Tuesday

Well, today I spent most of the day editing with Tony. This is very enjoyable. I mean, I have to say I really, really love it. The film is coming together and even though there will be a few possibly jarring cuts from this to that – necessitated by my own flubbing a line, or a camera operator’s camera becoming momentarily out of focus (mostly my fault since I often jump up and move without notice) I think the film is going to be professional and representative and maybe, even possibly GOOD. I am relieved. I will be proud… I think. I mean, I still haven’t finished the editing and I still haven’t mixed the sound and music and there’s so far to go before it’s really what it needs to be. But I am optimistic. My jaw line may not be as sharp as it once was, but this film will be as sharp as – well as is possible under the circumstances, and that is good enough for me.

I don’t have much to say tonight except I wanted to respond to a post by a Mule Skinner on my blogspot. (I copy my blog onto the blogspot and the forum and I read every single response.) Anyway, Mule Skinner is not a fan of mine, and that is TOTALLY FINE. I am happy this person wrote. She/he or whoever wrote rather nastily. Later, another poster noted that this person did not really identify himself or herself and chastised them for it. Personally I think it’s good that someone can write to me without identifying themselves. That makes it more honest, I think. Anyway, I just wanted to respond. But first let me repost what Mule says and answer as I see fit.

Anyway, he mule skinner said...
I saw "God said Ha!" live, in Los Angeles, in 1996. In that, Julia makes several loving references to a nun for whom she reserves no small amount of admiration, and says lots of nasty things about Pope John Paul II as well as the Catholic Church._

My response: I do, in that monologue, make a few references to Sister Antonella, a nun who taught me at Mary Cliff High School and who taught English Literature. I liked her a lot and she became a sort of friend. I mention her in “Letting Go of God” as well. I don’t say a lot of nasty things about Pope John Paul II as I recall. I do say I didn’t like him and that when I bought his book I was embarrassed and felt I had to get a book to put on top of it and underneath it when I was buying it, as if it were pornography. I say (in that monologue) that I need to keep up on what the Pope is saying so I can refute him. My thoughts about this now are: who would have thought that John Paul II was going to be the liberal Pope compared with who followed him!!!?!!! Ha. That makes me laugh. Cardinal Ratzinger is SO much worse, in my opinion than John Paul II. I don’t remember saying lots of nasty things about the Catholic Church in that monologue. I have a lot more nasty things to say now. But I do remember telling the story of going to see “Nunsense” and being offended at how nuns were portrayed like cartoons in that show. And that this is not my experience of nuns. I don’t know, I think that’s defending Catholicism. But maybe for you, Mule, defending nuns does not equal defending Catholicism. In any case, it’s all moot because I have so many more beefs with the Catholic church now than I had then. Anyhoo – let’s read Mule’s post further:

Mule writes:

The essential problem with this schtick is the fact that God looms large in the life of every atheist. God means more to Julia than to the average believer, and is constantly on her mind._

My response:

Yes, this may be true. And that – as I believe another poster pointed out, is because I was hoodwinked for so many years. When you take on a worldview the way religion has you believe it, and then discard it, it’s hard NOT to have it dominate your thoughts for some time. And that is true for me. Also, even if this wasn’t the case, because our current President is so religious and so much has been legislated and done in the name of religion in the last six or seven years, it makes me livid as a citizen. I wouldn’t say that God looms large, but me seeing the negative effects of belief in God looms large for me. It’s impossible for it not to. On the other hand, I feel I am over God. If I weren’t doing this show and I weren’t living in a country where religion dominates and contributes to so much catastrophe and stupidity, I don’t think I would be thinking about God at all.

Mule writes:

_Another problem is the fact that it is just not funny. God Said Ha! wasn't funny. Pat wasn't funny. It was excrutiating.__

My response: Well, humor is definitely in the mind of the beholder. I don’t know how to respond to that except to say that enough people were laughing to keep the show open and ticket sales were steady enough that it encouraged me to keep doing it. On the other hand – it’s true, in a city as big as Los Angeles, if there were a monologue about cat mutilation, there might be enough people around who wanted to see that, and it may have a long run. So, a long run is probably not a good indicator of funny. In any case, I accept that you didn’t think my shows were funny. In the case of the Pat movie, you have a large group of people on your side. I thought Pat was funny, but the movie was a big bomb. So, touché.

Mule writes: All of the 'jokes' are crafted to appeal to a microscopic segment of America, that being the Hyperion Avenue, 90026, 90027 zip codes. And no one else. __

My response: Wow! Why didn’t I open my show in that zip code? I had no idea! I don’t even know those zip codes, but I feel should be advertising my film there.

Mule writes:

Without politicking this demographic, Julia would likely still be stealing money from the bar she was working at, rather than from network television.__Like "It's Pat!" this latest effort wil fall as flat as a tarantula on a baby's face.

My response: Well, I seriously doubt I would still be bartending like I was twenty five years ago, but… I don’t know. Wait, so what you are saying is that I have been politicking this demographic for success? Does that include SNL? What about the other TV work? Voice overs? If you are talking about a larger city indie-type demographic, I have earned diddly from that. Most of the money I’ve earned has come from much more mainstream endeavors that you, Mule, would probably approve of. And as far as stealing money from the bar goes, Mule is speaking of a story I told on This American Life where I talked about skimming money from the bar when I was 22 and 23. I regret doing that. It was completely wrong. I told the story because I was interested in how I, as a person who considered myself to be very upstanding and moral, could have let myself justify such behavior. It’s embarrassing and still embarrasses me. But that’s why I wanted to talk about it. Not only that, in that time of my life, the Catholic church played a small part in it. I do not blame my Catholicism for this behavior, I assure you. But I had a twisted view of what opportunity meant – as I discuss in more detail in the This American Life episode. So you could say that Catholicism, in a way, was a character in that story. This is a longer discussion, but I do not think I would still be skimming dollars off at a bar 25 years later. I really don’t.

And now for Mule’s analogy that my film’s reception will be like that of a tarantula falling flat on a baby’s face. Where did you get that? I have not heard this before. Did you make that up? It’s kind of good. Is my film the tarantula? Is the movie-consuming public the baby’s face? I don’t see that this means: bomb.

But aside from that. Yes, maybe this film will fall flat. I have no idea. I feel just so glad that it’s finally a film at all, after all this time. And now I can begin to stop performing it, because I am getting so tired.

And on that note, I retire for the night….

I am immersed in editing my movie of “Letting Go of God.” I am working at home, with a guy named Tony, and we are spending many hours a day going through footage and assembling a rough cut of the film. And so, most of my thoughts have to do with this.

And frankly, this process is not all that interesting unless you are the person editing it. For me, it is very interesting because I feel like five years of work is finally assembling itself in an interesting way. And this is my very favorite part of the process. I like this part more than pre-production and much more than shooting. This is like you are a knitter and you finally have the yarn and the pattern and the knitting needles and now you are just joyfully knitting away.

Since I am the actress in the film, I don’t know what a lot of the footage looks like and I’m seeing it for the very first time. And there are, ahem… surprises.

For example, I have learned that at some point in the last four years I turned into my aunt Barbara. And I had absolutely no idea until I started editing my film.

Oh my god.

I am my aunt Barbara.

Fortunately I loved my aunt Barbara. She did die when she was 56, she pointedly drank herself to death, and that was very sad for all of us that were trying to stop her. And she did it in a very Leaving Las Vegas-y kind of way – canceling her health insurance, going to the store and buying a shopping cart full of booze, coming home and turning on the TV, and waiting. And soon it was all over.

So, okay, it didn’t end well for her. But aunt Barbara was just… great. She was funny and laughed a lot and she was smart and so caring about us kids.

I normally think I look more like my aunt Bonnie – who I think is very pretty and also, she is still very much in my life.

But no, I don’t look so much like aunt Bonnie. It’s aunt Barbara – I’m definitely aunt Barbara. And then there are all the Chicago aunts – aunt Barbara’s aunts. And all of them, their faces did this thing – when they hit their mid-to-late-forties, their faces did this thing – where they went from mostly oval to mostly square. All of them. How did I think I was going to escape this inevitability?

I guess if I was going to nail it down, I had this vague idea that I were going to age like Audrey Hepburn did. I think this must be related to the idea I had at age eleven that I would get older and look like Cher.

And then there’s my mouth. I don’t have my mother’s mouth. I have my mother’s mother’s mouth. My grandmother, Marie – it’s right there for me to remember and identify it. Every time I make an “r” sound – Grandma Ivers is living on.

You know, you don’t look at yourself all that much. I mean, unless you are a crazed narcissist who spends the day gazing into the mirror, you don’t really spend all that much time looking at yourself. A few minutes in the morning, a few more minutes mid-day maybe. You spend a lot more time looking at other people, especially those that you live with and those you hang out with. It struck me just recently and with some profundity that the average person doesn’t really know what they look like day in and day out like their loved ones do.

So here I am, spending some weeks in a dark room looking at a screen of MYSELF. Oh gawd. When I edited “God Said Ha!” which was at a post-production house and not at home (like you can do now with Final Studio 2 which seems to be working seamlessly,)I drove home every night for the first two weeks in tears. I remember it well, because the tears would start about a mile from where I was working, just as I turned onto the 101 Freeway and headed the next few miles home. I usually had recovered myself by the time I arrived to my house. You see, I liked the performance in “God Said Ha!” but I just hated the way I looked.

