A common assumption always made about God is that as an omnipotent being who created us, He/She/It would have created us for the purpose of worship.  On the surface, the reasoning seems obvious, but in my wandering thoughts recently I have started to wonder if this is really the case.  For the sake of this argument, I am going to define “God” as male, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, the traits that seem to be most commonly ascribed to God (particularly in the religious community).

First of all, why would a being so ultimately powerful want or desire worship from beings so vastly inferior to himself?  Yes, he created us and loves us (using the assumptions above), but we are so much below him and our worship would seem to be meaningless.  It is like a human being worshiped by an ant colony.  It would be nice to have beings who worship you, but would it really do you any good?  More importantly, would you even care?  Religious people will argue that it is different because God created us.  But if that is the case, wouldn’t it do more good to create beings that are more powerful?  Wouldn’t their worship seem to be more productive and more meaningful?  Perhaps we have the potential to eventually become more powerful, which would make our worship more meaningful.  But again, wouldn’t it just make sense to create us like that in the first place?  Even if you bring in the free will argument about how God wanted beings to voluntarily choose to worship him, why not create a being whose worship would be more effective, especially when they do it voluntarily?  It certainly doesn’t seem to make sense to create us as some sort of “pet” race, bred solely for worship.  Does God’s power somehow derive from our worship?  That would seem to be quite a limitation, because if the beings do not worship you, you no longer have any power.  If God is omniscient, then he would be able to see this potential limitation ahead of time.  All of this also begs the question:  if God doesn’t need our worship because it really doesn’t do any good, then would a lack of worship really make a difference, either?

It also seems quite selfish for God to expect to be worshiped.  Yes, I know, God is the highest power, so he therefore has the right.  But just bear with me for a second.  Religious people always assume that since God is the highest power he would demand to be worshiped.  They often say that we were created by God for the very purpose of worshiping him.  Many even go on to say the reason we were given free will was a sort of “experiment,” as God wanting to see if we would still worship him freely rather than as automatons.  God gets “more glory” that way, right?  As stated in the above paragraph, God really doesn’t need our worship.  So why create us to worship him if it doesn’t do him any good?  Is God some insecure little kid that constantly needs our reassurance that he is a “good” god?  Once again, if God is omniscient then he would know he is omnipotent and omnibenevolent, and wouldn’t need our assurances.  When you combine this with the doctrine of Hell found in many religions, it really adds fuel to the fire.  God already has billions of people who worship him, but he is jealous that he doesn’t have my worship.  So he threatens me with Hell as a means of trying to get it.  It seems similar to a scene of some spoiled kid who has all the toys in the world, yet he sees one that someone else has and wants it, and when they don’t give it to him (because it is their only one) he throws a fit and perhaps even gets violent.  Does God need to learn the concept of sharing?  Does God need to be grateful for what he has?  Does God perhaps need some of his “toys” taken away so that he appreciates the ones he has more?

It seems to me that the most logical explanation is that religion (made by selfish people) wanted people to worship them, and they just portrayed it as worshiping a God so that people wouldn’t balk at the idea of worshiping other people.  If that really was the goal, then it seems to have been accomplished quite well.  You see people doing something you don’t like so you say that God doesn’t like it and they need to stop.  They fear God (or you, as the case may be) so much that they stop.  You and other people even go to the trouble of writing a huge book full of all these things people can’t do, and say it is the “Word of God” so that people won’t question it.  Yet you portray it as a message of “love,” (an ingenious ploy, by the way) saying that God loves people but just wants them to be “pure.”  It just seems to be a convenient way to get people to do what you want, and make them feel loved (or scared) so that they don’t want to leave.

Another possible explanation is the fact that a lot of religion came from the archaic idea that sacrifices needed to be made in order to “appease” the gods.  You toss someone into a volcano so that it won’t erupt.  You toss someone into the ocean or river with a millstone around their neck to prevent floods.  You go around doing crazy dances and cutting yourself so that it will rain.  Or you sacrifice a person every day just so the sun will rise the next day.  One of the major problems with worshiping a god is trying to determine what that “god” wants.  Since the “god” usually isn’t that forthcoming, it basically boils down to making a guess and seeing what happens.  If more extreme measures seem to “appease” the god, then those extreme measures are continued.  This is all based on fear, being scared that a being more powerful than you will hurt you or other people if you do not appease it.  Could it be that all the religious ideas of “worshipping” God are simply a derivation of this archaic notion of fearing a perceived, supernatural, superior being?  The “loving god” element could have just been another natural progression of determining what that “god” wants, thinking that the “god” may not really want us to make such extreme sacrifices and will take care of us anyway.  If that is the case, the idea still has a long ways to go before it takes hold because there are still so many elements of divine retribution still present in religion.

Yes, I know it is probably sacreligious and at least borderline blasphemous for me to say such things.  But this has all been on my mind lately, and I thought I’d throw it out there.  I welcome feedback, positive or negative.

All I can say is, “Wow.”

I definitely did not expect the massive amounts of readers and comments I received on my post, “The Prayer of a Desperate Agnostic.”  I have never had a post featured before, and never have I received so many views, comments, rec’s, or friend requests on one post.  I have had Xanga sign-in lock and friends lock on for such a long time.  The last several years of my life have been really rough, and I put the locks on because I was hesitant to make too public the personal stuff I have been going through.  So for all of you new people who have now subscribed to my site (and/or are now friends with me), I would like to give you a little bit of background so you know where I am coming from with that post.  I don’t know how you all will react to this information, but I feel it is important that I tell you.  I have always felt that honesty is the best policy regarding anything, so I want to paint you an honest picture of my life to this point.  And just so you know, I do plan to take what each of you said into account.  There was just so much feedback that it is going to take some time for me to fully (and fairly) digest all of it.

