Hey, Goddess. Did the quote suggest that you were advocating homosexuals to come out of the closet, rather than free thinkers? While it may be important for both types to come out of the closet, so to speak, perhaps sending a clarification his way is in order. I couldn't find the article in question, though. It sounds like a good read. Can you either give us directions as to how to find it, or post the URL to the exact article? Or maybe I'm just not looking in the right spot.

The Brights sounds like a fascinating group, by the way, although I hope their choice of name isn't intended to say that the rest of us are dim.

I meant come out of the closet as a rational thinker (hence my explanation below the quote). I came out of the closet as a heterosexual years ago. Haw haw. There is no URL to the piece -- it may be up next month, as I think they post some of their content with a mont's delay. Right now, you have to buy the mag to read it. PS New editor there, much improved.

The Goddess writes: "I meant come out of the closet as a rational thinker (hence my explanation below the quote)."

Whoops. That's not what I meant to say. I meant to ask if Strand took your quote out of context, implying that you were saying that "homosexuals must come out of the closet." I know what you meant, in other words, but did Strand? Did he actually imply that you were talking about homosexuals rather than free thinkers? (As if those of us who are believers walk around with our wrists and ankles in manacles.)

Once again, bravo for Ms. Alkon. I too am a bright, as
redundant as that they may seem. I too have been URGING both
individuals, and bodies as a whole(see my article in Free
Inquiry, Spring 2003, print) regarding Hollywood coming out
of the closet in regard to religion. Is coming out of the
closet in this area important?

Okay. Quick pop quiz. What do the following 10 events all
have in common?
1) 9/11.
2) The murder of John Lennon.
3) Texan Andrea Yates drowning her 5 children.
4) The de facto war between Israel and the Palestinians.
5) The kidnapping of Utah teen Elizabeth Smart.
6) The 300 year occupation of India by the British.
7) A friend of mine allowing cancer to grow on her body.
8) The current spate of problems plaguing Africa.
9) Main reason we donít have cures for a myriad of diseases.
10) A massive forest fire in the hills above Los Angeles.

In one way or another, they are all the result, either fully
or partially, of religion. No six degrees of separation
here. They are all directly linked to religious thought and
action.

Donít believe me? Still a doubting Thomas? Ha Ha..then letís
plow on...

Hopefully 9/11 doesnít take to much explanation. Religious
minds plotting the destruction of religious infidels.
Religious devotees flying planes into building believing
wine and plump virgins await them. etc. etc.

The murder of John Lennon was committed by mark David
Chapman, a young man who used to sing, ìImagine, John Lennon
deadî with some of his ìreligiousî friends, and recorded in
his diary that he hated Lennon because of Johnís 1966 remark
that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. YES, Chapman
may have been psychotic, but his motivations were
religiously inspired. There are many psychotic people, in
fact, but that doesnít make you a murderer. Only the ones
harboring such acidic ideas like religious hatred, as one
example, turn deadly.

Texan Andrea Yates, by her own admission, killed her 5
children to spare them going to hell had they lived. Yes,
she too was most likely deranged, but had she not had these
religious terror stories running around her head, she may
have acted more benignly with her children.

The de facto war between Israel and the Palestinians is one
that is hinged and underpinned in religious belief and
dispute. One party believing this is their promised ìholy
landî and the other with members of its tribe thinking you
can blow yourself and others up and gain entry into, yes you
guessed it, that marvelous afterlife of wine and virgins
again.

Utah teen Elizabeth Smart was kidnapped by a ìprophetî who
called himself ìEmmanuel.î Elizabeth was going to be one of
ìEmmanuelísî religiously mandated wives.

The British annexed India into their empire and held them
there for some 300 years, terminating with Indiaís freedom
in 1947. Now, how is it possible that a much smaller country
like Britain was able to annex and control this leviathan in
another part of the world? Fairly simply. For at the heart
of it, was Indiaís domination by the Hindu religion which
told them that this life was essentially meaningless, there
were other lives coming and besides, whatever you were
getting here in this life was deserved, so you might as well
just sit back and take it. The self-determination and
strength of an entire people usurped by religious canards.

A friend of mine allowed cancer to grow on her body. She
actually saw the cancerous tumor growing on her breast for
over a year, knew it, but did nothing but pray and not
ìbetrayî god by going to a doctor. She is a ìchristian
scientist,î the ultimate oxymoron.