Now, when I see God Said Ha! (which I had to do as I prepared for this current shoot) I think I look fine – good even. Possibly great. I am WISTFUL over how I looked then. I guess some part of me knows that eventually I will feel that way about this movie too – but oh! People! Imagine if you had to spend hours at a time just looking at yourself! It’s a Zen exercise in self-acceptance. And also, sort of a nightmare. But I have to admit… interesting. Like I suddenly realize, “Oh, when I move my arm like this, it looks like that. And then I turn my head just this way, why it looks like that. And oh -- so this is what other people look at when they look at me, oh, oh, oh!” And then all the insecurity, resignation, rallying self esteem kicks in and finally I become just an object, a dissociated-from-me-object that is the focus of a film and I editing it together, stitch stitch, stitch.

My friend Kathy Griffin says you can get yourself stretched. Yes, on screen. The digital age – you know. Maybe I’ll try it. Just a wee little teensy 5% stretch. No, maybe 7.5%. I may look like a giraffe by the time I’m done.

The set for the film is filled with furniture from my living room and also books and objects from around my house. And I felt so… well – I’ll say it, at “home” on stage. But now that I look at it, it all looks so fussy. And old-ladyish. My shock at having become aunt Barbara is exacerbated by the fact that I inherited many of Aunt Barbara’s (and my Grandmother Henrietta’s) things and those are the very things are on the set. Like I have an old religious triptych of the Madonna and child that has been in our family for over 100 years, a large Mexican rosary that hung above my grandmother’s bed, a painting of a young woman in a bonnet that was in their living room. When I inherited those objects, I put them up and around my house in “honor” of my beloved, now dead relatives. What I thought was in respect of them, turned out to be something much darker. Because, you see, I DIDN’T REALIZE I WAS TURNING INTO THEM! Oh jeez.

It makes me want to sell my house and all my belongings and buy a very contemporary house that is stark and clean and… modern! And not at all like aunt Barbara.

Even though, I loved aunt Barbara. I just didn’t know, I just had no idea; I just am so astonished that I turned into her!

Oh!

Oh…

Which I suppose is my fate. And fortunately, and I’ll say it again, I loved aunt Barbara. Yes, it’s true; she was deeply depressed and lonely. (The comedy writer in me wants to write here: … and who isn’t? But the truth is, I am not depressed and I am not lonely. Even though I feel like I am much like my aunt Barbara in so many ways.)

Please don’t write to me: no! You look good. DO NOT. I know, I look all right. Really, I feel good. But let me ask you, how would you feel if you had to spend hours and hours and hours looking at yourself? It is… a rather deep moment of truth to experience, let me tell you.

All righty…

p.s. I loved all the comments on the last post. It’s nice to know that so many others jab at the radio station channel to turn off Bush the way I do. And I loved, LOVED, “Will someone please give Bush a blow job so we can impeach him?” bumper sticker. I would put that one on my car if I had it. Although I would have to come up with some explanation for Mulan. Hmmm… It means that Clinton got such a bad hair cut and blow dry that he was impeached? It means that…

Okay, the comedy writer in me has completely failed me in this moment.

Anyway, back to editing…

You know, I can’t even hear him anymore. When President Bush is on TV, or on the radio, I almost always instinctively change the channel or the station. I can tolerate listening to Bush in post script – I mean, I can hear people making comments about his speeches or “quips” or whatever he does that constitutes talking. I can hold by breath and just barely take it when there is commentary about his speeches, but I can’t actually listen or watch them as they occur. I just hate him too much.

And it doesn’t feel like a cerebral, intellectual choice. It feels like it’s instinctive, and I am repulsed. Like he is not just a president who I really don’t like, but instead spoiled milk in my fridge, milk that I innocuously lift to my nose and then recoil from and nearly gag. I can’t help it. When I am in the car and his voice invades my otherwise thoughtful sanctuary, I watch my hand change the station even before I am aware that he is speaking! Yes. It’s that bad. It’s below the level of awareness, and I cannot control it and I don’t want to control it. Usually, if it’s an important speech, I will read it in the paper the next day. Then, I can digest it -- nearly. But I cannot hear his voice, I cannot watch his cocky arrogant teenagish demeanor, I cannot peer into his chicken eyes and I cannot stomach his permanent smirk. I hate how he rests his body weight on one foot and leans in with one shoulder, like the smart aleck in junior high (see how I’m making him less mature with each analogy?) and I hate his superior snicker. I hate him. It’s beyond anything rational, I just HATE HIM SO MUCH.

Unfortunately, yesterday, at the gym, I was on the stair master and Bush was in the middle of his latest speech (which I think was actually given the night before) and the spectacle of him was on both the TV channels right in front of me and I have no idea how to change them and other people were watching, so I really couldn’t. The sound was off, but you could read the text of his speech below him.

All I can say about this is, every time I write off this last eight years or bemoan how we have injured the world by electing this pig, or worry, worry, worry that we will never regain any sort of respect in the world, and every time I think of other president’s blunders and think how bad Bush is compared with even the worst other presidents we’ve had and then I just think I’ve settled that in my mind: Bush is the worst, he’s taken us closer to the brink, blah blah blah end-of-story: every time I’ve done this, when I am confronted with the man afresh – when I can’t avoid him – when he is there before me as I step up and on the stair master for example…I am again shocked and flabbergasted that the specter of him is so ghastly. So much worse than I had thought before; before when I thought he was the WORST POSSIBLE. How does he do that? It’s like he had broken some physical law or something.

And I have to admit, I have a hard time listening to the news about all the violence in Iraq. I can’t really do anything about it in the short term. It upsets me so deeply and I don’t know what to do with it. I don’t want to get jaded, or thick-skinned about it. I think doing that is somehow to lose my humanity, to lose my real compassion, it’s almost an insult to those who are dying. I am tired of having Mulan watch me well up in tears as we drive to gymnastics as I listen to another report about another death squad. Another group of bodies found in the morgue, of another bomb in a marketplace or another group of soldiers turned up burned beyond recognition.

I think, back when I believed in God, I thought that - my being upset about something meant something to the Universe. Like God was listening. It must have been some extension of being coached to pray about my troubles. This idea that collective anger or fear meant something, changed something somehow. But now I see little reason to get upset repeatedly about something that I can do nothing about.

I am doing probably the minimum that each person who is reading this blog might be doing too – I am contributing money to different candidates and to the Democrats, I am teaching my daughter, bit by bit, about how to be an informed citizen. I send in the occasional letter that someone sends me to then send to my representatives. And when I think of doing more, I think I am barely able to get the stuff done in my life that I have to get done right now! I know, I’m just a complainer. Oh! I hate that too! I’m just a complainer!

So in the meantime, I jerk my arm at the radio when Bush is speaking and recoil from my stair master as he blathers on and sometimes I have a news blackout just so I can drive around town without getting distressed. And now it’s been going on so long! It’s become a way of life. Mulan, for example, knows of no other President than this one. She does not know what it is like to be living in a country not at war.

And you can’t believe what it’s like (or maybe you can, maybe you are in the same boat) to be explaining how and why we are in this war to a seven year old. I’m watching Mulan become aware of the world while I explain to her what she just heard on the radio, or how we see people in military fatigues at the airport, or how – when we were at my brother’s house recently and his wife’s brother, who is a pilot, had recently returned from a tour in Iraq and why he and his wife were hoping so much that he didn’t have to go back. And it isn’t glamorous and it isn’t even manly or exciting, it’s just tragic, the whole damn thing. And I have to explain it again and again and it’s a tricky dance because I don’t want her to become cynical or resigned to government being so awful. But so far, that’s all she knows.

Ug. I don’t know, I just needed to rant about this this morning I suppose.

I am in a fog. That’s because, for the second time this year, I have given up coffee. I like really strong coffee. And I have been able to, pretty easily, give it up when I felt like it. My boyfriend says that he already knows what he’d have to do to give up coffee. He would have to have nothing he needed to accomplish for five days and he would have constant headaches. And he would have to be lying down for most of the day. But not me, I told him. I can do it relatively painlessly and when I want to.

But then this morning, two days in, I woke up in this fog. I am walking around like I’m in water, no - under water and the water is thicker than water. It’s a soup. I can’t think very quickly and I want to sleep every minute. I just took Mulan to her violin class and I actually did fall asleep while she was playing, and I woke up with a jerk as she and her teacher shouted “Hurray!” because she had completed some string of notes without a mistake. I had drool on my cheek.

Oh god, is it coffee that has prevented me from early old-agehood???

This is probably not exactly the best state-of-mind to be in to begin writing my blog again. But here I am.

Well, the show was filmed and now I am getting it ready to submit to film festivals. My dream would be to go with it to Telluride and to Toronto, but – at least as far as Telluride goes, it’s a long shot. But I am feeling optimistic, in general, about the play as a film. I am also in a huge state of relief. I have two more shows I’ve committed to, in Chicago, in June. But after that, I’m not sure if I want to keep performing the show. I mean, maybe I’ll miss it and want to do a show or two in the fall, but we will see.

In the meantime, I am organizing my house and recovering from everything. At this moment, Mulan is seated next to me and she is doing her two-digit-subtraction homework.