I was raised in a Christian (Southern Baptist, conservative) home, and went to church from the time I was a little kid.  I read (and had read to me) the Bible on multiple occasions, and even started memorizing Bible verses from an early age.  I became a Christian when I was young, though I had pretty much believed it my entire life up until then.  After several years of “officially” being a Christian, I really started to get very active and committed to my beliefs.  I became very active in church, reading my Bible, praying, and in general trying to live a good Christian life.  I eventually surrendered to the pastoral ministry, went to a Christian college, and became engaged to a Christian woman.  I wholeheartedly believed for a long time, even having many experiences that I could only describe as “visits” or “messages” from God.  Was I really a Christian?  Without a doubt.  I believed in Jesus Christ with all my heart, believed that he had died for my sins and was resurrected, and had invited him into my heart to be my Savior.  If a Christian wishes to come along and discredit my salvation, then I would ask them to examine their own faith.  I had (what you describe and what I used to describe) as a personal relationship with Christ, so before you start questioning the validity of my faith, I suggest you look in the mirror.

I have always had a questioning mind, always asking “Why?” even sometimes when it wasn’t deemed appropriate for me to do so.  Somewhere along the line in my Christian life, my mind started having all these questions about what I believed.  I tried to shove them down for as long as I could, just because I enjoyed my relationship with God, believed with all my heart, and the questions endangered all of that.  Some of these questions were logical in nature, some were more existential, and some were questions of conscience.  I would try to ask the questions in church or other Christian settings, often times in a devil’s advocate sort of way, yet the answers people came back with were always lacking.  Many times they wouldn’t even try to answer and would just tell me to pray more, read my Bible more, go to church more, or have more faith.  No matter how much I tried to ignore them, the questions just persisted all the more.  So I started becoming more active in church, reading my Bible, praying, etc., partly because I wanted to find answers and also partly because I wanted to saturate my life with Christianity in hope that the questions would go away.  I started reading many Christian apologetics books by C.S. Lewis, Josh McDowell, Lee Strobell, and others, yet none of these ever answered my questions satisfactorily.  I had even gotten to the point where I was in doubt about my own eternal security, all because of Pascal’s Wager.  I was afraid that another religion’s version of “Hell” might be the correct one, and as a Christian I might be doomed to it instead.  As a Christian, if Christianity turns out to be wrong you may actually have something to lose, despite what Pascal said to the contrary.  Believe me, the very LAST thing I wanted to do was leave my faith.  I had a good life as a Christian, I was going to be getting married, and I already had a plan for how my life was going to be going.  I also knew that leaving Christianity would hurt so many people in my inner circle, and that was something that I absolutely did not want to do.

After years of trying to find the answers within church and Christianity, I decided I had to start searching outside of Christianity.  Again, this was not an option I wanted to pursue, yet the questions kept nagging at my mind and I had to have answers.  I had done an exhaustive search within Christianity, and I regrettably came to the conclusion that the answers to my questions would have to be found elsewhere.  And so, I decided to leave my faith.  I didn’t make this public at first, but the inner torture from not telling anyone (especially people like my fiancee) was just too great.  I finally “came out” to my friends and family about what I believed, and the reaction was just as I anticipated.  My fiancee broke up with me, my relations with my family became considerably strained, and I lost many friends.  My life came crashing down around me, and it would take me a long time to recover.  I dealt with major depression and suicidal thoughts for quite awhile.  I don’t know how many of you will react to that, but that is the truth.  I often described the feeling (especially about what happened with my fiancee) as my heart being “ripped out of my chest, stomped on, diced up into little pieces and force-fed back to me.”  It was an extremely painful experience, one that I would never want anyone else to share.

All of these events did temporarily halt my search, but I eventually managed to pick up my search again, this time incorporating sources from outside Christianity.  I started reading books by Dan Barker, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens, and a lot of what they said really seemed to make a lot of sense.  I also started researching other religions and philosophies, such as deism, Buddhism, Islam, and humanism.  I also went back and started re-reading some of my other Christian sources, but from the new perspective I now had.  I read “Mere Christianity” by C.S. Lewis.  I read “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobell.  I even started reading the Bible again.  I have also had other Christian sources recommended to me since then (I know many of the people who commented recommended some as well), such as Ravi Zacharias and Ray Comfort.  I read all of these sources (Christian and non-Christian) with as open-minded of a perspective as I could, because I really wanted to know the truth, whatever that may be.

Where am I at now?  As my last post suggests, I still don’t know what the answers are.  I still have to classify myself as an agnostic, just because I still don’t know.  To be honest, I don’t think it is possible for us to know.  There is “evidence” used by all sides to support their claims, a lot of it that seems contradictory, and it is hard to sort through all of it and determine what really is true and what is not.  Though the more I search, the farther I seem to get from Christianity.  I can believe in God, but the more I research and the more I think, the less I think that the god of Christianity is the true God, if God even exists at all.  There is so much I see in the world that doesn’t jive with the “God” proposed by Christians, and therefore I have not been able to go back to Christianity.  It is also a HUGE step to go from believing in God to believing in Christianity (or any other religion).  A lot of religious people offer their “proof” that God exists, and then seem to assume that if you then believe in God that you will believe their religion.  It doesn’t necessarily even follow that a belief in God has anything to do with religion at all.  I may pursue a “relationship” with God, but (despite what a lot of Christians say to the contrary) that doesn’t mean it has to be in a Christian sense.  Can I have a relationship with God without religion?  Can I have a relationship with God without the Bible?  I think, if it is possible to have a relationship with God at all, that these are very possible.  Though as my search progresses, I seem to be leaning more and more toward the idea that God doesn’t exist at all, that the whole notion was just posited by human beings eons ago.  As Dan Barker put it, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” and I simply do not see extraordinary evidence for the existence of God.  Perhaps I am looking in the wrong places.  Perhaps I am not considering all the options.  Perhaps my mind isn’t as open as I’d like to think it is.  I have limitations, and I know that the reason(s) for not seeing it may very well be caused by these limitations.  I also know that I am not perfect, and so if there is any fault to be found I am sure I bear my share of the blame.  There is just so much to sort through and I have a hard time finding inner peace with anything I have encountered, no matter how hard I try.

