What exactly is religion? (And other reasons why I’m not allowed to play with the kids that don’t swear)

Image result for religion

I like to think of myself as a reluctant contrarian in the sense that I would like to agree with everyone else, but in many cases I can’t.

I want to. But I can’t.

Religion is one of those things where everyone else seems to agree with an idea, but only if you keep those ideas general enough that it can fit into everyone else’s lifestyle, and therefore be a one-size-fits-all philosophy.

This is pretty evident by the fact that some people think God put Trump in office despite the fact he’s a triple married adulterer who has fornicated with porn stars. Not to mention that people choose jobs, justify sexism, and have callous attitudes towards the poor (despite being contradictory of scripture) typically for the same reason–it’s God’s plan.

Here the thing though–how is it that so many people can wedge their contradictory agendas from the same pieces of paper?

The answer, from my observation anyway, is that very few people actively choose to be in the religion they are in. They are born into it, think their way is normal, then die.

Growing up Catholic, it was pretty shocking to me going to a Protestant (specifically Presbyterian) school and encountering how few Protestants knew–or cared–about the differences in their religions.

Or even knew what a Protestant was.

Lutheran, Episcopalian, Baptist, Methodist, flying spaghetti monster–I seemed to know more about their collective religion’s history and the distinctions between them then they did.

And despite no one caring very much about actively studying their faith, why they believed what they did, and why it was supposed to matter to them, there seemed to be a correlation between apathy and moralistic righteousness.

In other words: the less they knew about their–and everyone else’s–religion, the more their whole world and the crap they try to pull in it was totally justifiable because…Jesus.

Not exactly inspiring.

I found myself taking a step back and wondering why religion–this idea that there is an almighty being, and magic, and demons, and prophesies, and souls–was put on autopilot in the minds of not a few individuals, but the majority of people walking around and living their lives according to a philosophy the average person really knows little about.

Hell, even Atheists are lazy too.

It’s the same autopilot mentality of “Well, this shit is lame. Therefore it’s all lame and I’m the smart one, and ifIcan’tseeitthenit’snotrealand…”

Have your eyes glazed over yet?

Yeah, mine too when I heard it the first 1,053,029 times my initial week of college where everyone is uniformly a rebel.

Ultimately, I took a step back from religion, ironically, because very few religious people I knew seemed to take the idea of religion seriously. And research. And actively choosing. And thinking.

The idea of God, death, souls, demons, sins, hell, great battles of good and evil, and winged invisible people blew my tiny mind as a kid…and thinking about it still does to this day.

So why weren’t so many religious zealots as amazed by even the possibility of these things existing among us?

Again, we go back to mental autopilot: I grew up hearing this, it seems normal because everyone around me repeats it, you don’t think about it, you die.

Despite some people not digging deep and sincerely questioning if and what they believe exists beyond the veil of human existence, people still will base their life decisions like who they marry, what school they will put their kid in, and what they will allow themselves to read/watch based not on a well thought out philosophy, but because they know the trigger words and want to match up with people who have the same thoughtless vocabulary they do.

Fitting in matters more than philosophy.

This alone can be enough of a deterrent, but the more I started looking into the history of various religions, the more I was a little unsettled by how regionally specific they were in their rules.

I know that’s confusing, so hear me out: Religion, any religion, is intended to be the universal word of God. It is the way we are supposed to live out our lives to reach Heaven, Paradise, Nirvana, or whatever. The idea is that if God made man, our existence, and the rules to win the game, ideally they should be universal, right? Because Truth, Justice, and Goodness should be universal to establish that there are rules to win the game and more importantly, that there is a Goodness that surpasses us as humans revealing just how small in this world we really are.

So why does God care if you eat pork?

Just so you don’t think I’m only picking on Christians, I’ve added a few other players to the game.

Why does God care if you eat pork? The being that created the heavens and the earth, created humans to be omnivores (fight me), and doesn’t seem to mind you eating other meat…why does he care if you eat pork? Or wear specific outfits despite the earth being abundant in materials to wear? Or eating beef for others?

Why do only women have to wear head coverings to show their modesty, but not men? Yes, modesty can be a virtue, but how do you know the scripture didn’t intend for it to be modesty like humility? Why does it have to be literal modesty? And why just for women? I’ve heard the argument that hair can be seductive and that’s why women cover up when they choose to, to preserve modesty, but isn’t men’s hair seductive to women? Weren’t women all over the world fawning over Elvis, Justin Beiber, and Johnny Depp’s locks because it highlighted their looks and certainly not their personalities? Does the virtue of women matter more than men?