The current spate of problems plaguing Africa. Let me tell
you something. My experience in talking with visiting
Africans, convinces me that these are a capable, bright and
vibrant people who have simply been hijacked by tribalistic
religious thought.

Main reason we donít have cures for a myriad of diseases?
Once again our old friend religion. What is the one thing
that has stood in the way of science from the beginning of
time? Religion. We went through a long period of time known
as the ìDark Ages.î Well, our old friend religion was
responsible, why else call them dark? The world simply went
to sleep for over a millennium and finally emerged in Europe
with the Renaissance. Where would we now be in the fields of
science and medicine if we hadnít come under this witchís
spell of Oz-like religious slumber. We would be advanced at
least a thousand years in the understanding of many complex
medical issues and cures.

In the Angeles National Forest above Los Angeles a massive
forest fire consumed tens of thousands of acres, and closed
the area to millions of visitors in the year 2002. It was
called the William's fire. What caused it? The reports I read
said it was started by three individuals(still unnamed and
at large) who, practicing some sort of pagan religious
ritual, let their candles get out of hand and begin burning
the nearby shrubbery.

The reason I bring these seemingly disparate events together
is to simply chronicle the wide-spread nature of the harm
done by all of these ìWorldî religions and to put a face on
them by using events that are known to us all. And by the
way, this list is just the tip of the iceberg. The list of
harm religion has done to man is endless, I just picked
these 10 at random.

And my point is simply this: in the age old battle of
science vs. superstition, we must be ever vigilant and
tireless in our effort to promote science and rationality as
alternatives to religious, paranormal and superstitious ways
of thinking. For the stakes are enormous. This isnít some
vague academic battle that is going on somewhere ìover
thereî or behind the ivy covered walls of academia, this is
a battle that effects ALL of us on a DAILY basis, in a
myriad of ways, some obvious and blunt, some less obvious
and serpentine. The battle of science vs. superstition is
one that effects you, me, our friends and our children on a
very tangible and real daily basis. It is the underpinning
of many of societies ongoing, systemic, endemic problems and
must be addressed in this manner. For in my view the battle
of science vs. superstition is, was, always has been, and
always will be, at least into the foreseeable future, the
most important battle and issue in the world today. By far.
Chris Volkay

Chris,

Does religion corrupt people, or do people corrupt religion (and everything else they do)? I vote for the latter. I contend that if we woke up tomorrow, and everyone on earth had no religious beliefs whatsoever, and no residual effects from prior religious beliefs, life would still suck. Humanity has the lust for power and domination too deeply rooted in its psyche to say it's all the fault of religious belief. We would just have one less venue on which to blame all of the problems in the world.

Whether you say that lust for power is part of the evolutionary survival game or something else really doesn't matter. The fact that humanity is selfish is the root of the problem, not the religious beliefs--religion becomes an excuse and a scapegoat.

I fully agree that lots of stupid, horrendous things have happened as a direct or indirect result of religion. But I believe that is directly attributable to the human factor--a person or persons involved made choices to dominate/rule others, or simply to be selfish regardless of how it would impact others, and that was the root cause of the problem, not the religious belief in and of itself.

I will not agree with you if you contend that people wouldn't be stupid and selfish except for religion's influence. But I respect your right to completely disagree with me, since neither of us can make religion disappear and so we'll never know whether I was right or you were.

Peggy,
Thanks for the response, I enjoy your letters.

In the old days the answer to the riddle, "What's the root of all evil" was "the devil." Then we entered a so-called modern age, and the answer to that question became "money." You have stated that the root of the problems with humanity is "selfishness." I would say however that the root of all problems, or the problem with humanity is ignorance. From this central core, all problems spring. That is my view. And of course, what is the one big, steadfast barrier to education and knowledge throughout all of human history? Religion of course.