Today I walked over to Jill Sobule’s house (she lives only a few blocks away) with my dog Arden, and we talked about our show. Now that I have “Letting Go of God” shot, I will concentrate on our show, “The Jill & Julia Show.” We also hope to film our show, possibly as early as December. In any case, we were goofing around and we started to write a song for “Letting Go of God” the movie, and it was so much fun. I could maybe use this song for the final credits or something. Jill came up with a great tune for the chorus and then I’m sort of Rex Harrison-ing it by talking about the whole religion quest. It was funny. She recorded it and we’re going to work on it. It might turn into something.

Yesterday I spent a half an hour talking to Roseanne Barr on her radio show that is recorded out of Las Vegas. She is very much against religion, but calls herself “spiritual.” (I think I do too – I go back and forth on that one, whether I should be using that name or not.) Anyway, I like Roseanne. She did an early Pat sketch with me on Saturday Night Live, so I’ve known her for a while. I like it when she comes on Bill Maher. I like how much she doesn’t care what people think about what she thinks. She always makes me laugh when she is on that show. Anyway, she mentioned in the radio show that she had had a religious type of experience at a very young age and that this made her believe in a supernatural type of god type something. And of course I also had these types of experiences. She said she didn’t need to debate over proof of God or not because this experience made it real for her. Even though she is very down on any type of organized religion, as I said. Anyway, we only touched on this topic for a moment, but I did ask her if she were interested in whether she wanted to know more about the experience she had. And she said, “If you can’t trust your personal experience, what can you trust?” Which I took for, “No.”

And this got me thinking and chewing on this idea for the rest of the day. And that is, one of the biggest upsets on my particular journey, is that I learned not to trust everything I had experienced. I guess it boils down to that old adage, the one I have seen on a bumper sticker. And that is: Don’t believe everything you think.

It’s hard to get people to second-guess their experiences. Or to look at them critically. And when the result is something that has only been perceived as beneficial to them (like in this case, believing in God) then why do I even want to get them to second guess it?

Well of course, I do want them to. Because that leads to one of the most startling discoveries, that our experiences are so… biased! And so… unreliable! And morphing!

And it is hard to get your bearings about yourself and what you even think after you realize this. Or at least this was true for me.

I just read “Stumbling on Happiness” by Daniel Gilbert. It’s funny and insightful and oh – all of you should read it right away! Actually it’s even better on audio. You can download it from audible.com or iTunes. He reads it himself. He deals a lot with this topic – not about religion, but how we sell ourselves to ourselves and how we construct narratives that make our experiences make sense – even when those narratives are probably wrong. The other book I’ve just finished is Carol Tavris’ “Mistakes Were Made, But Not By Me.” Also, fantastic.

And then, I’ve seen a couple of movies that I have liked very much. “The Year of the Dog” and “Once.” Molly Shannon is fantastic in “The Year of the Dog.” I think she should get an Academy Award nomination for it. To me, it’s a movie about learning how to find your place in the world. Plus, it’s hysterical. And then, “Once” – an Irish film about two musicians, made me want to move to Dublin immediately. In fact, when the movie ended, I wanted to jump up and object to the screen – I had moved myself into that movie and it was unfair to just dump me out into my seat at the theater just like that. No, no, no. I wanted it to go on and on.

That’s all. I am really going to try to write much more often.

I have posted my updated performing schedule on my website. Tickets cannot yet be purchased for the Los Angeles shows and the Chicago shows. But I believe that by the beginning of next week that will be rectified. I do know that already the Spokane shows are selling well. Oh! And I am going to appear on Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me – the NPR show, on April 12th in Chicago. That should be fun.

I have been thinking about something someone said to me this weekend. And that is, “Maybe very few people are capable of not believing in God.” And I was so arrested by that comment and I have been chewing on it for the last two days. Hmmm… maybe very few people are capable of not believing in God. I have to say; I think I agree at this point. But I hate that so much. It makes me feel elitist. I cringe at the thought, and I am automatically recoiling at that idea.

Except, I might… sorta… agree.

I said to this person who said this, “But what about Sweden or all those Scandinavian countries where hardly anyone believes in God.” And he said, “Well, yeah. But I guess what I mean is supernatural ideas too, or New Age-y ideas or basically a reluctance to look at the world squarely without divine influence. You have no idea what those people (the non-religious Scandinavians) believe besides not believing in God. Maybe they don’t believe in God but they believe in faeries, like they do in Iceland, or that the ‘universe’ ‘means’ for them to do this or that, or that when they put a gnome under their pillow it always rains. Maybe people are just superstitious, or religious. Maybe that’s what humans just are. ”

Then I said, “But I cannot come to that conclusion. To come to that conclusion means that I am the silent superior one and I have no hope for humanity. It puts me in the most arrogant position. I don’t want to feel this way about those people – about people in general!” And my friend said, “You don’t think the people who are religious or New Agey don’t look down on you? You don’t think they feel arrogantly towards you?”

And he is right.

Argh.

I think this came up because this weekend - with several friends - I watched “The Secret.” This is the movie that Oprah has been promoting on her show. Everywhere I drove last week, I saw ads on billboards for… The Secret. Basically the film takes the perfectly good ideas of “The Power Of Positive Thinking” but ads a lot of mumbo jumbo to it. Like giving the Universe a personality that wants “abundance” for us and “feels” the energy of our thoughts and puts a whole supernatural schpiritual schpin on the whole thing. It was so awful, it was so insufferable, it was so excruciating, I could barely watch any of it. If I had any energy I would go through the whole movie point by point. But I cannot. All I can say is, I thought Oprah was smarter than that. Not smart, mind you. But smarter.

I don’t know how we would have parodied this movie “The Secret” on Saturday Night Live because it is already a parody. One charlatan after another comes on and uses scientific jargon to “prove” that the universe is listening to your wishes and will fulfill them for you if only you ask. 90% of the examples of what someone might wish for are about material possessions, especially cars. A guy dreams of a big house (the picture of the big house was so cookie-cutter “mansion” ish, it was garish and fake looking) and lo and behold, he buys that house. Another man is tired of his debt and so he imagines himself getting checks in the mail instead of bill - and then he does! He gets checks in the mail! (No explanation of where they came from…) Worst of all, a woman who has ovarian cancer imagines herself healthy and poof! She is over her cancer! It’s just awful. It’s not only stupid and wrong, it’s dangerous. I was so depressed after watching it. And that’s when I had the discussion I recounted above. And I have been turning these ideas over in my mind ever since.

An acquaintance told me that she made her husband watch “The Secret” because she wanted him to be more positive about his career. I swear, if my spouse made me watch that movie and expect me to take it seriously, it would be a reason to break up. And then having that thought, I was flooded with memories of almost that exact same thing. Different boyfriends who would make me consider the most outlandish ideas and expect me to take them seriously – that Carlos Casteneda really was a shaman with supernatural powers and that giving up all personal power to a “higher source” was a good step in personal development. Oh! I would twist my mind up and back trying to find ways to still respect these guys. It was so hard. Now I wouldn’t have the patience for it at all.

So, this is what I’m mulling for tonight: I think it is too hard. I think it’s too hard for people to accept the random nature of life, and how vulnerable we are. All these ideas make people feel like they have some control over their lives, and that the universe cares about them. I mean, maybe life is too scary for most people to accept the reality of our vulnerability.

But what irks me is that people actually do have so much more control over their life than they realize! Movies like “The Secret” do damage two ways. On the one hand it tells you that life is not random and haphazard and that you can control the universe to make what you want to happen, happen. On the other hand, it discounts actual human determination and action to accomplish anything. Because all you have to do is sit back and let the “universe” hand you things.

Then my friend said, “What if religion is what allowed us to evolve? I mean, what if humans were able to beat out the Neanderthals because they were religious? What about religiosity in other species? It may turn out that ants are the most religious of all!”

Which had me aghast…. Again. Yeah… what if. What if.

Performances

Well, I’ve added some performances of Letting Go of God and of the Jill and Julia show and it’s going to be up on my website soon but I thought I would throw it out here on the forum and on the blog because I am so excited about it!

Jill Sobule and I are going to do the Jill & Julia Show in New York at Joe’s Pub on St. Patrick’s Day – Saturday, March 17th. I won’t be doing the St. Pat’s show I was planning to do at Largo – instead I’ll be in New York. Jill and I are also planning on adding two shows at Largo in late Feb. and early March but we don’t have the dates yet.

Then, on March 30 & 31st I will be doing “Letting Go of God” in Spokane at the Bing Crosby theater (formerly The Met). My mother finally gave me dispensation to do the shows. (This means she has given up on saving my immortal soul…) To be honest, she is being really great about the whole thing. I jokingly asked her if she would be willing to help sell Cds in the lobby afterwards and she said, “I would be telling everyone not to be listening to you! I would be the worst sales person!”

Then on April 4, in Seattle, I will be giving a speech at the American Atheist convention. I am really looking forward to attending that. Some of my favorite people will be there including Bob Price (of the book “The Reason Drive Life” among many other wonderful books.)

April 13th and 14th, I will be in Chicago at the Lakeside Theater doing “Letting Go of God.” Stay tuned for more details.

Then back to Los Angeles to do the shows leading up to the filming on May 5th.

I gotta run, tonight Jill and I are performing at The Hotel Café - just two songs and two stories.