Circling back to types of Christianity, why does God care if you drink alcohol, get married, or wear magic underwear or not? (Nope. Not a joke–look it up).

Image result for mormon underwear

The answer, from what I could find, is that all of these “messages from God” are all regionally, culturally, and time-period specific.

Remember that part in the bible/torah/qu’ran that talks about the logistics of buying and selling slaves? It’s not because it’s justifiable by any stretch of the imagination–it’s because it was unfortunately normal for the time period these things were written.

Today, preachers, priests, rabbis, and imams will excuse many of these anachronisms by saying they were a metaphor, or need to be interpreted a certain way, or worse–justifiable.

I think a lot of people just don’t want to admit that organized religion today is so far removed from the actual divine truth–whatever the hell that is–due to the fact that it was so heavily influenced by us.

Our cultures, our languages, our reality for the time.

Our religions just seem to be a reflection of what the status quo is. After all, wouldn’t the Christianity of the Midieval days be complety foreign to us now?

It’s not because God has changed. We have.

And we’ve more likely than not, been working on our own culturally and time period specific version of what we hope God’s word is then having the capability of thinking past ourselves to figure out what universal truths actually exist.

So, that makes me wonder…

Is there a universal truth? Or is God fine with us having organized religions that have more to do with our own agendas then pursing a common sense of righteousness?

Maybe he’s fine with it because it’s part of the test: how well can you treat others over an idea that is literally life and death for some people.

In other words, maybe it’s not about the destination, but the journey.

Maybe it’s not about being right, about which religion is the “right” one, but about tolerance, adaptability, and constantly questioning your morals.

Maybe organized religion is okay for humanity overall despite probably being wrong due to our flawed influence, because part of the test in our lives is to see if we are capable of growing and learning from our morals instead of relying on a script as a crutch.

Or maybe the Earth is going to roll off the back of an elephant and who gives a damn.

Anyway, these are the thoughts that keep me up at night, and keep me away from the Midwest.

Image result for redhead girl sitting alone

Your 26 year old still lives at home, you’re one late check away from getting evicted, and you’ve only had entry level jobs: Millennials and the new American middle class

Image result for millennials broke

My parents, and pretty much anyone I’ve met over the age of 40, have all talked about the days when they had financial stability from a one income household.

The days where you didn’t go into a debt larger than a mortgage just to get a bachelors degree.

The days where you could stay with the same company for decades and get a starting salary large enough to raise a family on, and a pension to keep you in comfort when you could no longer work.

Today, older generations often wonder why younger generations are resentful of their government, “the system”, and this so-called “1%”.

The reality of it is, the system that used to hold up and stabilize the middle classes no longer exists. The people who often deny that have been inactive in the changing job market for over 20 years (or more) and lack the self-awareness and humility to acknowledge their anachronistic view of an economy that no longer exists.

Image result for 1950s color housewife

Within the past decade, college tuition has increased by over 55% in public universities, according to CNBC. According to the LA Times, rent has increased 65% within the last decade, and the cost of living overall has increased by 2.3% just this year alone.

In contrast, salaries have stagnated since the 1990’s, with entry level jobs still averaging at $28,000 according to Glassdoor. Seems shockingly low doesn’t it?

Well, to your average Millennial it’s nothing surprising.

True story: After graduating college (a year early) with a STEM degree and work experience going back to when I was 15 years old, I got an interview for a job that required a masters degree but insisted on paying $14 an hour.

Most parents from a different generation–and economy–would balk at the idea of such a low salary for such high standards. What they forget, however, is that in a post-recession America, many employers have carried over the “you should just be grateful you have a job” exploitative mentality.

Image result for exploited worker cartoon"

Despite claims from the media that “unemployment is at a low” and “we are no longer in a recession”, the topics of underemployment and worker exploitation often go overlooked.

How many people do you know work two or more jobs, not out of interest, but necessity? How many people did you see on the news during the government shutdown crying because they were one missed check away from having their lights cut out despite having supposedly middle class jobs? How many people are avoiding dating, marrying, and having children, not because they don’t want it, but because they can’t afford it?

Image result for government shutdown people crying"

When universities cost $35,000 a year (with scholarship and financial aid), have an interest rate of %9 (that increases every two years), get entry level jobs (that require a bachelors degree whether it is needed for the job or not) that pay $15 an hour, and rent for a studio that costs $1300 a month (in the cities that actually offer full time jobs), how can we be surprised that there is a resentment in this country that is long overdue?

