Over the last ten years, I’ve had to write a few articles regarding theism, atheism, and theology in general. There are at least three articles about it here, and a percentage of both books were devoted to the goofiness of religions and those who practise them. You’d think therefore that I could stop now; but, obviously, I can’t: whatever I’ve written to date has been misunderstood, misread, or otherwise functionally ignored. So, here’s what we can all hope will prove to be the last word on the subject...as much as we can all doubt it.

First, let’s define a few terms. Just to be really sinister, we’ll define them correctly. Ready? Great. Here we go....

Atheism noun From a- [without] theos [deities] -ism [belief structure]. Literally: Without Deital Beliefs. That which lacks a deital belief system; that which lacks theism.

It may come as a surprise therefore:

Theism noun From theos [deities] -ism [belief structure]. Literally: Deital Belief Structure. That which is theistic; that which believes in deities.

Mindboggling, innit.

In case this remains somehow and improbably unclear: a theist, which practises theism, is that which believes in deities. Any deities. Allah, Baal, Cthulhu, Dagon, Erketu, Freya, Garphlat, Huitzilopochtli, Ictinike, Jehovah, Kali, Lucifer, Mars, Nike, Odin, Perun, Ricagumbeda, Set, Thor, Udo, Vacuna, Wuriupranili, Xenu, Ymir, Zeus, or any and/or all of several million other mythological bogeymen.

This might be a good time to mention that, in fact, while atheism means, by its etymology,  the state of being without theism; the state of being without deital beliefs, its first use, which amusingly predates the standalone word theism, used the basic definition of that which lacks beliefs regarding Zeus. Just for those illiterate imbeciles who’d like to pretend that atheism does mean and has always meant that which believes that Jehovah doesn’t exist; atheism has never meant anything of the sort; ever.

That said, there will remain those wishing for a term applicable to those mythological creatures which believe positively that deities exist negatively. Meaning that, among idiots, there’s a strawmanned need for atheists to be positing the [certainly incorrect] belief that deities don’t exist. To be practical, such a belief would be impractical, and possibly impossible; no one would in fact maintain the belief that Jehovah didn’t exist, because then one would additionally need to maintain the belief that Allah didn’t exist, and Zeus, and Cthulhu, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and the Swimming Spaghetti Monster, and the Tunnelling Spaghetti Monster, and so on, to infinity and beyond. Make sense? Do you believe that the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn’t exist? How about the Invisible Purple Unicorn? Surely you’re not intellectually dishonest or lazy enough to believe with certainty that the pink IPU is fiction, without having formed a belief regarding the purple one. Are you? We’ll take it as read that you’re not; or, this is about the point within the article at which you’ll wander off to eat some crayons; either way, our definitions are set; we can move on.

Or, nearly. For those not of the cretaphagous persuasion, who are still wondering what manner of mythical moron would attempt to maintain a positive belief in the negative condition of deital existence, you’re in luck: based on the etymology, such a SpEd would be an antitheist. Like this:

Antitheism noun [also antetheism] from anti- [counter] theos [deities] –ism [belief structure] Literally: Countered Deital Belief Structure. That which counters theism; that which does believe that deities don’t exist.

In case this is all a bit too clever to grok, let’s move away from theology into another habit and its alternatives, to further explore how words work.

Smoker noun That which smokes.

Nonsmoker noun That which doesn’t smoke.

Antismoker noun That which doesn’t smoke, which coughs insanely whenever you do, which whimpers about its rights being trampled, which lobbies to outlaw smoking in this galaxy, which should sound suspiciously similar to the antitheist, apart from its unbelievably upsetting object of obsession.

I get it; I do. As a smoker [and as a biped], I can’t stand antismokers, any more than a theist [or a biped] can stand antitheists. We’re agreed: those who whimper about their rights being trampled by X, whether X is smoking or makebelieving, are far more annoying to all bipeds than X itself. Smokers, theists, nonsmokers, and atheists alike all hate antismokers and antitheists; I’d even suspect that antismokers hate antitheists while antitheists hate antismokers. It’s possible in fact that antismokers and antitheists each hate themselves. It would explain a couple things, anyway.

Of course, comparing smokers to theists will upset a few people on both sides. It shouldn’t. It is in fact the perfect analogy. One theist will believe in Jesus; another will believe in Allah. One smoker will smoke Camels; another will smoke Marlboros. One theist will believe in Jehovah, apart from Jesus; one smoker will smoke Chesterfields, apart from filters. Somewhere in there, we’ve got people chewing Kodiak; somewhere in there, we’ve got deists. Obviously, we've also got those unloyal junkies who'll smoke whatever's cheapest, brands notwithstanding; and we've got those unloyal junkies who'll believe that Some Greater Intelligence musta created everything, brands still notwithstanding. And so on.

Regardless what one smokes or makebelieves, the default state [the nonsmoker and the atheist] will decline to partake in the conditioned habit of smoking or makebelieving, but otherwise care very little. Don’t smoke? Cool. No one cares. Don’t makebelieve? Cool. No one cares.

