I'm a new wikipedian. I've been lurking around here and using Wikipedia for ages, so I figured it is time to start contributing to one of the greatest projects around.

So far, I have only contributed snippets of info, but at some point maybe I would like to participate more fully. Here is a little information about me that might be relevant to interactions on Wikipedia.

• I was born in 1978 in the pacific northwest
  
• I'm a college graduate with a BS in Mechanical Engineering and Spanish, MS in Biomedical Engineering
  
• I speak English and Spanish
  
• I'm currently a US Navy helicopter pilot
  
• I like traveling, and I've lived in several places: Spain (9 months), China (3.5 months), Thailand (2.5 weeks), and Japan (2 years).
  
• I've also traveled a little bit in Europe and a lot in East Asia and Southeast Asia.
• I'm married.

During junior high and high school (late 80's to late 90's), I was a born-again, evangelical Conservative Baptist. In college, I broke with this tradition and I am now an atheist. My personal religious philosophy is that rational thought is the best and only way that humankind can approach truth. Prophecy and revealed truth do not contribute in any positive way to the questions of morality, the origins of life, the purpose of life, or any of the other important questions typically relegated to the arena of religion. Even though these questions are at least partly outside the scope of science, the scientific method and rigorous philosophical thought can be applied. I think that atheist/humanist/deist/agnostic thought has contributed immensely to the betterment of human society.

At one point, I would have described myself as a libertarian, but unfortunately for me, that label has been co-opted by the conservative wing of the Republican party. I do not share many social values with conservatives, so I no longer identify as libertarian. However, I do still hold many opinions that I associate with libertarian thought and writing. I believe that personal freedom (both physical and intellectual) is one of the most important virtues a society can endorse. The only valid limitation on personal freedom is that one person's freedom should not violate the freedoms of another person. Of course, this isn't always clear cut and easy to decide. It's the role of the people (via government and the political system) to determine where to draw these lines. Phrased another way - the government has no business regulating consensual acts nor does it have any duty or right to "protect citizens from themselves." The second function of government should be to facilitate cooperation and planning so that we can take actions and accomplish something. After all, somebody has to decide where to put the roads and keep the economy running. Speaking of the economy - well, maybe I'll write a sentence or two about the economy someday. For now, all I can say is politicians need to listen to the science of economics. I'm mostly a capitalist. I think the only way a society can be productive is to reward those individuals who are productive. However, I am also very much an environmentalist. The capitalist system as it currently formulated does not place much economic value on the preservation of the environment, and as such, protective environmental measures are seen as a drag on the economy. I think this is a woefully short-sighted calculation. Natural resources are not infinite, nor is the environment's capacity to absorb waste. We have to consider the cost and value of anything that we take out of the environment or put back into it. I also think that breaking the chain of poverty is absolutely essential to a viable economy for all. The children of the poor deserve the same opportunities that wealthy children have. Being born wealthy should not confer the advantages that it does.

I'm also against government conscription in any form. An all volunteer fighting force is essential to our security and stability. If the idea of the United States (or any country, for that matter) is important enough, its citizens will volunteer to fight if necessary. If the citizens don't think a cause is important enough to fight for, then maybe it isn't important enough to fight for.

This user is a member of WikiProject Atheism.