And by the way, these are my views, nobody else's. My views seem to be out of the mainstream of a lot of humanist dogma. (Yes all groups have their dogma.) You mention people are stupid and selfish, yes they are. They probably will be a thousand years hence, even if religion were removed tomorrow. But here is the possibilty.
I would say that a lot of selfishness and stupidity arises from ignorance itself. In my view when humanity is perpetually kept weak both mentally and emotionally, these are the conditions that breed selfishness and stupidity. In my experience, my own anecdotal personal experience, only strong people have the ability to act rationally and with reason and with generosity. The weak, both mentally and emotionally are the ones, not always certainly, but the ones most prone to acting badly, and selfishly, because they lack the requisite knowledge of operating in a different manner. Bring education and knowledge to previoulsy closed off minds, and you have a chance to make the situation better. That's the operative word here Peggy, BETTER. Will we ever have a utopia or eden? Of course not. But reaching the billions of closed off minds in this world, offers us possiblities. Then what happens? Well in my view with this added brain-power we have the chance to actually strengthen people. We can empower them. Embolden them. Have them fishing instead of being handed fish.

Couple of other thoughts. Your philosophy sounds very Buddhist, although I know you said you were Christian. But guess what? I'm not saying you're wrong, I guess I'm saying that I just don't see those traits as the central problem for humanity, but I certainly agree that they are problems. Selfishness, will-to-power, creating expectations for ourselves that we are unable to attain, are very big problems for the human race.

Let me say this in closing. You mentioned evolution, and here is what I would want to say in that area. Most people, perhaps not you, but most peole in general have the wrong idea about evolution. We are not here to be happy, we are here to survive. Survival and reproduction are the two mandates of our life giving force(DNA).
Whether we are happy, well adjusted, or open caring, generous unselfish beings is only of minor importance to our (DNA). Many of these changes, turning people away from selfish, stupid beings may be beyond our genetic control at this time. We can only make small incremental changes here. Any large wholesale changes to human beings in these areas, may be hundreds of years away, when we can successfully alter our basic genetic structure and essentially hardwire ourselves for happiness

Chris,

I enjoy your letters too, even if we don't agree. It helps me sharpen my focus. On a much earlier post (I have no idea when), much of the same information was discussed, and I said then that if religion were removed, people would still be stupid and hate. I suppose for clarity I should say 'be ignorant' rather than 'be stupid', since ignorance implies an ability to learn, while stupidity does not.

Unfortunately, most of the people that I interact with have absolutely no desire to be informed. That, to me, is stupidity. I continue to read things that are contrary to my own opinions for the very reason that I want to learn, and I can't very well learn if I just stick to what I already know/believe. But I often feel like I am in the minority, at least in the social circles in which I find myself.

Even when opportunities are presented to people to become more informed (less ignorant), many do not want the bother--it's too hard to study, to actually learn or change your opinion. It's so much easier to hitch yourself onto someone else who's done the thinking for you. And that someone is the person that we end up reviling--the person who maybe started off by thinking, but ultimately realized that through manipulation he/she could influence others and have power to move his/her own agenda. For you, the great manipulator may seem to just be religion--I find it also in politics, in corporations, and honestly in every 'movement' to come down the pike (I agree, it is definitely in religion too).

My perception of the lust for power is strongly linked to the primal survival mechanisms--the stronger you are, the more likely you'll survive and procreate and succeed all around, so gaining power is attractive and advantageous. But usually it is to the ultimate detriment of others.

I can't remember the source (I bet Amy knows it), but it's a psychological reference to the 'higher order' of needs. Our primal survival needs must be met before we can be concerned about higher order needs. So basically, if I've got food and safety, then I can worry about esteem, and eventually end up in philosophical pursuits.

Because our society has so many of the 'lower order' of needs met, the higher order become more pressing, and that is why power is so enticing. Though our predecessors may have had struggles, we find ourselves extremely comfortable. Possibly because the wealth has come fairly rapidly in our society, our slow brains haven't had time to adapt to the fact that lower-order needs are met, and so our power plays continue to come to the forefront.

Anyhow, those are my random musings for the day. I've enjoyed the discussion--like I said, I like to learn, and Amy's blogs have always been a learning experience for me!

I think you're referring to Maslow's Hierarchy Of Needs. Here's a link:

http://web.utk.edu/~gwynne/maslow.HTM

Chris,

What is your source on the information about the Williams fire? Investigators are not looking for a bunch of pagan ritualists, they're looking for three guys in a silver truck who were seen driving up to the area, throwing "a device" out of the vehicle's window, and then hustling away.

going by news reports I heard at the time on tV.

Chris Volkay: "In one way or another, they are all the result, either fully
or partially, of religion. No six degrees of separation
here. They are all directly linked to religious thought and
action."