I am so sad about Molly Ivins dying. I can hardly stand it. I guess it might have been considered inevitable that she died from breast cancer. But somehow, I always thought I would get to meet her someday. It’s so sad to have Ann Richards and Molly Ivins die in the same year! It’s like the life of the party has disappeared. Oh, oh, oh. This really is making me sad, today. When I read Ivin’s book, “Shrub” (about George W.) I immediately went out and bought ten copies and sent them to people. And that is back when I (now realize) felt optimistic about politics in America. I actually thought everyone would read that book and Bush wouldn’t be elected. The first person I thought of when Bush WAS declared the winner in 2000 was of Molly Ivins. I wanted to be at her home with her, drinking whiskey and just letting the waves of shock and outrage that this man had been elected wash over us until the tide was really out and we really accepted that this is what happened. I wanted to eat chili with her. I wanted to watch movies with her. And now even though that was probably impossible, now it’s absolutely impossible. Sad day. Sad day.

Last night Jill and I did our show together at Largo. It really seems to be coming together. I had such a good time. I am going to learn keyboards now. Jeez. I ‘m in a band now. I can’t stand it, it’s such a surprise. And also, not exactly true – I’m more the court jester of the band, but just that I get to sit onstage with Jill and other musicians is so thrilling, so darn fun, I am pinching myself that I even met her and that this is what has come of it!

Pomegranates are out of season. My friend Julia is driving to the last outposts of farmer’s markets looking for them. I reached a level of acceptance when my produce person at my grocery store said, “It’s over. There are no more pomegranates this year.” And then he walked away and I stood still next to the Brussels sprouts, frozen in shock that winter has passed so quickly.

But! I have a new recipe for Brussels sprouts that Mulan and I are loving, loving, loving. You take a bunch of Brussels sprouts and shave them or cut them finely. They become a big fluff of green. Then you put some olive oil and a slice of chopped bacon in the pan with some garlic, and then stir fry the Brussels sprouts. We’ve been having this with a chicken walnut sausage for dinner. It’s FANTASTIC. Add a glass of good red wine and you’re as close to heaven as is possible on this earth.

I am filming my show on May 5, 2007!

Finally I have things to announce. I haven't written because my entire Spring is up in the air and I wanted to wait until I had some concrete information, and now I have it! So, I will be shooting Letting Go of God, before a live audience on May 5th, here in Los Angeles at the Gay and Lesbian Center's Renberg Theater. I am shooting two shows that day, one at noon and the other at six p.m. I will have information later about how to get tickets if you want to be part of those audiences. (There will be a nominal fee, all the proceeds for those two shows will go to The Gay & Lesbian Center, Los Angeles for their programs and community outreach.) Before that, I will do seven shows at the Center's Renberg Theater, starting on April 20th. Those will be regular stage productions. Tickets will be able to be purchased for those seven shows in a couple of weeks. I will let you know when you can get tickets for that. When I shot God Said Ha! I had a live audience as well and it took about four hours to shoot the show. But the people had fun! Anyway, all this got worked out yesterday and I am thrilled. I am really excited to do the show again on a full set. When I performed Letting Go at the Hudson theater, I basically moved much of my living room furniture onto the set. And this time I will do that again, but it's going to be more elaborate. I have all kinds of ideas. Now I can really get started thinking about the look of the show in detail.

Last night I went downtown and listened to a debate, or maybe it was just a spirited discussion between Sam Harris and Reza Aslan, He wrote "No god but God, The Origins, Evolution & Future of Islam." The discussion was moderated by Jonathan Kirsch, who has written many books - his most recent is "A History of the End of the World" about the book of Revelation, and my most favorite of his books is, "God Against the Gods" which is a history of polytheism and monotheism in Western History.

The talk was very, very interesting. I found myself agreeing with a lot of what Reza was saying. His argument was that Sam was taking the most ridiculous and dated passages from the religious texts too literally and not understanding how religion is really understood by modern people and that he
(Sam) was blaming religion for things that would exist independently. For example, Reza argued that 9/11 was an inherently political attack, not so much a religious one. Sam agreed that there were political elements to that event, but that religion is the gasoline that fuels the fire and takes it over into more deeply divided territory where people are willing to die to kill the innocent. Reza says that history shows us that nationalism also makes people willing to kill the innocent. I guess I agreed with both of them -- I think religion is a terrible added fuel to inevitable tribal and cultural squabbles and wars that will arise around the world. I sat with my friend Catherine Ingram during the debate (she is a wonderful person and author and leader of popular retreats, one of her books is, "Passionate Presence" which I recommend heartily -- there are so few people out there willing to talk about profound -- or, for lack of another word, "spiritual" -- but I hate that word now, too -- life experiences and who understand science as well as she does) and she said that she thinks Sam shouldn't use the 9/11 attack as an example of heinous religious action -- she thinks things like female circumcision or women being stoned to death for having been raped are better examples.

I was actually really intrigued supportive of almost everything Reza was saying until the end of the discussion when he started talking about numinous experiences and how there are many paths to "truth" and science is only one of them. I actually don't necessarily disagree with this, but I never really know what people mean by "truth" when they invoke that word and I suspect they don't know either. That's when words like transcendence and phrases like "relationship with the ultimate" are thrown around too easily for my taste.

In any case, I plan to be a better participant in my forum from now on. Because I like the look and feel of the blog, I'm going to post my comments on blogger as well as on the forum. This may make it confusing in terms of comments. I don't know what to do about that yet. But, for now, that's what I'm going to do.

Hello all. Happy holidays. I am up in Spokane for the next week or so. And I haven't posted a blog recently because I just love the discussion that's happening in the comments section of my blog and I don't want to interrupt.

SO... the forum is here! It's here! It's here! Please click on the forum link at the right (in my list of links) to get to it. Or go here: Julia's Forum. For the time being I won't be posting on my blog and will probably just post only on the forum. I think this will keep things going in a much more straighforward and open-discussion-oriented way.

Okay. This is why eye-witnesses are so unreliable. I watched my appearance on Craig Ferguson, thanks to One Good Move.org, and it’s startling to me. My version of my appearance is disputed by the undeniable evidence that I saw. I didn’t get a big laugh off of not being “sure” there was no God. I think the comedienne in me just relaxes after I get a quasi-laugh, and that was the quasi-laugh that relaxed me, so in my mind it was a big laugh. So, that realization is kind of embarrassing. But on the other hand, I thought I didn’t mangle things like I thought I did. In any case, I think I did okay and thanks for the notes of support.

I really don’t want to be one of those needy girly-actresses who says she thinks she sucks while her eyebrows raise, waiting for others to chime in and say she didn’t suck at all. Oh, I hate that kind of person so much and that is what I feel I did with my blog entry, to a certain extent. In any case – yes! The appearance. And I did sell a bunch of Cds so that is good. (Thanks if you are one of those people!) I am trying to wait to put the Cd on Amazon until AT LEAST after Christmas. So, this publicity is good in that I am making my money back towards the initial investment of the Cds before Amazon has it and my profit goes down to almost zip. Amazon – amazing how they do business. But that’s another story.

I was wishing I had said something about eye-witnesses to Craig Ferguson when he said the thing about people having experiences with "purple dragons" that make them know they are real. Because right there, that is one of the most startling and unsettling things I learned in my journey away from God. I didn't realize how completely unreliable personal experience was in terms of verifying facts and relying on it for real hard information. All those religious experiences that people have had, that convinced them there is a God, that started religions and so forth -- all personal experience and memory, all highly faulty! It might seem like it's obvious to the people reading my blog, but just this little thing to me -- made everything different. This alone turned me into a skeptic. Visions, feelings, memory -- emotionally important, sure. But reliable as truth? Not really. Not really at all.

OH. I am just about decided on the type of forum that I am going to put up. This, I hope, will happen very soon. I mean – all those forums look almost identical to me, but I have to have a certain type of one that goes with the language that my website uses. Talking to people about this is like me in a foreign country where I know exactly ten words and I just keep using them over and over and nodding my head vigorously like I know what people are saying when really I only get a very general idea.

I loved people’s posts from yesterday. I really loved the person who wrote with all the reasons I should send my daughter to a religious school. I agree with everything she said! And it was really funny too.

But I don’t think it’s going to happen. Mulan is in a really great public school and unless I move to Spokane while she is in school, the chance is incredibly small that she would go. I think I couldn’t do it, anyway, if it really came down to it. On the other hand, I really want Mulan to know religion. I want her to know about St. Paul and Abraham and have some idea of why those stories have such impact. I think I will have to start my own Sunday school teaching it all my way! Ha.

My grandmother had this beautiful rosary – it’s large, like maybe three or four feet long, with huge wooden carved beads. It was always hanging over her bed, on two nails, so that the rosary hung in a kind of shape that almost looked cross-like. And the beads sunk down in the middle. I thought it looked like a person with arms outstretched to the sky, to God. I really loved my grandmother and that rosary reminds me of her and how it felt in her house, which was really cozy and safe.

Anyway, after my aunt died, I got the rosary and I hung it in my bedroom. Not right above my bed, but over some bookcases. I really like it there and it’s comforting for me to look at. So, the other day, Mulan referred to the big “Y” necklace. And I said, “What?” And she pointed to the rosary and said, “Y’know, the big “Y” necklace!” And my heart sank. How does she not know that is a rosary!?!

I know, this falls under the heading of anything that kids won’t be familiar with that I was familiar with – dial phones, Tvs with no remotes, blah blah. But still, there was a little sword sticking me inside when she didn’t even know what a ROSARY was.