The conditioned response to a conditioned habit [antismoking or antitheism] is of course the act of a fool. The antismokers and the antitheists are those meaningless ’tards who neither do nor don’t smoke or makebelieve, but instead have gone to the alternate extreme: bitching and moaning and lobbying and whimpering that the constitution and other things they can’t understand guarantee that no extant condition is allowed to annoy them. Obviously, they’re wrong. Still, they whimper to no foreseeable end.

So. Here I am. I do smoke; I don’t makebelieve. I’m a smoker, and I’m an atheist. It’s that simple.

For those still here for which it isn’t yet simple enough, who are now wondering why I don’t know what agnostic means: prepare to learn....

Agnostic adj From a- [without] gnostos [knowledge] Literally: Without Knowledge. Functionally: Without Knowledge of Deities. That which doesn’t know whether deities exist or not; see synonyms at Everyone.

Okay? No one knows whether deities exist. Not me; not you; no one. Of those seven billion people clueless as to whether deities exist, none happens to know which deities, if any, exist. Because, to date, no deity has been proved to exist in point of fact. Deities may exist in truth, which itself is an abstract concept; none exists in fact, which in its simplest form is a truth which has been supported by evidence capable of surviving the scientific method. Do deities exist? Maybe. Which ones? No idea. Will I ever believe in one? No. Why not? Because the first time I’ll suspect that deities exist, it’ll be a tenth of a second after someone gets the Nobel Prize for having discovered, catalogued, dissected, and preserved a deity, then published his findings in a scientific journal pending falsification via review from his peers. Because that’s how facts are established in the real world; and I have no need to believe in facts: I can simply accept their factuality.

Make sense? Good. So. If you have evidence of deities, feel free to publish your evidence in a scientific journal and see whether the National Association of Science falls for it. If so, enjoy your Nobel; if not, have some crayons. Do not, under any circumstances, beleaguer me with your halfassed, makebelieved evidence of deities: look around; therefore: deities exist. It’s not funny; it’s not cute; it’s not evidence.

Of course, that’s just my opinion; swear to Dunhill.

I’m not jewish. I have no intention of becoming jewish. Not because I’d mind becoming Israeli [it rarely hurts to have an extra nationality to fall back on if you’re living in a selfdestructing country] and not because I don’t believe in deities [neither judaism nor even christworship happen to have commandments requiring anyone to makebelieve these things], though possibly because I regard circumcision as a halfcocked idea. Otherwise, it’s just not something I’m worried about. Some people are jewish; most aren’t; I don’t consider it to be a defining factor. As such.

I do find it amusing that, as a matter of historical fact, the jews invented selective breeding: when identifying their smartest people, they promoted them to rabbis, required them to marry, and encouraged them to have as many smart kids as possible. Incidentally, the christworshippers had a similar plan, in which they crammed their smartest into the priesthood and gave them only altarboys to eat. As it were. The result, after thousands of years, is that, in terms of pure genetic intelligence, the jews are on average smarter than everyone else, while the christards are on average Fred Phelps. All of this is a bit perplexing as I don’t appear to be a drooling moron, though I likely have catholics somewhere in my ancestry; either there’s a way to cheat the system after all, or someone who should have been a priest in the dark ages managed to get away unseen; I dunno.

None of it matters much to me. Apparently, I have friends who are jewish, or black, or gay, or smokers, or female, or whatever characteristic is considered inferior by bigots; I don’t care. I’ve made it something of a point to know less and less people out in the world, where they can develop a problem with me for being white, or tall, or male, or smoking, or whatever characteristic is considered inferior by other bigots; most of the people I know these days are online, where I can measure them largely by whether they’re entirely illiterate, which is about what counts to me. To wit: ‘your an idiot’ is applied irony published by a fool.

Which is its own thing.

So, let’s make something clear real quick. I’m white. Like, really white. I’m genetically norse, which makes me very, very white and fairly tall, and Odin probably likes me more than you. But I don’t care. I don’t apologise for it, and I don’t flaunt it. I don’t complain about it, and I don’t use it to my advantage. I’ve never owned a slave, slaughtered an injun, or gassed a hebe; I’m not even in the game. If you’re wondering why that even has to be said, it’s because the game’s afoot either way, and everyone playing expects me to take a side. I’m not going to: it’s not my thing.

That said, let’s make a couple more things clear....

I don’t like victims. That’s not to say that I don’t like people other people don’t like; if I like someone, and someone else dislikes him strongly enough to victimise him, I don’t stop liking him. It’s to say that I don’t like people who effectively victimise themselves. Which pretty much means that I’m not into people who, having displayed the audacity to ascertain whether I’m jewish, and learned that I’m not, blame me for making them, being jewish, whatever they are today and/or expect me to feel sorry for them. I get it; I do; once upon a time, someone did something to someone; one of the two was your ancestor; the other of the two wasn’t my ancestor, but, since neither was my ancestor, I’m supposed to feel sorry for you for having the wrong ancestor; I don’t care: I don’t blame you for your ancestry; I blame you for yourself, and whatever you are today; if you’re a whimpering victim trying to blame me for your past, we’re not gonna get on very well. I didn’t make this happen; I didn’t prevent it from happening; I wasn’t there at all. Okay?