I don’t know how many of you, my readers, will react to this.  It may offend you, it may encourage you, it may challenge you.  I don’t know.  I just feel that the most important thing in my search is to be honest, honest with myself and with everyone else.  This is where I am at right now.

Oh God in Heaven, Creator of the Universe, hear my earnest plea.

I don’t know if you exist or not.  Everything in my mind tells me that there is no evidence for your existence, that the belief in a god as an explanation for the unexplainable is irrational.  From all my reading and understanding, this seems to be the primary reason why any sort of religion came into being, and why many people still believe in you and follow religion today.  Yes, I see things around me I can’t explain, but people centuries before me once attributed things to a god for which we have perfectly realistic explanations for today excluding a deity.  Without a doubt, many of the things I cannot explain today will one day be explainable throughout the progress of humanity, as we learn more about the world and universe around us.  Does this mean that you were not necessarily involved in the process somehow?  Not at all.  You may have set things in motion to let us decide our own fates, curiously watching as we learn and grow into greater understanding.  But then again, you may not exist at all.  We may just be some cosmic accident, somehow developing consciousness and sentience despite all odds.

There is really no way of knowing if you exist or not without you revealing yourself to us in a way that we can all understand.  Of course, if you do not exist this would be impossible.  How can one expect to hear or see something from a being that does not exist?  If you do exist, yet do not interfere with the progression of events on our world, then such a revelation would go against your strict policy of non-interference and would therefore taint the results of your cosmic “experiment.”  I say “experiment” with all due respect.  I do not mean to insinuate that you treat us like lab rats or salivating dogs; I merely mean that you have a great deal of curiosity, a quality (I believe a good quality) that has rubbed off on us, your creations.  There are many who say you have already revealed yourself to us through sacred religious texts, and if you are indeed proactive within our society then perhaps you did.  But there are so many different religions out there who claim to have your words to us.  How do we know which of them (if any) are true?  I suppose it is possible that all of them contain some form of message from you, yet the followers of each insist that their belief system is the only correct belief system.

Oh God, there have been many people throughout history (and are today) who have waved banners of religion and done horrible things in that name.  There have been inquisitions, holocausts, jihads, holy wars, and crusades all waged in the name of religion.  If any of these people do carry your true words, they certainly don’t seem to care too much about who they trample in their path.  How many billions throughout human history have been killed by the sword of religion?  Much of this seems to derive from the mutually exclusive properties that the religions in question share, believing that since their belief system is the only correct one they must abolish any other dissenting belief system.  Many of these religions claim that they do what they do out of love, saying that since their way is the only way they must remove anything that might lead people astray.  They use fear tactics, manipulation, and even warfare, whatever is necessary to convert people.  They believe that doing whatever it takes to further their belief system is for the greater good, because it will remove all heresy and will win more people over to the “right” way of thinking in the long run.  But is it really worth it?

God, if you do exist, surely you had a reason for creating us other than just to watch us suffer.  The very act of creation alone is an expression of curiosity and love, so I find it hard to believe that you would go to the effort of creating us just to find ways to make us miserable.  Therefore, I find it hard to believe that you would reveal yourself in the form of religion, knowing full well how many would suffer and die as a result.  I have personally been witness to some horrible atrocities done in the name of religion that have left people dead or scarred for life.  There are many out there who have rejected a belief in religion or any form of God because of the traumatic experiences they have faced.  Will you truly punish these victims, forcing them to endure a second “Hell” after the “Hell” they have already faced in this life, all because they didn’t believe (with good reason)?  How can this possibly be justified?  In general, how can such pain and tragic loss of life be for the “greater good?”  Could you not foresee what religion would ultimately lead to, that believers would torture and kill each other just to further their cause?  A reasonable explanation is that you could not foresee what would happen, meaning that – for all your powers – you still have limitations just like us.  Or perhaps the true revelation (if it exists) is not to be found in religion at all.  Then again, perhaps the very idea that you even exist was postulated and/or manipulated by those in power so that they might control people.  Perhaps the initially innocent belief in a god that doesn’t exist grew way out of hand.  Regardless of the reason, I find it difficult to believe that any religion truly carries your message, at least not in the form that you intended.

This brings us back to the initial question of what your true message is, if there is even one to be found.  I have spent many years painstakingly searching for answers, desperately trying to find some truth amidst all the strife and conflicting opinions.  Yet, for all my efforts, it seems the deeper I dig the more questions I encounter.  Will I ever find the right answers to these questions?  Perhaps some of them, but probably not all of them.  Yet religion insists that my eternal destination rests on finding the correct answers, which is considerable pressure to find the correct answers to life’s toughest questions in the limited time I am alive on this Earth.

God, if you do exist, I am trying my best.  I don’t know if I will come up with the right answers or not in my lifetime, but please bear with me.  I am doing the best I can to live a good life and find the right answers to these questions, using the tools that you gave me to determine what that is, yet I fear I will still end this life with unresolved questions.  All I know is at my disposal is the experiences I have in this life, and even then there are times when too much stimuli cloud my judgment.  There is so much confusion in my mind and I have a hard time sometimes distinguishing what is true and false.  If I die under a belief system that is false, please have mercy on me.  It is not my intention to displease you.  It is actually quite to the contrary because I am doing what I can to be what you created me to be.

One thing that Christians (and even many theists) tout from time to time is how good God is.  They get a good job and say that God is good.  Someone gets saved, and they say God is good.  Someone “miraculously” is cured and they say God is good.  You can go to a church service and hear it said probably a hundred times before you leave the building.  One of the biggest things they like to say is that God is good because he provided a way out of Hell.  But is God really good?  Is it really appropriate to even affix such labels to God?

