I have been agnostic for a long time now, mostly because I can't suspend my scepticism about organized religion. Lately though, there's been this thought swimming in my head, that I only believe what I want to. Because really, reason and rationality are what I base most of my decisions on (or try to, at least). And my philosophy in life has pretty much been, what I can't rationalize with logic I shouldn't accept. Which is stupid, because if that's the case, then it also means that for every truth I can't explain, it in effect becomes a lie. What glimmer of faith I may have had when I was young I could never truly understand. My faith was to be private, and people, even my uncle the pastor, interfering with how much I'm willing to give or express of it was unacceptable to me. Until now, I'm still not comfortable with active evangelising, cell groups, or what I see as the church guilting people into giving up 10 percent of their salaries. What I contribute is between me and the Person Up There, which was partly why I was so repelled from churches back home. But I attended a catholic service recently, and more than anything, I felt confused. Because that's what sitting on the fence does to you.
Oh, and because I've been researching my essay on nuclear deterrence this past month, these were the headlines for some day last month.
Voice of America: US Military Chief: Iran Has Enough Material to Make Nuclear Bomb
L.A. Times: Iran has the materials to make a nuclear bomb, top U.S. official says
FOX News: Top Defense Officials: Iran Has Fissile Material for Nuke, but No Bomb Yet
Wall Street Journal: Iran Amasses Enough Fissile Material for Bomb, Officials Say
AFP: Iran has enough material to make nuclear bomb: US admiral
New York Times: U.S. Says Iran Has Enough Material for Nuclear Bomb
ABC: Iran has fuel to make nuclear bomb: US official
The Guardian: US fears that Iran has capability to build a nuclear bomb
Honestly, it's incredible how fear-mongering the media is. If you're just an average person glancing across the headlines, you would think that Iran would be in possession of an actual nuke very soon. But it's not until you actually read the articles, when you find out that yes, they may have enough uranium atoms to create a bomb, but to actually develop one, Iran would need high technical capabilities to enrich them to a weapons-grade level, which they do not have and won't have for some years to come. Thing is, Iran had signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (approved by the IAEA), which gives them the indisputable right to produce nuclear power for civilian uses.
To be fair, I did find some balanced articles on this topic (who is going to believe the Tehran Times anyway?). But on the whole, I think putting sensationalist spins on stuff like this just confuses people. It's like saying, I can go to my backyard and grab a bucket a sand and use the silicon to make a computer (although that I admit would be really cool).
Oh and incidentally, <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/opinion/27taylor.htm>.
It's what I do when I have assignments due; I google alternatives to university. Or read stuff about the Reform Party back in Singapore (better economic policies, they say). Or this: <http://wayangparty.com/?p=8552> on our one and only Ho Ching turning 428.1 million into 29 dollars. She makes it look so easy. Peh.