Apparently, while you have a fairly impressive vocabulary and write well, you must have been sick the day they taught logic.

In fact, virtually none of those things you mention are based in religion. I could discuss this point by point, but there's no sense in being redundant. Most examples you give are caused by mental derangement, not religion.

Chris Volkay: "Hopefully 9/11 doesnít take to much explanation. Religious
minds plotting the destruction of religious infidels.
Religious devotees flying planes into building believing
wine and plump virgins await them. etc. etc."

Where did you hear the part about wine? Muslims don't drink.

But more to the point, deranged minds, not religious ones, caused 9/11. Most of the Muslims polled found the actions of 9/11 to be abhorrent and Islam teaches that suicide is a sin.

9/11 was not caused by religion. Had the suicide bombers been atheists, it would not change the fact that they were angry, gullible people. It was not religion that caused their rage and naivete. The horror of their own lives did that for them.

As for Chapman and Yates, you think religion caused their derangement? Chapman was a very sick man. Religion did not make him a murderer, since Christians regard murder as a sin. You think had he been an atheist, he'd suddenly be an okay, no longer dangerous type of guy?

You also write: "Yes,
she too was most likely deranged, but had she not had these
religious terror stories running around her head, she may
have acted more benignly with her children."

As any logician will tell you, it is useless to speculate what would happen in a scenario that hasn't played itself out. You cannot draw supportable conclusions from a hypothetical situation. It's like saying, "If not for Madame Marie Curie, the world would not know about radium." You are precluding the possibility that someone else could have discovered it. Yates may well have acted more benignly toward her children. Yet, she could have also just as easily justified her actions by wanting to spare her children life in a cruel world.

Religion does not cause insanity. Most Christians do not murder their children. And of course, no atheist has ever killed their children, either. Right?

The most absurd example you give is the Israel-Palestinian war. Why, of course! Had it not been for their religion, neither side would give a flying fuck about property rights. Chris, since you're an atheist, you won't mind me coming over and dispossessing you of your house, right?

As for your friend, the Christian Scientist (which I am also), well, religion aside, let's talk a few facts about breast cancer. First of all, it is the number one killer of women in this country. Medical science hasn't exactly made landmark strides in the treatment of it. Gosh, she should just run to the doctor right now so he can cut her breast off, subject her to chemotherapy with its accompanying nausea, baldness, wasting syndrome, to say nothing of the inconvenience of a central line and the fact that after all this, most breast cancer patients die anyway. I think I'd rather let the end of my life come quicker and relatively less painfully than having to go through all that. Even if I didn't accept that cures were possible through faith (and the testimony of medical experts have confirmed that it is), I'm not sure I would take my chances with a doctor if I did have breast cancer. I could die relatively quickly or be slow tortured to death. Gee, what's that woman thinking?

Thanks, Amy! I knew you'd know what I was talking about regarding Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.

Oh Patrick Patrick Patrick
You're a christian scientist? Absolutely amazing.
And here I thought you were a bright fellow. Never would have guessed. So you study the science of christianity? Hmm, I'm thinking of starting my own insane cult, how about "Werewolf Scientists." Exact same thing.

You say I was sick the day they taught logic? This coming from a man who embraces the modern day equivalent of voodoo, mumbo jumbo and utter nonsense.

9/11 wasn't caused by religion. Well Patrick you're simply an idiot, but as a christian scientist, now I'm being redundant. You've bought into the Bush doctrine of "Oh all these religions are great, none are to blame, it's only the perverted thinking of a few." What utter nonsense.
What atheist flies a plane into a building? None.
Only delusional religious idiots. This was the result of religious Jihad. Rivers of wine and virgins await.
Chapman-religion didn't make him murder as christians regard murder as a sin-Are you really that idiotic Patty?
I didn't say that religion caused their insanity. Only that when you take insane people and having them thinking these idiotic religious thoughts it can lead them to acting out on what their particular delusions are.

Next the war-you're absolutely wrong as usual-you are consistent-perhaps you'd like to read what I wrote again. Am I saying that the sole and only reason for that particular insanity is religion? NO. Try reading what I wrote. Does it play a part in it. Oh you bet it does, Patty. One group of religious nuts claiming the land is theirs, while another group of religous nuts fight the religious infidels. Absolutely, positively.