For argument’s sake, I am going to discuss solely the God of the Bible, since that is the most popular God in our country.  That is also the God that I no longer believe in, so it only makes sense.

I’m sure many of you have heard time and time again my rants about how evil God is.  I talk about how God killed many billions of people in the Old Testament, just because they didn’t worship him or weren’t his “chosen people.”  The comeback is always, “Well, those people turned their backs on God and got what they deserved.”  But how many children were killed during those events?  The Flood wiped out the entire population of the Earth save for a few, and I am sure that there were just a few children on the planet.  While the Israelites were in Egypt, God sent a plague killing the firstborn children of Egypt.  In several cities in the Promised Land God told the Israelites to kill everyone and everything, even specifically mentioning children.  Little children who had never even had a chance to accept or reject God, yet they were killed simply because God had them be born in the wrong place.  In the case of Egypt, Pharaoh was the one who refused to let the Israelites go, yet it wasn’t Pharaoh who was punished; it was the children, and not just his children.  After the Israelites left, the Bible says that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart so he sent his chariots after them.  In that case, Pharaoh didn’t even choose to disobey God; God made him disobey just so he could kill some more and receive glory.  David has an affair with Bathsheba and kills her husband, yet God doesn’t punish David, he punishes David’s child (and the child suffered for seven days).  After reading things like this, one really has to wonder at the justness of God.  The people responsible are not punished; rather it is the people they love who are punished, people who didn’t do anything wrong.  In the case of the Flood, God doesn’t even bother to sort out the good from the bad; he just tells Noah to build a boat and kills everyone, guilty and innocent.

If God is all-knowing then he should have been able to foresee these things before they happened, and if he is all-powerful then he should have been able to prevent it.  At the very least, one would think that an all-knowing, all-powerful God could have found a way to “cleanse” the planet without killing, or at least just weed out the bad seeds.  This would seem to indicate that either the “all-knowing” or the “all-powerful” aspects of God are not true.  One also has to wonder if God just isn’t good, and just wants to use his power for his own gain.  Perhaps he is some sadistic freak that just likes to watch people suffer.  Or perhaps God has (or had) flaws.  He might be omnipotent now, but may not have always been so.  Perhaps he looked at everything and saw the one solution, and it turned out to be the wrong one.  However, Christianity also holds to the idea that God exists outside of time.  If that is the case, and God is omnipotent and omnipresent, then God should be able to go back in time and impose a better solution.  Perhaps God just said, “To Hell with it, what’s done is done,” and just decided to leave it alone.  Or perhaps the reason why the “solutions” seem so flawed is because God really wasn’t doing anything at all.  Perhaps he just created the Earth, saw everything in advance, and just decided it wasn’t worth the effort trying to intervene.  Plus, since he gave us free will, intervention might interfere with that.  One then has to wonder why he created us at all.  It surely seems it would have caused him less headaches.  Or maybe there is no Creator at all.

Back to the point at hand (I got off on a tangent there), whenever I say these things about God being evil, about why God seems to love killing so much, I always get certain replies.  Many people will try to find some way to justify the killing, but the ones who are honest will usually come right out and say that it doesn’t make sense to them either why God would kill so much.  Some will even rebuke me by asking how I can have the audacity to question God, and will even tell me I am condemned to Hell for doing so.  The most popular one seems to be that God works in mysterious ways, and we can’t understand his will.  They say that we can’t label God’s actions as bad because we don’t know all the facts and can’t possibly understand the will of an infinite being.  This is usually where Romans 8:28 comes in, where people say something along the lines of “God works all things together for good.”

Here is my major problem with that last one.  First of all, it assumes God is good simply because the Bible says so.  Therefore, you look at everything from the perspective that God is good, and see whatever you want to see that makes you believe that.  What drives me nuts is when people will try to say that I can’t say God is evil because something bad happens, yet when something good happens they use it as evidence that God is good.  It works both ways.  If bad things aren’t evidence that God is bad, then good things are not evidence that God is good.  If we don’t know all the facts and can’t understand the will of God, then how can we automatically assume that God’s will is good?  The Bible?  Just because a book says it doesn’t mean it is true.  Besides, if God is evil and God “wrote” the Bible, then wouldn’t he try to paint himself in as good of light as possible?

If you really want to get into it, putting labels of any kind (like “good” or “bad”) on God is defining him by the standards of those labels.  In order to say that God is good, you are holding God to a standard, the standard of “good.”  A standard is not a standard unless it appeals to something “above” the individual in question.  If you are holding God to such a standard, then it means that you are putting “good” above God.  If God is the creator of all things, and created good and evil, then he is above them.  God existed before good or evil existed, and so what was he then?  So to boil it down, if you call God “good,” you are saying that there is a greater power than God (“Good”).  Personally, I believe that if God exists, then he/she/it isn’t perfect and should be held to that standard.  Just because the being created the universe doesn’t mean it is all-powerful.  All of us have a conscience, which is our only obvious window into higher things, and since it helps us determine right and wrong I have no problem with putting “good” in the highest place.

To summarize, if God truly is the highest power, then he cannot be labeled as good or bad, because there are so many variables that we can’t understand.  People will see what they want to see, and so if they want to see God as “good,” then they will.  But since there are so many variables that we cannot know, then you can never really have an objective view of God.  Either you have to say that God is not the highest power, or you have to hold to a morally-neutral view of God.

So I guess the Chargers are going to win the division.  We are still a game ahead of them with one game to go, but that game is against them IN SAN DIEGO.  The Chargers would win the tiebreaker, so if they beat us next week they go instead of us.  I don’t have much faith that we are going to be able to beat them in San Diego.  The way our defense has been looking the last couple of weeks, I don’t see it happening.

I think we’re going to be watching the Playoffs instead of playing in them.