I guess it’s that I think of Catholicism as art. That was the art of my childhood. That was the place with flickering candles and people in robes and incense and paintings and stained glass windows and people huddled together away from the cold reciting poetry and singing songs. And I am giving none of that to Mulan. And even though – really, I mean this, I think she is better off without it, it KILLS ME that she isn’t getting it. Sure, sure, I am giving this feeling to her in other ways, in other places, with other things – sure. But not in this particular way.

On the other hand, I think of this incident, too. Last summer I was up in Spokane, with my girlfriend Darcy at her house. She had had a lunch with me and four or five other of our friends. We’ve all known each other since childhood. And anyway, there was a kid’s drawing framed on one wall and it said, “Family is important. Family is great!” And there was a picture of a family. Darcy’s children are now in Catholic school. And another one of my girlfriends said, “Isn’t that darling? It’s so… Catholic.” And I said, “What’s Catholic about it?” And she said, “It’s so Catholic, the importance of family.” And I said, “But that’s not particularly Catholic.” And she said, “Oh yes it is. They really talk about family a lot at Catholic school.” To me the implication was that in a public school, kids wouldn’t draw pictures like that.

Now the point of this is – as we all know, family is important, especially for kids – this has nothing to do with religion. Mulan comes home with pictures like that all the time. But for my friends who send their kids to religious school -- they think that something like this is unique. They reinforce to each other and their kids, just with little comments like that one to me, that it’s Catholicism that promotes the idea of family and in the cold harsh world outside Catholic school, they don’t. It’s this subtle prejudice that is built in. I mean, we all do this, of course, about some things. But this time it really struck me. It was so odd to me, that comment.

What’s funnier still about this is that my friend Darcy is gay, living with another woman and they have two sons together. Not only that, my friend Darcy is not even a Catholic anymore but this choice of school for her sons is the right one for the moment and the situation for her. Furthermore, when Darcy put her sons there, she and her partner went to the school principle and said, “This is our family, we are proud of our family, and if there is any problem with the school about our family, we aren’t coming here.” And there were assurances that there would be no problem. And as far as I know, there hasn’t been one.

But still. That comment reverberated in my mind. “It’s so Catholic.” The emphasis on family is… so Catholic. ARGH! And that’s why I am so glad that Mulan is not at a religious school no matter how enlightening it might be and how inoculated against religion it might make her.

I know, I am rambling about small points today.

And I am off to Mulan’s school for the Holiday Performance this morning!

Well, I just got home from a taping at Craig Ferguson. I really don’t know how it went. I am sort of flummoxed. Well, maybe not flummoxed. I will probably know better how it went when I watch the show. Which won’t happen because I won’t be able to bring myself to watch it. Mostly because it's on so late. And because I can't bear to watch myself. Those two things will stand in my way of having a reasonable feeling about it.

First of all, one of the wonderful things about doing the show was that Tim Meadows was also there. We were on SNL together. He does little sketches for Craig from time to time. Tim was also in the Pat movie. We had a good time talking in my dressing room about friends and what has happened with everyone we know from SNL.

Craig started right off (after a brief mention of Pat and SNL) with asking me how I could know for absolute certainty that there was not a God. I said I didn’t know for sure (which got a laugh) but that I think the evidence for God was weak. And then I said that I describe myself as an “atheist” because I do not live my life under the assumption that there is a God. I am “a” theist. I’m not sure I was very clear about this. And then that started a longer defense of atheism. I spurted out the Carl Sagan analogy of the purple dragon in the garage and I think I sort of mangled that. Then he asked me if I was trying to convince people to be atheist. Atheist, Atheist, Atheist. This is the only thing people will remember about the interview. And my nervous laughter. I am sure this will help me sell about two Cds. UG. It’s so hard! I mean, this is so not really what my show is about. Which I tried to get us back to. The struggle, the FUNNY.

Craig is really smart and charming. He said he “used” to be an atheist but now is not so sure. He had a joke about a dog crossing the street in the pedestrian crosswalk and how this makes him believe in God. I mean, we got to talk much more about the topic of my show than I did on The View. But still, I wasn’t totally thrilled when it was over. Not because of Craig – I mean, he is smart and funny and he gave me time on his show. But I felt I didn’t represent my CD as well as I wanted to. I wasn’t ready for the “how can I know for absolute certainty there is no God” and so forth. I made my case, but I don’t think it was very clear. OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH… I mean, how could I not have expected to be asked that? It's the obvious question. But I thought I was so smart and had figured out that people who interview me were going to only ask me questions, like, about how my parents reacted to my show or how I am raising my daughter. Because no one would want to touch the topic directly. See -- just shows me never to assume anything. So, I am glad it's over. Criag genuinely listens to his guests and that is really unusual and nice. I think he is smarter than your regular talk show host. But still, I felt that many of you blog-poster people could have done a better job defending the viewpoint. On the other hand, I had a good time. So, go figure.

Oh. I am so tired. I must go to sleep.

Good morning! Okay, that does it. I am definitely starting a forum. This conversation is getting too good and too all over the place and we just must find a better vehicle for it. That means a forum. I am working on this with my friend Joel and I will let you know what it up very, very soon. In the meantime, I would love to get some suggestions for subjects. Anyone, as probably most of you know, can start a thread, but I have to decide what the subjects are. So, what? Ethics without religion. Parenting without God. Navigating through social situations with the religious, but without God. God as a euphemism, too good to give up?

And speaking of the last idea. That's what I've been talking to myself and to my boyfriend about this weekend: God is such a great euphemism. But when you're ME, you can't really use it so much anymore. DAMN.

I can't write much -- I am off to take Mulan to school and then meeting with my music composer friend who may be doing the music for the film version of "Letting Go" today and then the Craig Ferguson Show later this afternoon.

Btw, I am so over on the side of no-Christian songs at public school -- 10,000%. I listen to classical music on the radio and of course it's all Jesus and all Christmas all the time at this time of year. Which I love, but still. Enough already.

Yesterday, as my boyfriend and my daughter and I were driving to Monterey Park for Chinese food last night, my daughter said she wanted to practice her Christmas song -- the one she's singing at the "Holiday Performance" at school on Wednesday. We said, "Go ahead." And she belted out, "Oh Kwansaa! Oh Kwansaa! The Seven days of Kwansaa!" And I was filled with joy! YEAH PUBLIC SCHOOL. I was actually filled with national pride too. I can hardly believe that this is the way it already is in our country. We are so lucky. This separation of Church and State is our most precious resource.

Anyway, give me your ideas. What are discussions you would like to see explored?

Also, I plan to take some of my favorite posts from the blog and put them up in a special place on my website. So many things people have written have taken my breath away.

And, yeah... the new blogger allows me to have such a bigger font. BIG, huh?

Random Thoughts

Once again, I am beat. I am working on getting the forum together, because clearly, we need one on this site. But I thought I would offer some random thoughts, some of them in regards to posts that have been written in the last few days.

I have gotten hundreds of emails after doing The View. Most of them, the vast majority of them, positive and encouraging. Several have been from Mormons, correcting me about their Church's belief in the Virgin Mary and the divinity of Jesus. Of course, as most of you know, I understand that. When I speak about the Mormon missionaries and their stories, and then say that I couldn't be condescending to them because I believed in things like a virgin birth, etc. What I meant was that I also had mythical stories that I took seriously. I didn't mean to imply that the Latter Day Saints didn't also believe in those stories as well as their own, specifically Mormon stories. All I have to say to all those emails is... WOW.

I also got some disgruntled letters from atheists! One said I wasn't smart enough to be an atheist! Well, I'll show him or her! I will not be smart AND be an atheist and, and... just take that, mister. Or, sister.

Anyway... WOW. I think this person in particular was upset about comments I made on this blog about Christmas songs being sung at public school. (Combined with being what was characterized as overly polite to the Elizabeth on The View...) I have been thinking about that -- and since I wrote that blog entry I have been literally drown in a sea of Christmas -- every radio station (almost) filled with stories about Our Lord And Savior's Birth -- and I was thinking how sick I am already of it and how GLAD I am that when I go to Mulan's "Holiday Celebration" next week I will mostly hear about Kwanzaa. But after being so snidely insulted, I offer more defense of my original idea. I, like all of you fellow non-believers - think the Christian stories are myths. I am still not sure that making those stories off-limits in public schools is making things better. I am not sure that every teacher would teach the Bible with a believers slant and I offer up England, Australia and much of Europe for evidence. Yes, based on principles, Christian stories should be kept out.

But what if there was a group of people who seriously believed that Santa Claus was real? Would we have to stop anyone from talking about Santa Claus in a public area? Then the Santa Clausists might feel persecuted and huddle together - starting their own schools just so their kids could talk about Santa Claus openly. I think it's a difference in opinon in the matter of strategy. What will make the myth of Christianity become more obviously mythical? Having kids do nativity plays in public school and singing Christian religious songs? Or having them not mention a word about Jesus during Christmas time? I think that we blew it, frankly. Or possibly. My own strategy would have been to innundate the kids with Jesus to the point where they were puking from it. (The Shick Center Concept for getting rid of Christian Myths!) And I don't think having this opinion makes me "less developed in my thinking." (As one writer put it.)

For the record: I am not the president of Atheists of America or any group that is like that. I am not even an op-ed writer for a newspaper. I am just me. I have opinions. Not everyone is going to agree with them. I might even change some of my opinions as I get more information. But that's no reason to start calling me names. C'mon you atheists who wrote me in anger, jeez!