Medical cures possible through faith? Now you've become delusional Patty. Run to the doctor and have her breast cut off? No, I don't know, I'm not a doctor. How about a diagnosis first? And yes receiving medical treatment is the only course of sane action here. Not mumbo jumbo voodoo.

You have the audacity to speak to me of logic? When you gleefully proclaim yurself a christian scientist, you immediately wrap yourself in the cloak of illogic, superstition, mumbo jumbo and just plain good old fashioned idiocy.

When you proclaim your faith and belief you immediately rmove yourself from any serious debate. How can one reason with believers of nothing more than superstious nonsense. For shame Patrick. March yourself into the bathroom right now, turn on the light, look into the mirror, that resplendent kisser of yours is modern day voodoo, you've become a 21st century witch doctor!
Repeat after me..."Bocha chica rum de dum..Bocha chica rum de dum..."

Hmmm... Apparently, you're not as firmly established as an atheist as you like to think, Chris. If you were, you wouldn't be so threatened by a believer.

Chris- you could throw Northern Ireland, Bosnia, and a few other religious wars in there as well. Unfortunately for your thesis, the atheists have it all over the religious types when it comes to inflicting death & destruction on humanity. Witness Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Ghenghis Khan, Saddam Hussein, and a few others. Not even close.

Furthermore, logic is a very useful tool, but when it comes to sex and religion I'd throw it out the window and show a little of that tolerance you accuse the religious types of lacking.

Thank you, Lloyd. You raise excellent points and I couldn't have said it better (or even as good as).

What is a "religious war," anyway? Wars are one way that groups struggle to gain control over land, money, and other resources. I don't care what the fighters claim as their high-falutin' motivation, because it's never about some fine point in theology. Get real.

Ah Patrick
threatened by you Ha Ha
I am threatened by you as Einstein would have been threatened by the 3 stooges
not threatened just appalled by your ignorance and the havoc yours and others wreaks upon this wonderful planet of ours
To LLoyd:
As was discussed earlier
Hitler as a good example, is trotted out by the religious apologists as an atheist. NAAAAAAAAAAAAAA wrong once again. Hitler was a good religious boy steeped in the religiously based anti-semitism all around him. His agenda was partly about politics, partly about real estate, but also partly, a large part about religion and religious based hatred. You see my dear dolt, history books don't declare wars religious or seldom acknowledge any religious component, because all religions have signed up to the universal "gentleman's agreement" if you don't criticize my religion, I won't criticize yours." Let me explain this to you, religions form your worldview, your underpinning of morality, your understanding of other peoples, etc. This is known as a worldview. By your worldview you take actions. This is what people and leaders base their dealings on, wars and otherwise.
(As a matter of fact see my brilliant, seminal article "Gentleman's Agreement" at secularhumanism.org then go to web exclusives)
But I'm not tolerant you say. Oh my goodness where are the PC police when you need them, I've committed a great sin!!! Let me explain something to you two silly children. No I am not tolerant of religion. And isn't it about time someone said so. I'm not tolerant of superstitious nonsense that has been destroying our planet. Come into the 21st century gentlemen. Ask my forgiveness and you shall receive it, for I am tolerant, toward repentance.

Chris "the supreme being" Volkay

And upon reflection I must say this
If you can sit there and try to tell me that
the Holocaust didn't involve religious hatred and persecution, then I must conclude that you are like men who look through keyholes with glasseyes.

Patrick, your facts about breast cancer are off. It's not the No. 1 killer of women, that's heart disease. It's at most No. 2, maybe No. 3. Secondly, early treatment can lead to beating it, and not just by taking the breast. I work with 4 women who survived breast cancer and have been cancer-free for at least 5 years. They caught it early and had combinations of radiation, chemo and surgery. It's not an automatic death sentence, and it's not always radical surgery. Anyone who watches a lump for a year is almost certain to die.

Chris,

You might want to go to the source, "Mein Kampf." Hitler's obsession with Jews revolved largely around supposed racial issues. He considered Jews subhumans to be eradicated and often referred to Jews as aspiring to impregnate German females to improve their stock (really!).

German scientists discovered U fission and the huge energies released. Had Hitler not been so obsessed with persecuting Jews Germany may well have had the Bomb first.