Wow, this book is great!  It really sounds like something I could have written.  I have to force myself to put it down!  It sounds like the author is a former Christian, just like myself, who became disenfranchised by his faith, just like myself.  Now he is an agnostic, asking many of the same questions I am.  A great read!

Damn, I sometimes think that David Draiman can read my mind!!

Criminal
Disturbed

Malevolent criminal, I
When the vision paints my mind
Cross the invisible line
And you’ll be paid in kind

Criminal, this suffering
It makes me think like a criminal
The suffering, when we’re alone
Criminal, this suffering
It makes me feel like a criminal
The suffering, when we’re alone

Typical enough for me
That I burn inside in agony
What power will enable me
To bury my vision

The hunger coming over me
As I learn to hide the agony
To make a final remedy
To close the door once and for all

In a world that I don’t want to know
With a message that I never want to send
To be freed from all of this
I want you to quicken my end

Don’t tell me I cannot go
With a wound that refuses to mend
Deliver me from all of this
I want you to quicken my end

It seems the whole experience is
Terrible and crippling
The pain is much more
Than physical, beyond belief
When we’re alone

Typical enough for me
That I burn inside in agony
What power will enable me
To make this decision

Despair has fallen over me
No way to hide the agony
Embracing my calamity
To save myself once and for all

In a world that I don’t want to know
With a message that I never want to send
To be freed from all of this
I want you to quicken my end

Don’t tell me I cannot go
With a wound that refuses to mend
Deliver me from all of this
I want you to quicken my end

Now you wanna know, you want a name
You wanna call me mother fucker
Now you wanna know, you want a name
You wanna say it doesn’t matter

Now you wanna know, you want a name
You wanna call me mother fucker
Now you wanna know, you want a name
You wanna say it doesn’t matter now

Now, now you wanna know
Now you wanna name
Now you wanna place
Now you wanna time
Now you wanna know

Now, now you wanna know
Now you wanna name
Now you wanna place
Now you wanna time
Now you wanna know, now

In a world that I don’t want to know
With a message that I never want to send
To be freed from all of this
I want you to quicken my end

Don’t tell me I cannot go
With a wound that refuses to mend
Deliver me from all of this
I want you to quicken my end

Don’t say it isn’t so
I’m on a path that you’ll never comprehend
Set me free from all of this
I need you to quicken my end

Obama has 238 votes pretty much sewn up, in my opinion, while McCain has 163.  McCain is definitely the one that needs to be taking more swing states (underlined) Tuesday.  Obama only needs to take 32 more votes, which could easily be done by taking two states.  David Wissing is optimistic for a McCain win, but he is a Republican so of course he is going to think that way.  I think McCain will take quite a few swing states, but like I said Obama only needs to take 32 votes in swing states to win, which will probably be very easy.

Here is my prediction map, along with reasoning and margin for each state.  There are quite a few key races to watch, which I have marked with an asterisk (*).

ALABAMA (9 votes) – South of the Mason-Dixon line, and has gone Republican for a long time.  McCain has this one sewn up.  McCain by 15-20%.

ALASKA (3 votes) – Sarah Palin’s home state, another easy win for McCain.  McCain by >20%.

*  ARIZONA (10 votes) – McCain has had some trouble in his own home state, even campaigning here a bit down to the wire.  I doubt he’ll lose it, but it might be closer than he’d like.  Keep an eye on it.  If this one starts going south, it could signify a long night for McCain.  Unfortunately, its polls will be closing later in the night so we won’t see a lot until after we have already seen results out east.  McCain by 5-10%.

ARKANSAS (6 votes) – I don’t think McCain has anything to worry about here, though the margin might be a bit closer than we expect.  Maybe Bill Clinton’s campaigning has had an effect?  McCain by 5-10%.

CALIFORNIA (55 votes) – No way Obama is going to lose here.  The only Republican California has gone for since I’ve been alive was Ronald Reagan in 1984, and he won all but Minnesota and DC.  There are enough Republicans here that I doubt it will be a complete landslide, but Obama has this one sewn up.  Obama by 15-20%.

* COLORADO (9 votes) – Definitely one to watch here.  Colorado went for Bush in 2004, but it has been trending for Obama this cycle.  The DNC was in Denver, so that probably has a lot to do with it.  McCain will make a respectable showing, I’m sure, but I have to give this one to Obama.  Obama by 1-5%.

DELAWARE (3 votes) – Easy victory for Obama here in the liberal northeast.  McCain won’t even come close.  Obama by >20%.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (3 votes) – Ha.  The district is 100% urban, which means it will undoubtedly go blue.  No Republican candidate – not even Reagan – has been able to take this.  Obama will win this by a ridiculous margin.  The only question is if McCain will get double-digits.  Obama by >20%.

* FLORIDA (27 votes) – This is the largest of the battleground states.  Obama has been leading here pretty consistently recently, though the margin has been very close.  It could go either way.  I decided to give this one to McCain, just because it went for Bush in the last two elections.  But if Obama does take it, there are 27 of the 32 votes he needs.  McCain by <1%.

GEORGIA (15 votes) – South of the Mason-Dixon line, though it does have some urban areas that make it a bit less reliable as a blue state.  This was Jimmy Carter’s home state, but this is also Zell Miller’s home state.  McCain will still win this pretty comfortably, but it will not be a huge margin.  McCain by 5-10%.

HAWAII (4 votes) – No way McCain will come anywhere close in this liberal stronghold.  Obama by >20%.

IDAHO (4 votes) – The people of Idaho love their guns, and there is no way this state will go to a liberal.  It is also close to Utah, so once again Obama has pretty much no chance.  McCain by >20%.

ILLINOIS (21 votes) – Barack Obama’s home state.  He has routinely been pulling >60% of the vote in polls here.  No question he’ll take it.  Obama by >20%.