Also, Norma. In response to your response to Becky. Not every one of us is rational through and through about everything we do. I can totally understand Becky's desire to send her children to CCD (Catholic religious school) to get a "conscience." Norma wondered, in the face of all the obvious damage that Christianity has done - specifically Catholicism, and in spite of the fact that Becky herself didn't need continuing "conscience" education as an adult, why she would want to send her children to get indoctrinated.

Well, maybe I can answer.

1.) Maybe Becky wasn't sure why she had a "conscience." Maybe she felt her own morality had been shaped partially by her church and then she took it from there. Maybe she felt her church had inculcated a sense of deep morality in her that she couldn't instill in her children on her own. Now - mind you - I don't think this is the case. I can just understand why someone would think that way. It's reasonable.

2.) Churches and church communities offer lots of opportunity for reciprocal altruism. There are lots of personal interactions and much social debt that is spent and accumulated at a church. As we know, this is the basis for the evolving of a moral conscience. Maybe there was no other equally dense social opportunity for her to immerse her children in that would cause them to be aware of how they treated others with such scrutiny and such payoff.

3.) How old was she? It sounds like she was in her twenties. If I had had children in my twenties, they would have all been Catholic. I think my decision to raise them Catholic would have been reasonable, given my age and circumstances.


What else? Oh yes, my interest in fantasy in film. I loved "Heaven Can Wait" before and after I believed in God. The Lubitch film is brilliant. But on the average, I am more inclined to reality-like films than fantasy-based films. I don't know why. I would take Yasojiro Ozu's "Late Spring" (where the big drama is a subtle shift in attitude) over Star Wars. Which brings me to my next admission. I have never seen Star Wars. But if I did... Okay, that's not fair. I should have seen Star Wars. I am just not one for fantasy or science fiction. I do like The Wizard Of Oz.

And now I get to Mulan. So, recently Mulan put it together and figured out that The Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus were not real. Because I want to encourage her skeptical thinking, I admitted it when she asked. I couldn't keep up the ruse. Basically she found a baggie of her teeth in my bathroom and one question led to the next. It was a pretty funny conversation we had. Of all the moments I wish had been secretly filmed between us, that was the time. And to be honest, I was proud of her.

But now Mulan has told one of her friends that there is no tooth fairy and the mother of this friend has complained to me. I talked to Mulan and she promised not to reveal this to anyone else. But then she said, "But... I want to tell!" And I thought, "I TOTALLY understand."

Well, I just did “The View” and I am waiting at the airport to head back to Los Angeles. I had such a nice, even fun experience doing the show. I was moderately concerned about the response. I think I was just skeptical that they were really going to have me on at all. I mean, this is a major daytime talk show – whose target audience is mainstream American women, and it’s ABC, y’know a huge corporation. And all that usually means that people who have views outside the norm are not on. But it was really great. I had a wonderful time. Rosie came to my dressing room before the show and told me how much she enjoyed the CDs. I was really impressed that she actually listened to them. I mean – not that she wouldn’t have, but come on, there must be so much material in one week on that show that I figured it would get lost. Joy Behar was delightful and even Elizabeth, the conservative Christian, who I was worried about -- a little bit – she was just receptive and nice and open. We spoke after the show for several minutes and she told me how she just can’t look at a little baby and think that that baby was an accident. I tried to explain evolution to her in, like – 30 seconds. She said when she sees the beauty in the world, she feels it must be designed and come from God. And I explained that we all innately have a feeling that the world is designed and blah blah blah – everything I’ve said before. And she was really nice and sweet and said she wanted to listen to the CD and I was really bowled over by her sincerity and graciousness. I felt a little more nervous than I usually feel, going on shows like that. I guess it’s been a long time. I think the audience didn’t quite to know what to make of me, and I was so glad they put my CD/book in their gift packages. I mean, to me this is a major deal that they did that. Anyway – one little voice out there and all, but still it felt good.

One of the producers walked me to the limo and told me how he was feeling more comfortable being outspoken about his lack-of-faith. That was really nice, too. There is so much I wish I could have said – I wish I’d been more relaxed and funnier – I was worried that people wouldn’t know that the show is a comedic look at my search for God too. But all in all, when I figure I really had only six minutes and two minutes were taken up with “Pat” and talking about Mulan, so really, four minutes, I did okay. I feel good.

Whew.

Next week, on December 11: Craig Ferguson.

Oh! My big news, and I really wish I had said this on The View as well, is that my show is now downloadable from Audible.com. This means that in two weeks it will be up on iTunes as well and will be linked from Amazon as a download. I got several emails from people in the last few weeks saying, “Come into the Twenty-first Century Woman!” And so, I have. You can download it. Go to audible if you care. And there will be a link on my site to audible very soon.

Okay, so here I am in New York City. I just flew in to do this appearance tomorrow on the View. I have no idea how it will go, but I am so thankful and happily surprised that they are having me on the show to talk about Letting Go of God. I know that Jenny McCarthy is also a guest. I don't know if we will get into my show very much or not. But we will see.

I am going to start a Forum so we can continue all this great discussion. It probably won't be up for a while, but it eventually will exist. In the meantime, I'm collecting my favorite comments that people have made and I am going to post them in a special place on my website.

In the meantime, I wanted to answer the letter that Michael wrote to me -- after I asked him, why he believes in God and what that God is like. His letter to me is in italics. My response is not.

Julia,

Thank you for at least acknowledging there are issues with the concept of spontaneous creation. I appreciate your honesty about that.

Wait a minute! I didn't say there were "issues" with spontaneous creation. I said that there are lots of possibilities for how life got started on earth, all of them plausible and from natural sources - or not-God sources. I worry that you use the word "issues" to mean that the evidence for a wholly natural universe is shakey, when it is not.

Now, to answer your questions. I write this with a little trepidation because I know that it will be jumped on by many, but, you asked an honest question and I will provide an honest answer. I don't expect that it will be a satisfactory answer to most, but it is at least a contrary viewpoint from a believer to a non-believer.

The short answer to your question of why do I believe what I believe is that I believe that God loved me so much that He voluntarily came to earth and became human. He endured incredible suffering of physical and spiritual pain and torture for the redemption of my sins. He was humiliated, mocked, laughed at, and killed because of that love. Yet, he was resurrected. I cannot escape his love for me and I, in turn, love him. Boiled down to its core, love is the essence of my relationship with God.

But there is no evidence that God loved you so much that he came to earth and became human. To me, this is a myth - a common myth - that you believe as true because your religion told you it was true and you have some reason to need to believe it. This story of Jesus divine nature is repeated through out many myths. There is no credible evidence that he was resurrected. The evidence is based on heresay and eye-witnesses and we know that this is one of the worst possible types of evidence. Even though it might feel good to believe this story and even though there might be plenty of social and psychological reasons to believe this story, to me - it doesn't seem like there is any solid evidence to believe this story as fact.

I feel his presence in my life. I have joy, peace, and contentment trusting in him even in very difficult situations. God has been faithful to me even when I have not been faithful to him. He has answered prayers and provided guidance with difficult decisions. Without Him in my life, there was a gaping hole in my being that only He could fill.

I think you have been coached to feel that the joy and peace and contentment came from God when really that is all within you. You have the capacity to make yourself feel joy and peace and contentment and God is a mechanism through which you can transfer your inner powerfulness onto a "God" and then give it back to yourself as if it's a gift. And it IS a gift. It's the gift of your own evolved psychology and biology. You may need to believe in God. You may be a better person for believing in God. But that still doesn't mean there is a God.

Now, the longer answer. There was a time in my life when I questioned whether there was a God "up there." But, in doing so, I had to acknowledge that the universe had a beginning at some point. It likely started with a singularity and rapidly expanded from there. Why would that have occurred? What would have caused it? How could matter be created out of nothing? In the words of the old Billy Preston song, "nothing from nothing means nothing." Logically, it does not make sense that something would be created out of nothing for no reason without the force of a creator creating it. An intellect and power beyond anything we can comprehend or even imagine in this dimension would answer that dilemma. It makes much more sense to me that a being created the universe than believing that it just happened.

I think that there is plenty of evidence for a Universe created without intention or intelligence. I think consciousness is a product of an organ that we have evolved: our brain. I think we have evolved to think that consciousness is something that is other-worldly or exists outside ourselves. We overly-revere consciousness -- and it's easy to see how this could be. Consciousness is amazing. But that doesn't mean that the Universe has a consciousness. Also, the universe didn't "just happen." It happened through a long process of evolution and natural selection. Our brains are also designed to expect a designer. We see such a small little bit of it in our lifetime -- that's why we need science and a concillience of evidence from many disciplines to really see what is likely to be true. And all of that points to a world without design and without an intervening and loving consciousness that is concerned about us. Even though - I know - that SUCKS. It was really hard for me to take that. It meant that bad things really did often happen for no reason. It meant that all that time I "kept it to myself" when I was wronged or thought I was wronged, and then thought - "well God knows this and that's what is important." It meant that I had to stand up for myself and see all the terrible injustice in the world. And that bad things can happen to good people because lots of bad things are random and not deserved. So, I know, it is difficult to look at the world that way. But I think it is accurate to look at the world without a Supernatural Love. And now I see the dark side of believing that, too.