A resentment that is built on the promise of a dream our ancestors got to have because they had something the younger generations do not: opportunity.

The main argument from the aforementioned out-of-touch anachronistic economy experts is that everything is fine how it is, it’s just the young people today are “entitled”. This argument often comes up despite the overwhelming evidence that the average Millennial works more than one job, has 5 times as much debt, and has lower comparable salaries for the same jobs.

So entitlement is clearly not the issue for an overworked and underpaid society. The main issue is a lack of opportunity.

The lack of opportunity to obtain a job after college that pays a livable wage since salaries have not increased overall in 20 years.

Image result for bad economy

The lack of opportunity to have an educational system that matches up with the job market and resulting jobs that desperately need to be filled: plumbers, computer software and hardware experts, laboratory techs, builders, police officers, nurses, and IT techs.

The lack of opportunity to get a foot in the door for a stable career when entry level jobs require a masters degree (assuming you can afford one), 5 years of job experience (specifically in that field), and connections only those who can afford to take off work to network can manage.

Living paycheck to paycheck and being unemployed for 9 months or more regardless of skill when you’re in-between jobs is the new normal.

And it shouldn’t be.

It wasn’t.

The next time you wonder why there seems to be a desperation and divide in this country, why young people are suddenly so invested in politics now, and why there is a massive generational divide in terms of lifestyle–look no further.

You only need to look out of your door to see your neighbor driving a 17 year old car on its last wheels, your mailman wearing a slightly discolored shirt with a few holes in it, and your 27 year old secretary with a bachelors in biochemistry to see why there is a rage slowly building up in this country.

A rage that comes from waiting for a promise that never manifested.

Image result for upset wall street

Depression and the aftermath

I’ve often heard people compare the depression that leads to suicide as a monster that attaches itself to one person; a demon that sits inside the head of that individual whispering doubts and venom. This perspective that the tormenter only afflicts the individual until they give up is not an accurate one.

It’s a virus.

Specifically, it infects until the soul is worn out, then spreads to contaminate others when the virus has taken over.

We think we end our pain when we end our lives when in reality we are just transferring our pain to everyone who knew us and now knows we are gone.

When you are enveloped in enough pain that you chose to end your own life, you don’t end the pain—you spread it to others who have been touched by you: your parents, siblings, friends, neighbors, ect.

This is often the reason that people will call suicide a “selfish act”. It’s not because these people don’t care about your pain, or the lack of any feeling you have at all, it’s because we as a society have forgotten that our lives are not just our own. Who we are and what we do affects everyone around us whether we realize it or not.

This isn’t to be dismissive of the loneliness that accompanies depression—believing that you truly are alone in this world; but a reminder that your life isn’t guaranteed to be happy one, but a purposeful one.

In recent years, we have put so much pressure on people to “find their happiness” when we have no idea what that means and have no plan on how to realistically reach that vague goal. The enormous pressure and burden of trying to discover a life that will lead to perpetual happiness is an unrealistic goal as happiness was never intended to be everlasting. Happiness comes in small or large doses, and if you are not in a constant state of joy, that doesn’t mean you are not living your life correctly.

The burden we place on today’s society of encouraging them to upheave their whole lives or strive for specific goals has created the most anxious, depressed, and dissatisfied age.

And for what?

To essentially tell people they are failures if they are not in a constant state of being drugged out on their own neurological chemical cocktail?

Contrary to what you have been told: you cannot choose to be happy. It’s an emotion, and therefore it comes and goes organically as it pleases. This is often why people will feel things unexpectedly or subconsciously.

To suggest otherwise only increases the despair and feelings of failure that often accompany the doubts that one’s life has any value.

The suggestion that happiness is no choice is not to be maudlin or in any way encourage people to just give up—but rather to change their perspective.

Although you don’t have any control over your happiness, you will always have control over one thing: substance.

You can’t choose to be happy, but you can always have the power to choose to live a substantive life. Whatever that might mean for you.

Realistically, not everyone is capable of reaching happiness depending on the circumstance of their life. There are people who will live and die in horrible conditions in factories and work camps around the world. There are people who die forgotten about in sexual slavery. There are people who have never and will never know any kind of freedom. People in these circumstances may lead lives where they will never know happiness—but that does not mean their lives have no value.  