* INDIANA (11 votes) – Another potentially close one to watch.  Indiana usually goes red, but Obama has been getting good numbers here recently, probably because of what has been happening in Michigan.  I have to give it to McCain, but I think it could be very close.  McCain by 1-5%.

IOWA (7 votes) – This state went for Bush in 2004, but Obama has been leading here by quite a bit in pretty much all the polls that have been done.  I am sure he will take it.  Obama by 10-15%.

KANSAS (6 votes) – There is a line of midwestern states stretching from North Dakota down to Texas that are usually very reliable Republican states.  Kansas is no exception.  McCain by 15-20%.

KENTUCKY (8 votes) – Usually a very reliable red state, and there is no doubt in my mind it will be again.  McCain by 15-20%.

LOUSIANA (9 votes) – Liberal, Katrina-stricken New Orleans is in this state, but the state as a whole usually goes Republican.  McCain has been leading in all the polls here.  McCain by 10-15%.

MAINE (4 votes) – Maine splits its electoral votes by who wins each congressional district, but polls indicate this will not be an issue this election.  Obama will take this pretty easily.  Obama by 10-15%.

MARYLAND (10 votes) – Another state in the liberal northeast.  Obama will take this one with ease.  Obama by 15-20%.

MASSACHUSETTS (12 votes) – John Kerry and Ted Kennedy’s home state.  Need I say more?  Obama by 15-20%.

MICHIGAN (17 votes) – At the start of campaigning, this one looked to be in play.  But with all the economic problems in the automobile industry, union workers are flocking to Obama.  McCain pulled his ads here, so he is most assuredly not counting on a win.  Obama by 15-20%.

MINNESOTA (10 votes) – The GOP Convention was in the Twin Cities, hoping to have some pull from Minnesota and its blue neighbors.  But the proximity to Illinois is just too much liberal pull, besides the fact that Minnesota pretty much always goes blue (including for Walter Mondale in 1984).  I think conservatives may be making some progress here, but it is still Democrat.  Obama by 10-15%.

MISSISSIPPI (6 votes) – South of the Mason-Dixon line.  Though a recent poll showed it a bit closer, I think McCain will take it pretty comfortably.  McCain by 10-15%.

* MISSOURI (11 votes) – Wow, this one has been very close!  If the bellweatherness of Missouri is any indicator, this might be a very close election (at least in the popular vote).  I am giving the slight edge to McCain because he has led more in the polls, but it will most likely be a very slim margin.  McCain by <1%.

MONTANA (3 votes) – For some reason there is always a bit of a Democratic pull in Montana which makes it a little closer than its solid Republican neighbors (like Idaho and Wyoming).  It went for Bill Clinton in 1996, but went for Bush in 2000 and 2004.  It will go red I’m sure, but it will be somewhat close.  McCain by 5-10%.

NEBRASKA (5 votes) – Nebraska also splits its votes like Maine, but again it will not be an issue.  This is in that line of midwestern states that always go Republican.  McCain by 15-20%.

* NEVADA (5 votes) – Harry Reid’s home state went to Bush in 2004, but Obama has been consistently leading in all the polls as of late.  I am giving him the slight edge in this one, but it will be close.  Keep an eye on this one; McCain could take it.  Obama by 1-5%.

NEW HAMPSHIRE (4 votes) – The McCain campaign was consistently talking about pulling New Hampshire, since McCain won the New Hampshire primary.  However, Obama has been having some outrageous numbers here recently, so it doesn’t look like that will be the case.  Obama by 10-15%.

NEW JERSEY (15 votes) – No way McCain will take this state that sits right between New York City and Philadelphia.  Jersey is going to Obama, though recent polls compel me to slim the margin a bit.  Obama by 5-10%.

* NEW MEXICO (5 votes) – This state barely went for Bush in 2004, but it has been trending Democrat this election cycle.  I think Obama is probably going to take it, but keep an eye on it because it could be close.  Obama by 5-10%.

NEW YORK (31 votes) – The only way McCain will be close here is if all the Hillary supporters decide to back him.  New York always goes blue.  Obama by >20%.

* NORTH CAROLINA (15 votes) – Obama has been making a VERY strong showing in this state south of the Mason-Dixon line, and it is definitely going to be a fight.  I am giving the edge to McCain just because it is in the South, but it will probably be close.  McCain by 1-5%.

NORTH DAKOTA (3 votes) – If there had been any more recent polls out of this state, I am sure McCain would have been leading by quite a bit.  These last two have to be flukes, but I am going to weigh them into my margin anyway to be safe.  McCain by 10-15%.

* OHIO (20 votes) – This is a key state.  This is the third largest of the battleground states after Florida and Pennsylvania, so McCain really needs to take this one.  If Obama takes it, he only needs 12 more swing-votes to win.  Recent polls have been showing a tie or McCain with the slight lead, but Obama has been leading here for quite awhile so I think I have to give it to him.  It will undoubtedly be very close though.  Obama by <1%.

OKLAHOMA (7 votes) – That line of midwestern states, and this one borders Texas.  Enough said.  McCain by >20%.

OREGON (7 votes) – The three states on the West Coast pretty much always go blue, and Obama’s numbers show that he will continue that trend here.  Obama by 10-15%.

* PENNSYLVANIA (21 votes) – This is the second biggest battleground state, so definitely watch it.  Obama has been consistently leading here for quite awhile, and Pennsylvania usually goes blue.  But keep in mind that if he does take this one, that is only 11 more swing votes for the win.  David Wissing is hopeful for a Pennsylvania win, but I don’t see it happening.  Obama by 5-10%.

RHODE ISLAND (4 votes) – Peter Griffin’s home state.   This state is in the liberal northeast and is very urban.  It will undoutedly go to Obama.  Obama by 15-20%.

SOUTH CAROLINA (8 votes) – Assuming Strom Thurmond’s ghost isn’t liberal, this Confederate-happy state will go for McCain easily.  McCain by 15-20%.