Doug
you are right. However as stated many times before it was a combination of many factors, racial, religious, real estate etc. Answers are never simple and one dimensional. For instance, why did the Roman Empire fall? A single reason? Or a combination of dozens? I don't believe I've ever said that religion is the only and single cause of anything. What I do say is that it plays a role, sometimes small, sometimes very large in the events we have been alluding to. In my view, it is the No. 1 problem in the world. This is my opinion. But there are many problems in the world, religion is simply at the top of a very long the list.

While Mein Kampf is the primary source, there are conversations and letters, memos, and his actions, etc that still survive as well.

Not only U fission. Had he fought on only one front he may have won too.
Or, had he teamed up with the man of steel(Stalin), he might have won as well.

To Julie From Socal:
I must respond to what you said about breast cancer as well, because it is important and I wouldn't want anybody to take the words of that piteous christian scientist for ANYTHING. Doctors will tell you that nobody dies from breast cancer itself, only it's complications when it metastasizes(spreads). Same with prostate cancer, gentlemen. The prostate cancer doesn't kill you, but the waiting and the spreading of it does.
So the by all means, one should quickly be checked because in this area, time really is of the essence. For anybody to defend someone not seeing a doctor, is not only idiotic, but a dangerous notion to spread around into people's heads.

I am not a Christian Scientist myself, but to completely blow off the effect of faith on health isn't right, either. There have been a lot of studies showing that religious faith brings people comfort in times of stress, and can have other positive health benefits. Here are just a few links.

http://www.hollandsentinel.com/stories/121298/rel_faith.html

http://www.advocatehealth.com/system/about/community/faith/ministry/linked.html

http://www.starcourse.org/faithandhealth.htm

I would still go to the doctor and actively seek treatment, but I'd also pray that god would guide the doctors to finding the root problem and the best course of treatment. And I'd pray for strength to endure, and calm and all that other good stuff.

Anyhow, I know that's not going to convince anyone who's firmly entrenched on either side, but I find it interesting. Lots of well-established scientific journals and schools are doing or have done research on this, because there definitely seems to be some connection.

Peggy
Studies are done on these subjects to placate the public that believes there is a connection. Just because a study is done doesnt mean that the results will be positive. Secondly, speaking only for myself, any study can be made to say whatever the agenda of the people commissioning in want it to say. As in, all supermarkets claim based on surveys or studies that their prices are lowest. Any study can be made to say anything the vested parties want it to say.
Next, religion does bring comfort in times of stress, I agree.
That's one of the main reasons it was invented.
Just remember, with this placebo effect that religion provides, it is really just restoring the strength it stripped from you to begin with.

And finally(really) be sure to catch my proven and life-changing commentary on relationships, by Chris "the pissy know-it-all" Volkay
at (CENSORED)(CENSORED)(CENSORED)
Thank you

I agree that studies can be slanted to favor the results one wants to see. That's why it surprises me when places like Harvard Medical School and the New England Journal of Medicine publish findings linking therapeutic effects of practicing your faith. I would think that they are not particularly trying to slant people toward religion, especially if it may move them away from science.

And before I take your advice on relationships, Mister "Pissy-know-it-all", I'm going to listen Amy, since she manages to prove over and over that she pretty much DOES know it all. Except for the god thing. :)

Religion is not really something that you can argue about. You either Believe, or you do not. I will suggest though that one reason that this is coming up is that our President definately Believes, and bcause of this, the world is a lot more black and white than many believe.

One problem with not Believing is that much of our morality is based on religion. Without such, what is the basis for a common morality? Why is your morality any better than mine?

Amy does not really address the supernatural. I am scientifically trained (I am a patent attorney by trade), but find much unexplainable. The women in my life tend to be psychic, in a scary sort of way. Two of them have so scared themselves that they suppress it. A third routinely scares me with her, over the phone, prophesies. She rarely remembers what she said, but I do, and they typically come to pass.

I try to be objective. But I cannot find rationale explanations for what I have seen. She predicts the future too acurately too often. At first, I attributed it to just being very perceptive. But that just doesn't fit the facts. This woman has routinely and accurately predicted serious injury and illness long before those affected have had any real symptoms.

So, I am going to continue to put on my rationale hat during the week at work, and my spiritual and/or religious hat in the evenings and on Sunday. Maybe some day I will be able to reconcile the two, but I seriously doubt it.