Secondly, there is the question of where did life on this earth come from. Life on this earth also had a beginning. How did it begin? Evolution is one attempt to answer that question. An atheist friend I used to work with tried to show me how clear evolution was. He provided me with some books, one being from Gaylord Simpson. As I read it, I noticed how many assumptions, speculations, and holes there were in the whole theory. Why should I abandon my faith in God for a theory that required my faith to accept. (I acknowledge that there are many Christians who accept evolution as being God directed; however, I personally don't buy macroevolutionary theory).

Evolution is not a theory in that it is debated in the scientific community. Theories in science are what describe groups of facts. Evolution is a theory and a fact. The theory of gravity explains why apples drop from trees. But gravity is not a theory that is debated in science. The same is true for evolution.

The more I've learned about evolutionary theory, the more incredible it is for me to believe. I've touched on only a couple problems I have with it. I don't accept these assumptions that have to be made. For example, creatures more advanced than apes supposedly led up to man in a string of transitions. Those creatures would have been at that time the most advanced creatures on earth. Where are they? Why aren't they still around? Oh, I know that we have a few bits and pieces of bones here and there which are subject to interpretation. But I'm talking about the living, breathing creatures. Why would the most advanced creatures on earth ALL disappear except the last in the line? It doesn't make any sense. Therefore, again, the Bible supplies the answer for creation of the species that makes much more sense. A creator created that life.

I don't really understand what you are saying here. They are us. Or they are other species that are not extinct. I don't think you understand what evolution really is. The Bible's description of the creation of the species is a story that was made up by an ancient people that didn't have the means to look at the evidence. It makes much less sense. Why would God create all those animals? We don't need all those animals.

I also have found that the Universe, the beauty of nature, and the incredible complexity of life from cells up to humans displays not randomness but design. Design implies a designer. One may make patterns out of a cloud, but the cloud is not the object you see. I wouldn't expect to come across a sculpture and wonder what windstorm or firestorm caused some hunk of bronze to fashion itself into the replication of a horse. Rather, I would wonder who created the sculpture. Yet, atheists see an incredibly designed, perfectly complex universe and all that is in it but believe it just happened on its own by chance.

We see things as designed becasue we are arriving here on earth so late in the process and we are only alive for a very short period of time. It is reasonable that you would think the world was designed. This is one of the greatest gifts of insight that science has given us -- it shows us that the world exists without a designer. It goes completely against our instincts and common sense. And yet, the evidence points this way. We can see it in the smallest levels -- the ones that you accept -- in viruses and bacteria. Evolution happens and the byproduct, over a very long period of time, is a world that looks designed.

Fourth, why are humans so different from all the other creatures. The Bible says man was made in God's image. There is a quantum leap in intelligence between humans and animals. Furthermore, isn't it odd that all peoples throughout history have believed in a God. Now, you can chalk that up to ignorant superstition, but if that's the case, why do doctors, mathematicians, lawyers, CEOs, and, yes, even scientists, etc. in the year 2006 also believe in God. It would appear that there is some connection between being human and believing in God. It is not unreasonable to believe that God has given us the ability to find Him.

That's just it! We humans, it turns out, aren't all that different from other creatures! And it SO seems like it. But the more we learn about animals, the more animal like we find ourselves. Because we are animals. I think people all around the world believe in God because people made up reasons why there was thunder and lightening or why their particular tribe was special. They made these stories up to explain things they could not explain, or to help their group psycologically. And I think the reason that so many educated people say they believe in God is because there are a lot reasons to benefit from believing in God. It makes you part of a defined community, it alleviates anxiety about death, there is a social stigma to not-believing and so forth. It makes sense to me that there is not God AND that most people believe in God.

Next, I had to consider the life of Jesus. He clearly lived on this earth. He clearly claimed that he was God. Reliable witnesses saw him perform miracles. He was crucified, died, and was buried. There is no question that the tomb was subsequently empty and many witnesses saw his resurrected body. His ministry lasted only 3 years in an insignificant country in the middle of nowhere. Yet, within a short time, his message had spread and is now one of the world's dominant religions. The mention of his name provokes reactions like none other. His disciples went from being afraid to even admit they knew him to boldly preaching his word and being willing martyrs rather than deny his deity. You ask for proof of God? Jesus Christ was that proof.

Becuase someone claims they are God, that doesn't make them God. Lots of people claim to be God. The witnesses that saw Jesus perform miracles were not reliable. There were a lot of incentives to make this up. There have been many messianic characters in history and many stories about them. That doesn't make it true. The reactions that people have about Jesus are real, but they have them for psychological reasons and not because Jesus himself is having some effect on them. Many scholars don't even think that Jesus ever existed. AND just because people like the disciples went from doubt to faith to preaching doesn't mean that it is real and true. Jim Jones also had disciples who went through the same progress in behavior and thinking. I don't think you understand what "proof" is, really.

I have seen people who were addicted to drugs or alcohol turn their lives 180 degrees after accepting Jesus as their Lord. I have seen people who have been homeless for years completely turn around after becoming a Christian. I have seen individuals who have attempted suicide because of depression and failed lives be healed of that sickness. Christ offers redemption and hope to those who are suffering or in pain, which is most of us at one time or another. I'm not sure what atheism has to offer those individuals.

You are right that the idea of God or of someone like Jesus can have a dramatic psychological effect on someone. But I think those people all had that strength to turn their life around themselves. I think humans are capable of the most astonishing transformations.

Finally, God offers the promise of eternal life to those who believe and that's no small thing.

Yes. And there you go. I think that the idea of God and eternal life alleviates a great deal of anxiety in us about death. This is potent and deep. But it doesn't make it true. It just makes belief effective in that way.

I have explained in part above what the God that I believe in is like. He is an intellect far beyond my comprehension and understanding. I may wonder why some women die in childbirth. However, to say that I cannot imagine a God who would allow that is to say that I know everything God knows, and, knowing that, I conclude that a true God would not allow such things. Job had the same debate with God and God's responses were instructive.

Hmmm... Well, I thank you for describing your faith and what your God is like to me. I think that your faith is really meaningful to you and maybe even psychologically necessary for you. In that case, I am glad that you live here in America where you can have your faith. In many areas of the world, you would not be able to have your faith. You would be forced into some other faith. But here in America, at least it still seems like it - you can believe this story as the truth and you can privately worship in your own way. I am so glad that this country guarantees that people can worship - privately - in whatever way they want to. I just get ticked when one group of believers feel that they must make me believe the same thing as they do.

It seems like you want to have it both ways. You want to believe and you want what you believe to have the facts and reason and science behind it. But I think you have to let go of that. I think you should just believe because you believe. Just have faith and I would say, don't even try to get into explaining it or proving it. I know you aren't asking me for advice, but that is my advice. I am mostly concerned about keeping our society a secular one where the laws are based on reason and science and a tolerance for people to have their faith that they can express privately. I have no reason to convince you not to believe in God.


Anyway, there you go.

Lordy, Lordy how I love reading the posts. And I wanted to write a thoughtful response to Michael's post of a few days ago and now today is all gone and I am too bleary eyed to write or read. And tomorrow is going to be even harder... I may not be able to write till Monday! But keep writing. I love it so much. I mean, if you want to. Thanks!

Julia

Religious Symbolism, A Book I Forgot, Marcel Cairo & a note to Believer Michael:

Once again, I love all the comments. I guess - after turning it over in my mind for a day - that I am thankful that Mulan does not have any references to Jesus at school. Even though I also hate it. Cause I guess I want it both ways. I want to enjoy the myths as myths and I am tired of rejecting the symbols of those myths because some people think they are real.

But leftdog said something wonderful and I think true: Leftdog wrote, "Sure, it's a good story. I understand that, but it needs to be discredited before it can be reclaimed. Think Norse Mythology or any other similar; great stories, but only acceptable now because they have been defanged." Defanged. I like that word in regards to the Christ story. Sheldon said this too -- we need space and time before this story can be indulged in as a good story.

Plus, it's true - Jesus is everywhere, on every church lawn, inside churches, and it's only in the public areas where it's absent - or should be absent. I dream of a day when Jesus is as interesting and weird as Persephone or Eros. And I want that day to be NOW.

Austin Cline: thanks for all your wonderful research and writing. I read everything you linked to at your site. But still, even though I agree that it was the Christians that killed Christmas to a large extent -- how do we account for Europe, who have state sponsored religions and yet seem to be highly non-religious (at least at the moment, and in regards to Christianity.) They seem to be able to slip into secularism without a war with the fundamentalist Christians. Do they ban the creche from the government lawns? I don't know. I'm looking into it.

Maria: thanks for reminding us about Mithra. It's true. And the Mithra story is rawer and I think, better in lots of ways, over the Jesus story. See, Christians are plagiarists! Or, as I heard at a recent Skeptic lecture at Cal Tech, "Ingenuity is simply a matter of masterfully concealing your sources." Or maybe he said "Creativity." In any case, you get the drift.

Norma: I wasn't suggesting that the Jesus story be taught as another way of looking at the world, I like it as one of the myths that is part of our culture. In answer to your question: You are unduly cranky and cantankerous, but that is what I love about you. ONE of the things I love about you. But I don't think you have to be perpetuating fraud to enjoy a Sader meal or a Passover meal or Easter or the story of Jesus being born at Christmas. But I do agree, we aren't there yet. It's weird to enjoy the Jesus birth story amongst a group of people who actually believe that story is true. It feels condescending and wrong, but still, I'm going to do it. I want my daughter to feel what it's like in church on Christmas and the songs and the candles and all the rest. And if my experience last Christmas is an indication (I was told by my fellow pew-mates that they had seen my show and agreed wholeheartedly with my view of Catholicism and God...) I'm not sure that most of the people in that church won't feel just like I do.