SOUTH DAKOTA (3 votes) – That line of midwestern states.  This one is Tom Daschle’s home state so it might not be a huge margin, but it will still be a comfortable margin for McCain.  McCain by 10-15%.

TENNESSEE (11 votes) – A very reliable Republican state.  McCain will win it easily.  Country music lovers usually vote Republican, don’t they?  McCain by 15-20%.

TEXAS (34 votes) – President Bush’s home state.  An abundance of churches and prisons.  Gun-lovers.  It’s Texas, so who do you think it’s going for?  There’s enough Hispanics here to trim the margin down, but McCain has nothing to worry about.  McCain by 10-15%.

UTAH (5 votes) – The Mormon Church will tell all its people to vote for John McCain.  That’s the way it always happens.  Obama won’t come anywhere close.  McCain by >20%.

VERMONT (3 votes) – Easy win for Obama in the liberal northeast.  Not sure if he will break 20% based on the polls, but he will win very easily.  Obama by 15-20%.

* VIRGINIA (13 votes) – WATCH THIS ONE!  Virginia usually goes Republican, but it has been trending for Obama recently.  Will McCain come back and pull this Bush state back from Obama, or will the Democrat pick it up?  My bet is on the latter.  Obama by 1-5%.

WASHINGTON (11 votes) – Another West Coast state that always goes blue.  It will do so again this year.  McCain made it close for awhile, but Obama is pulling away.  Obama by 10-15%.

WEST VIRGINIA (5 votes) – Another pretty reliable red state.  McCain has been leading here consistently, and I have no doubt he will take it.  McCain by 5-10%.

WISCONSIN (10 votes) – This state went to John Kerry by less than 2,000 votes in 2004, but polls indicate Obama is doing quite well in this state that is the northern neighbor of Illinois.  He wins it easily.  Obama by 10-15%.

WYOMING (3 votes) – There will be many close races with a margin of victory greater than the entire voting population of Wyoming.  No matter…its three votes will unquestioningly go to John McCain.  McCain by >20%.

Final tally:  Obama wins 311-227.  And for those of you keeping track, yes I did split the two bellweather states, Ohio and Missouri.  It was a very tough call, but that is the decision I made.  According to my prediction, that means Missouri will miss for the first time in a LONG time.

Now the fun part begins.  Unfortunately, I have to work during the time the election results will be coming out so I won’t be able to provide live updates.  I will be keeping up with it, but I won’t be able to post anything until after midnight, when most races will have already been decided.  I have high hopes that Obama is going to win this, but the moment of truth is at hand…

Time for another map!  Last one before the one that matters!

As expected, McCain has been gaining some ground.

ALASKA (3 votes) – There is a poll here from Sarah Palin’s home state showing McCain leading by only 3 points.  This has to be a fluke, because every poll recently has shown McCain leading by double-digits.  I am not changing it.  McCain is going to take Alaska, no question.

ARIZONA (10 votes) – The last five polls from John McCain’s home state show him leading by 7 points or less.  I am pretty sure he is still going to take it, but I am leaving it as Weak McCain.  As I said before, this could be an indication of other problems.  Al Gore lost his home state of Tennessee in 2000 and barely lost the election.

ARKANSAS (6 votes) – There is a poll out from Razorback Country showing McCain only leading 51-44.  Again, I think this is probably a fluke, so I am leaving it as Strong McCain.

COLORADO (9 votes) – Obama has been consistently leading here, though his margin has slimmed a bit.  I am moving it from Strong Obama to Weak Obama.  I still think he will take it, but he might have some difficulty.

FLORIDA (27 votes) – There is a Rasmussen poll out showing McCain with a 1 point lead.  This state is VERY close.  Obama has been leading for awhile, but his lead has only been a few points.  I am leaving this one as Weak Obama just because the polls are in his favor, but McCain could pull this one.

INDIANA (11 votes) – The latest poll shows Obama with a 1 point lead, but it has been flip-flopping back and forth.  I think McCain will probably take it, but for the poll map I am moving it from Weak McCain to Tied.

IOWA (7 votes) – Obama has been getting some insane results here lately, in a state that went for Bush in 2004.  The latest poll shows him with a 54-37 lead.  It looks like Iowa is going blue this year.

MISSOURI (11 votes) – The latest poll from the Show-Me State shows the candidates dead even at 49-49.  Two of the three polls before that showed a tie as well, and the other one only showed a one-point lead for Obama.  I am moving this one from Weak McCain to Tied, just because it is so close.

NEW MEXICO (5 votes) – Obama still has a 10-point lead in this Bush state.  It looks to be going blue.

NORTH CAROLINA (15 votes) – The last three polls show McCain with a 1-point lead, though it is VERY close.  I am leaving it as Weak McCain.

NORTH DAKOTA (3 votes) – There haven’t been any polls here since mid-October, and the last two showed it very close (one as a tie, one as an Obama lead).  I have to leave it as Weak McCain.

OHIO (20 votes) – Obama has been consistently leading here until recently.  The latest poll shows a tie at 49-49, and the poll before that gives McCain a 2-point edge.  I am moving it from Weak Obama to Tied.

PENNSYLVANIA (21 votes) – Obama has been leading here for quite awhile, though the last poll is dated October 30 before McCain’s last-minute campaigning.  That poll showed Obama with a 7-point lead, and since McCain has been campaigning here I am pulling it back from Strong Obama to Weak Obama.

VIRGINIA (13 votes) – Obama has been leading here for quite awhile, including in the latest poll dated November 2.  I am leaving it as Weak Obama.

That’s the way it stands going into the election, folks.  The projected electoral vote stands at 318-178, with 42 votes currently tied.  With the map the way it is, McCain could win all of those 42 votes and still not win.  However, polls can be wrong…

I will have my prediction map out ASAP.