When we are born, we are not guaranteed a happy life. But your life, no matter how unhappy, will always have a great purpose. You may live the rest of your life never knowing what that purpose is or how brief interactions with others will change the course of their lives, but the social interactions we have with others play the biggest part in forming who we are, how we change others, and collectively how we create the world around us.

Every interaction counts, because you will never have the ability to step back and see from afar what you have set into motion because of your choices.

Choices that you will no longer have the power to control if you give up.

So, going back to when I said that you don’t end the pain by giving up, you spread it to others who have been touched by you, the bottom line is:

You can’t always choose to be happy. You can’t choose the hand you have been dealt in life. But you can choose to have a life of substance, because the only guarantee in this world is that your life—and the choices therein—has purpose. You have the power to choose to lead a life where you love others more than you will ever hate yourself.

And know that you are never alone.

A second recession in the near future and why politics is more important now than ever

There has certainly been attention over young people gaining an interest in politics and current events that has been commented on ad nauseum.

But where does this come from?

Well, the inability for an entire generation to settle down, buy houses, and get an income that they can provide for a family on has caused a backlash of youth not only gaining interest, but panicking over their uncertain future.

With the debt totaling over 22 trillion dollars according to NPR, America school’s performing lower in math and reading than a generation before, and increased mass shootings, there is a sword of Damocles hanging over the head of every American.

Politicians have certainly taken notice with Andrew Yang speaking on his beliefs about Universal Basic Income, and Sanders and Warren speaking openly about eradicating student debt and creating a national healthcare system.

With over 1.5 trillion dollars in student loan debt taking up the overall 22 trillion dollar national debt, it is not difficult to see why younger generations are increasingly aware and concerned over the countries political climate–specifically its consistent lack of change.

Within the past decade alone, student debt has doubled with entry level salaries remaining stagnant.

Additionally, rent rates across all major cities have increased within the past decade as well, leaving an entire generation scratching their heads on how it is mathematically possible to live paycheck to paycheck, let alone save money or put money back into the economy through spending.

With this increased awareness of a failing economy and rapidly declining middle class, voters are becoming more wary for the next few years as the previous recession that financially crippled millions of Americans still leaves a sense of dread in the memory of the everyday citizen.

Waistlines, healthcare costs, and an overall concern for America’s future are on the rise

One of the main hot-button issues in the US is the concern of a broken healthcare system. This, accompanied by an increasing obesity epidemic in the US, is only adding fuel to the fire.

This is a concern on a healthcare level due to the fact that obesity is tied into medical problems such as type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, and higher risk of various cancers. According to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in 2015-2016, 39.6% of adult Americans were reported as obese, while 18.5% of US children were reported for obesity.

So what does this mean for America’s future and the possibility of a changing healthcare system?

In a country that is over 20 trillion dollars in debt, there would be a financial risk of taking on a healthcare system that is supported through taxes when over one third of its population is at a higher health risk of major health concerns than the average civilian.

This increases concerns for those voters who have more conservative financial leanings that argue that supporting other’s healthcare through taxes would be a financial drain and burden on the taxpayer due to the fact that the US is on average more “unhealthy” in terms of diet in comparison to other nations who have successfully adopted a socialized healthcare.

On the other hand, those with more liberal financial leanings argue that healthcare is a right and should not be treated as a business in the first place. A civilized society should never allow a percentage of its population to die when there were ways through medicine to prevent that death in the first place.

Additionally, rising obesity rates in the US have been argued to be a systemic problem, and not necessarily just that individual’s choice in lifestyle. Specifically, the issue of food deserts, or lack of healthy food in in typically lower income areas, can prevent lower-income workers from obtaining the nutrition they need to be healthy.

Also, the FDA (the Food and Drug Administration), has been under scrutiny in allowing certain ingredients, such as synthetic hormones like rBGH and rBST and Brominated Vegetable Oil that have been linked to memory loss, fatigue, and even birth defects into American foods that have been banned in most of the EU.

Some studies have even found the hormones found in US dairy and meat could very well be linked to weight gain through creating an imbalance in the eater’s very own hormones.

This contributes to the argument that demanding national healthcare isn’t an entitlement, even given the increased obesity rates, but rather a human right and a solution to a problem caused by a short-sighted government.

The “Hunger-Obesity” Epidemic in the US

The culture in the United States has changed substantially in these past few decades alone. Ranging from the superficial changes like fashion, to the more substantive (and troubling) changes like diet and obesity rates, the United States has transformed into a nation that would be unrecognizable a mere forty years prior.