Ben Turk: You are absolutely right about Donohue when you wrote: "Donohue's attempt to paint himself as a victim of exclusion by straw-man 'multi-cultural gurus' is an attempt to 1. reaffirm the dominant culture's symbol set. 2. make that dominant culture feel threatened and incite a backlash." And for that alone, I revise what I said. I wish we could have Jesus and the songs, but we can't at the moment. Maybe in my lifetime but probably not.

Boo Hoo.

Okay. There is another book I totally forgot from my 17 and is almost the most important!

18. The Moral Animal, Robert Wright.

I am still recovering from this book. As I said to Robert Wright, when I met him at the TED conference last year, "Your book totally f**ked me up!" It's so hard to accept that even those qualities that I strive to perfect in myself: compassion, love, sacrifice and so forth, stem from the most unwily and advantage-seeking impulses. Also, this book made me truly admire Charles Darwin, the man. Wright analyzes Darwin from an evolutionary psychological standpoint. And this book made me realize that if you were to put Darwin the man, and Jesus, the maybe-a-man side by side, Darwin -- outside of his scientific research and what he contributed to the knowledge of our species -- was truly admirable, much more so than Jesus. Darwin was an exemplary family man, devoted to the needs of his community, he stood up for animal rights and even took two neighboring farmers to court over their mistreatment of their animals. He was conservative in his advice to others, kind and compassionate. He was not damning anyone to hell for not "believing in him." He was not frightening people into thinking the world was about to end. He was not counseling others to abandon their families. Wright doesn't make these comparisons, I am making them. But it was impossible for me not to think about Darwin's life this way. In any case, I recently reread the Moral Animal. When I first read it, I had to go lie in the fetal position for what seemed like months, just to recover from it. I gave it out as a Christmas gift to the entire Sex & the City writing staff. This book is so important to me.

And now we come to Marcel Cairo. Yes, I agree, our discussions of God on this blog have been childlike in that they are referring to the God that most Abrahamic religions believe in. And i would like to take you seriously, but it is hard when you make statements like you do. You say you believe in the afterlife BECAUSE you are a spiritual medium. What does that mean, exactly? This is what a spiritual medium is to me - a person who takes other people's money by playing on their weaknesses. I think what you must mean is that you feel you have communicated with people who are dead?

What do you say, gang? Should I engage this fellow? I went to look at the research that you mentioned in your blog responses and none of it looked terribly legitimate to me. The thing is this: I have a biological and natural view of the world. My understanding about consciousness, which was opposed to my inclinations - is that it is an evolved adaptation that our species has in order to help us survive and reproduce. Why would that survive death? The whole idea that this organ would survive death, just because I like my brain so much, seems narcissistic and silly. My critical thinking tells me that the chance of the brain having some special otherworldly-function is so highly unlikely that it is not worth pursuing. Do you think animals brains survive death too? What about insects? Anything with a brain? What about people with Alzheimer disease, whose brains have atrophied? Do they have some other brain, their healthier brain, that survives out in the universe after they die and is just hanging in purgatory until they do?

Why do you discredit James Randi and Richard Dawkins? Those of us who admire them are admiring them because they strictly follow the scientific method and are willing to speak out about their findings and are willing to expose people who do not. This is not adulation, but respect. I can't believe you would put Randi and Sylvia Brown in the same category. They are completely different. I am suspicious of engaging with you based on that alone.

If you say your experiences with those who are dead are not able to stand up to the scientific method, then I don't know what we have to talk about. I reread the recent research on near-death experiences and I don't see anything revolutionary about it since I was reading Susan Blackmore.

Believer Michael (If you are reading this...) I just saw that you posted an answer to my question to you from a couple of days ago. I am going to read it later today and write about it tomorrow. Thanks so much for writing back. I appreciate it.

Catholic League President: William Donohue's NYTimes Ad pleading for Diversity at Christmas.

So, this ad appeared yesterday in the New York Times"

Celebrate Diversity: Celebrate Christmas

The United States is 85 percent Christian, which means we are more Christian than India is Hindu and Israel is Jewish. Moreover, 96% of Americans celebrate Christmas. So why do we have to tippy-toe around the religious meaning of Christmas every December?

There is something sick about Friendship Trees, Winter Solstice Concerts, Holiday Parades and Holly Day Festivals. The neutering of Christmas extends to the banishment of Nativity Scenes from the public square, the expulsion of Baby Jesus from creches not otherwise forbidden, the banning of red and green at school functions, the censoring of "Silent Night" at municipal concerts, etc.

All of this madness is done even though 97 percent of Americans say they are not offended by Christmas celebrations. So as not to be misunderstood, it is important to recognize that the few who are complaining do not belong to any one religious or ethnic group - there is plenty of diversity to be found among the ranks of the disaffected. No matter, fairness dictates that their intolerance should not trump the rights of the rest of us. Diversity means respect for the traditions and heritages of all groups, not just hose which have been cherry-picked by the multicultural gurus.

To be excluded is normal. Mother's Day, Father's Day, Veteran's Day, Black History Month, Gay Pride Parades - they all exclude someone. The Olympic Games are a showcase of segregation - men are barred from women's sports - yet not even radical feminists call it sexist. Should all of these holidays and events be banned because some feel excluded?

By celebrating Christmas we are celebrating diversity. Don't let the cultural fascists get their way this year.

William A. Donohue, President


I thought I would post this ad and see what people thought about it.

Okay. Here's what I say: I agree with Donohue (!!!). Well, I agree that it's silly to take Jesus out of Christmas. I mean, we call it "Christ" mas, fer chrissake.

When I discussed this ad with my friend Jim Emerson (who sent it to me to begin with) he said, "Yeah, but you could also argue that the Christians took a perfectly good pagan holiday and made it about Jesus!" Which is also true.

But it kills me that Mulan can't sing any religious songs at school for Christmas. Everything is all about Santa (as if that is less religious than Jesus!) and holiday-time. Which I really hate. I love the story of Jesus' birth. A baby born in a barn, after a long trip? Born in the humblest circumstances and yet became a leader and revered? This is a great story. It's a myth, but that doesn't mean it isn't a great story. That means that if I want her to hear the Jesus birth story I have to take her to a church. Which sucks. I mean, this is the myth of our culture! Why do we have to pretend it is not?

I think it's silly to distinguish between myths-that-everyone-accepts-as-myths, being okay (i.e. Easter Bunny, Santa Claus) and the myths that people actually believe in as real (Jesus, Santa Claus...)

Plus, de-emphasising Jesus over Christmas inevitably leads to over-emphasis on Santa Claus, which means presents and THINGS and buying, etc.

So, I tossed and turned last night thinking this through. If I think Jesus is okay at Christmas, then what about crosses on government land? No. That is not okay. What about prayer in public schools? No, that is not okay. I think a moment of silence so the kids can be thankful should be part of the school day. Meditation, yes. Prayer, no. What about "under God" in the pledge? No. What about Bibles in schools? Yes! I think they should be reading the Bible and learning Bible stories along with stories from the Qur'an and everything else.

But I have to say, I really miss the story of Jesus being born in a manger. I love that story. And kids like it too, unlike, say the Fourth Of July, which is a really hard concept to understand for a little kid -- a baby being born in the barn is a fantastic story that should not be banned from the public square.

I really love that William Donohue rejects "political correctness" as well. He's right. We should be concerned with the facts and not whether those facts upset someone or not.

I listened to a speaker at a skeptic conference from Australia who said that he was amazed at all the hoopla surrounding Christmas in the states. Australia is highly secular and they sing about Jesus in school at Christmastime. Same thing in Sweden -- a highly non-believing population and they just go crazy at Christmas. The holiday lasts a month long and a lot of their celebration has to do with Jesus and the story of his birth.

Okay, I am thinking out loud here:

Maybe Easter is perfect example of my mixed feelings. I mean, the Christian Easter story: Jesus dying and then rising from the dead. Gawd - that's a great story too. It's much better then just symbols: eggs, bunnies, or concepts: fertility. On the other hand, I like all the symbols of spring at Eastertime - I like eggs and bunnies.

Maybe it's the writer in me that likes the details of the crucifixion story. It's a real story. Characters, events, surprising endings! And the bunny is just... well, a bunny. And... eggs. But in the end, when it comes to Easter, I like the religious story AND I like the symbols. But at Christmas, I think I just like the religious story the best.

But the point is, why can't it just be everything? I think it's a mistake for people like me (atheists) to argue that Jesus should not be taught and shown during Christmas in public schools. That's just the kind of thing that makes a lot of parents send their children to religious schools. I think it's a mistake not to have Jesus and a creche and the kids singing Silent Night.

When it comes to Christmas, even though it was originally a holiday with pagan roots, I like to be reminded of the story of Jesus. I think those garish Santa Claus' are creepy compared to a creche, which I think is beautiful and poignant. Maybe we should just pick 10 holidays and just go for it. Tell the whole story - whatever the story is. And just enjoy it, it's a STORY.

Well, I just thought I would throw that out there to see what people thought.