I apologize for not getting a map up sooner!  I just realized it has been about a month since my last map.  Here it is:

Pretty much all of these changes favor the junior senator from Illinois.  The senior senator from Arizona appears to be losing ground, if you hadn’t caught that already from the news.

ARIZONA (10 votes) – Trouble in paradise?  There are two recent polls from John McCain’s home state shows him with a slim lead, one showing 5 percent and one showing 2 percent.  I doubt he’ll lose it, but this could be an indicator of other problems.  Moving from Strong McCain to Weak McCain.

COLORADO (9 votes) – Obama consistently leading, three of the last four polls show him up by 8 points or more.  It looks like Bronco Country may be going blue this election.  Moving from Weak Obama to Strong Obama.

FLORIDA (27 votes) – Obama has been leading consistently here recently, some polls showing by as many as 7 points.  I am moving it from Tied to Weak Obama.

GEORGIA (15 votes) – McCain’s lead is slipping here.  One recent poll from Insider Advantage even showed Obama with a 1 point lead.  I think McCain is going to take it still, but Obama’s ads seem to be having an effect.  Moving from Strong McCain to Weak McCain.

INDIANA (11 votes) – McCain’s lead has definitely slimmed in the Hoosier state; some polls have even showed Obama leading.  The most recent poll gives McCain a six-point edge, so I am leaving it as Weak McCain for now.

IOWA (7 votes) – Obama has a solid lead here.  Several recent polls have shown him with double-digit leads even.  I am moving it from Weak Obama to Strong Obama.

LOUISIANA (9 votes) – One of the few changes in McCain’s favor.  The most recent poll now shows him with a 15-point advantage, leading 55-40.  Moving from Weak McCain to Strong McCain.

MAINE (4 votes) – The latest poll shows Obama now ahead 53-38.  It was only a few recent polls that showed it to be closer.  This one appears to be pretty solid blue.  Moving from Weak Obama to Strong Obama.

MICHIGAN (17 votes) – As expected, Obama is consistently leading now that McCain has pulled his ads, now leading 53-43.  This one could get much worse for McCain.

MINNESOTA (10 votes) – Obama is pulling ahead here, as well he should in this reliably blue state.  It was the only state (other than the District of Columbia) that Reagan lost in the landslide of 1984, because it was Walter Mondale’s home state.  The latest poll shows Obama with a 12-point lead.  Moved from Weak Obama to Strong Obama.

MISSOURI (11 votes) – Missouri continues to be a major battleground.  Some polls have been showing Obama with a slim lead, some have been showing McCain with a slim lead, and some have showed it tied.  This one is really too close to call.  The latest poll shows McCain with a one-point lead, so I will leave it as Weak McCain for now.

NEVADA (5 votes) – Obama has been consistently leading for awhile here now, a couple polls showing double-digit leads.  The latest poll gives him a 50-45 advantage.  Moving from Tied to Weak Obama.

NEW HAMPSHIRE (4 votes) – Oh my God!  The latest poll shows Obama now leading here 58-34!  Many pundits have been saying that John McCain might take this one, but the last four polls have all showed Obama with a double-digit lead.  I think I can safely move it from Weak Obama to Strong Obama.

NEW MEXICO (5 votes) – Two recent polls from Scott Rasmussen have showed Obama with a double-digit lead.  Moving from Weak Obama to Strong Obama.

NORTH CAROLINA (15 votes) – Like Missouri, this one keeps waffling back and forth.  McCain is leading by one point in the latest poll, so I am leaving it as Weak McCain for now.

NORTH DAKOTA (3 votes) – Minnesota State University poll from early October gives Obama 45-43 advantage, mid-October poll from Research 2000 shows tie at 45-45.  Was tied once before in July.  Hesitant to move it out of McCain’s column, but am going to move it from Strong McCain to Weak McCain.

OHIO (20 votes) – Obama has been leading here pretty consistently recently.  The latest poll shows him leading 49-45, and I am becoming more and more convinced that he might take the Buckeye State.  Moving from Weak McCain to Weak Obama.

PENNSYLVANIA (21 votes) – The latest poll only showed Obama up 7 points, but many other polls have been showing him by nine points or more.  I am leaving it as Strong Obama for now.

SOUTH CAROLINA (8 votes) – I didn’t expect Confederate-happy South Carolina to stay “Weak” McCain for too much longer.  I mean, the first battle of the Civil War took place here.  Wasn’t that also during Strom Thurmond’s first term in office?  *crickets chirping*  Hmm…tough crowd.  Anyway, moving from Weak McCain to Strong McCain.

VIRGINIA (13 votes) – All recent polls have showed Obama with the lead, some saying as much as 11 percent.  Moving from Tied to Weak Obama.

WASHINGTON (11 votes) – Obama’s lead has expanded to 56-39 and the last four polls have shown double-digit leads.  Not all that surprising because the West Coast usually goes blue.  I’m surprised McCain remained close for as long as he did.  Moving from Weak Obama to Strong Obama.

WISCONSIN (10 votes) – Obama has pretty consistently been getting double-digit leads here, the latest poll showing him up 9 points.  This state went to Kerry by less than 2,000 votes in 2004, but it looks like Obama will have a much easier time.  Perhaps it is because he is from neighboring Illinois, Chicago at that.  Moving from Weak Obama to Strong Obama.

Obama has a commanding lead at this point in the projected electoral vote, leading 338-200.  No matter how you look at it, McCain has some serious ground to make up.  He does seem to be closing a bit in the popular vote, but he needs to start making a dent in the electoral column.  As everyone remembers from the Fiasco of 2000, popular vote does NOT elect the president.

I’ll try to get out one last map before the election, as well as my prediction for how next Tuesday will go.  Remember, last election I called the winner in every state but one:  Wisconsin, that I gave to Bush but Kerry won it by a VERY slim margin.  Let’s see if I can keep up my streak this election cycle!