Something else I’m curious about, on the subject: why is this allowed to continue? I mean: the victims are trying to blame me for what happened in the forties. And I suppose they can do that, based on the first amendment; but it’s a bit slanted, isn’t it? And, by slanted, I don’t necessarily mean sloped. Meaning that I don’t get how I, who wasn’t there, can be blamed for slaughtering jews by jews, who weren’t there, when no one today is allowed to blame japs who weren’t there for bombing Hawai’i. How come? Because other japs who weren’t there get to blame everyone else for bombing Hiroshima? Do I merely have to wait for jews who weren’t there to bomb gentiles who weren’t there before no one not there blames everyone who wasn’t there? Is that how it works? I don’t get it.

Which brings me to the other thing I wanna make clear: jews didn’t bomb the twintowers. Neither did Americans. Or aliens. Or anyone but islamic zealots. And they certainly didn’t ‘cause 911’, okay? It’s not like it was only recently that 10^th September was followed immediately by the twelfth; there was an 11^th September 2000, you know. It’s not like the Caesars are still around, causing July and August.

I don’t really understand why people hate jews so much; and don’t think I haven’t tried. If it were a recent development, I could almost understand it: if it had only begun after jews who weren’t there had started blaming gentiles who weren’t there for the holocaust, I could almost see it. But it’s not. Antisemitism has been going on for millennia. Books have been written explaining why antisemitism has been going on for millennia. I’ve been reading them for what seems like millennia, and I still don’t get it. Maybe it’s good that I don’t get it; maybe, if I did get it, I’d not only understand the antisemites’ point, but agree with them and end up hating the jews. I doubt it; but, you never know.

I’ve got one hunch though: if you don’t tell me that you’re jewish, there’ll never be a problem. Especially if you don’t ask me if I’m not. Again: I’m norse; apart from being really, really pale, I reportedly look jewish. Long, thin nose; sharp, active eyes; mouth closed while I’m breathing....

Which is funny. Apparently I look jewish enough that antisemites less white than I am figure I’m a target. Which at least assures me that antisemites aren’t terribly bright. I’m not jewish, you morons; that I don’t share your unsupported proclivities won’t make me jewish. Unless you convince me that becoming jewish will remove me further from your idiocy; then I could move to Israel and....

That probably wouldn’t help much. There are more antisemites there than here.

Which makes me wonder something else. Why in hell are the muslims trying to take Israel? Or, really, what makes them think that they can? Suppose you got Israel somehow. How do you think the jews got it in the first place? England gave it to them. Do you happen to think that, if you take something England gave to the jews away from them, England are gonna be okay with that? You think the Israeli army are a bitch to beat? Meet the SAS, you meaningless cavemen. You have warriors; we have soldiers; you don’t get to win.

I don’t have to ask why the muslims hate the jews. If I were goofy enough to worship a lunar deity, I’d probably hate people goofy enough to worship a solar deity too. Fortunately, I’m not goofy enough to worship any deities, so that’s not likely to happen. Though I do wonder what would change if the christards were smart enough to realise that Jehovah was solar while Al’lah was lunar; I wonder if they’d still tolerate the muslims just because they’ve got oil.

By the way: by etymology, semites are both jews and muslims; I’m aware of that. Though ‘antisemite’ was coined specifically to mean ‘jewhater’. By the same token, ‘atheism’ means ‘without theism’, though the word was coined to mean ‘disbelief in Zeus’. Naturally, christards today can’t guess what it means.

Still, on the larger subject, I don’t hate muslims for being muslims. I’m less than thrilled that they fly planes into buildings; but that’s not technically all muslims, even if it’s supposed to be according to the moon’s rules. I also don’t hate all christards and jews, even if the sun’s rules are that they’re supposed to find me, not worshipping the sun, and stone me to death. Meaning that I’m okay with lazy christards and jews, so long as they’re not lazy enough to produce ‘your an idiot’ in chatrooms.

And of course I’m okay with anyone who doesn’t tell me what he is. Jews, muslims, christards, atheists, injuns, smokers...they all look the same online, until they define themselves as stereotypes primarily for the purpose of seeing my reaction. I’m atheistic and I smoke, which aren’t defining characteristics. If I have a defining characteristic, it’s that I’m smart; which I didn’t need to mention since I don’t tell people ‘your an idiot’.

Incidentally, if you’re reading this, pretending to read this, or having it read to you because I posted a link to it from a chatroom in which I didn’t want to explain it all again while typing it line by line, you can now go back and assure me that you were too stupid to understand a word of it.