One of the main changes—like diet—is the result of multiple factors that have contributed to the declining health in the United States.

Specifically, a major change that has affected the American culture is the rise and popularity of fast-food.  According to a New York Times article on hunger obesity, “A 2008 study by the city government showed that 9 of the Bronx’s 12 community districts had too few supermarkets, forcing huge swaths of the borough to rely largely on unhealthful, but cheap food” (Dolnick, 2010).

This raises the question of how impoverished people can afford nutrition when nutritious food is not readily available in low-income areas. There is an alternative term for this reoccurring problem in the United States—food deserts.

The term “food desert” is a term that became regularly used to describe the problem of a lack of nutritious foods in urban areas in the 1990’s. It was then that researchers and nutritionists started to articulate the rise in obesity levels and accompanying rise in fast-food consumption.  

Food desert areas lack a certain amount of supermarkets that provide healthy produce in proportion to the local population. So if distance is an issue for shoppers, particularly low-income shoppers, fewer people will put in the effort to travel for healthy produce when cheap, albeit unhealthy alternatives are readily available.

Considering that time, as well as money, are factors with these low-income shoppers, this brings up the additional problem of not having the resources to go out of their way to shop and then prepare the food.

Healthy food typically needs to be cooked or prepared in some way as opposed to fast-food that is already prepared and ready to eat. If a single parent who works eleven hour days has a choice between easily accessible and affordable food compared to a longer commute for food that needs to be made ready, the choice for the shopper that has few other choices in life would be simple.

This is a contributing factor as to why (and how) obesity and hunger can be tied into the same problem in the United States. Although not technically hungry in the strictest sense, the obese in the impoverished areas of the United States are indisputably malnourished.

Malnourishment is the result of not having the basic vitamins and nutrients a body needs in order to be healthy. If one is consuming large amounts of empty-calorie foods that give the illusion of feeling full without any of the benefits, that individual is suffering from a lack of nutrients that will inevitably effect their health throughout their lives.

Incidentally, there is an overlap of diabetes in these “hunger-obese” areas. In the Bronx alone, there are higher rates of obesity and diabetes despite these areas being comparatively low-income. This can only lead to speculation and concern over the cholesterol and overall heart disease levels in these low-income areas.

Hunger is a given when associated with poverty, but obesity being associated with poverty is a new and distinctly American tend.

In part, this issue stems from the rise in fast-food restaurants. Additionally, an increasingly sedentary lifestyle with a changing workforce is a contributing factor.

Gone are the days where a low-income job meant hard, manual labor. Although this is still true in some cases, generally much work is done sitting down for long periods at a time. For low-income houses who work multiple jobs, most of those jobs are done sitting down and being too mentally drained to have the desire—or even time—to exercise after.

This mental and physical fatigue from over-worked, low-income families often results in a lack of desire to cook. Healthy meals need to be prepared and that can take time, particularly when there are multiple mouths to feed. Fast-food offers the alternative of having readily prepared meals that require little to no attention.

When the primary concern for low-income families is getting people fed, as opposed to having the resources and time to monitor what they are being fed, nutrition can take a back seat for many families.

So this raises the question: what can be done about the hunger-obesity issue in the United States?

Firstly, access is the main issue when it comes to food deserts. When a large percentage of people in an urban area cannot get access to fresh produce, this is a serious concern as it is a major contributing factor to malnutrition in developed nations.

Access is the concern. Ideally, there should be a certain amount of supermarkets that provide fresh produce according to the local population. A specific amount of the population living in a condensed area should have access to a supermarket that sells fresh produce within a certain mile radius.

Secondly, there needs to be better access to nutrition programs starting with youths. Schools often don’t require, or don’t have, home economics. Considering that cooking and nutrition takes up an enormous amount of time in the average person’s day, it does not make sense that schools do not reinforce the importance of learning these skills at a young age.

If a child does not know how to cook, what to cook, or why it is important, how can it be expected that the child in question will know how to eat responsibly? Educational programs in schools, as well as providing more healthy lunch options in schools, will increase the child’s awareness about the importance of good nutrition and will better prepare them for taking care of themselves in the future as they grow into independent adults.

                These are ideas in which to start tackling the issues of hunger-obesity. However, if the issue is to be dealt with properly, an overall assessment and change of the modern-day workforce and the conditions of modern employees that creates this society in which parents struggle to find the time and the resources to feed their children properly would need to be examined. Indisputably, hunger-obesity is a multi-layered issue that shines light on the drawbacks of modern American poverty.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started