Villagers kill 5 ‘witches’ in Kenya

If you have a weak stomach, then I urge you not to watch this video. This is uncensored human stupidity at work. If you’ve ever said superstition isn’t harmful, then you’ve obviously never traveled to some of the less fortunate parts of the world, where the combined brutal ignorance and extreme poverty are a recipe for disaster.

If you think this video is outrageous, consider the fact the person who recorded this video had also notified the police 45 minutes before the attack, but they did nothing. Now 5 people are dead, and all we can hope is that the video itself can lead to some convictions and help curb these kinds of attacks.

America is not a Christian nation

An article here tries to make the case that both the Left and the Right are wrong about the Founding Fathers establishing (or not) a Christian nation. The author makes a good case for why religious conservatives are wrong, but he doesn’t seem to say anything constructive about why the Left is mistaken. I must assume he feels perhaps secularists like myself may not fully appreciate the contribution Christians have made in forming this country. I thought, therefore, I might talk a little bit about my thoughts on the subject.

We cherish our memories. Without them, our experiences would simply fade, and we would lose the ability to learn. This is why history is such an important subject; the progress of our society has only been possible because of the shared and recorded experience of millions of human beings who are now deceased. We stand on the shoulders of giants, and we directly benefit from their knowledge so long as we take the time to examine the past.

History is a neglected subject, and easily corruptible; after all, how many are willing to lie to further their agendas and politics? Take for instance the ‘religious right’ and their revisionist perception of the Founding Fathers, who they believe were devout Christians. They uphold the factually incorrect idea that the United States of America was founded to be a Christian nation, or even that the founders had intended to make Christianity the official religion. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Declaration of Independence was a statement against the tyranny of kings, princes, and clergymen. This is precisely why the separation of Church and State is such a fundamental principle; it is designed to prevent the usurpation of freedom by men of the cloth.

I won’t deny Christianity has had a supreme influence on the West; it does not mean, however, our morality is inherited from the Bible. If anything, our modern society was shaped and influenced by moral philosophers coming out of the Enlightenment. It just so happened that many tried to apply their models to that of Christianity, despite the fact much of it is contradictory. They were pious men, but although they may have been inspired by God, it does not mean their morality reflected the message and tone of the Bible. If anything, they did what most Christians do these days; they ignore anything that conflicts with their morality, or declare the stories are meant to be taken allegorically. It’s one or the others, guys; not both.

If the US was really a Christian nation, then all other religions would be outlawed, or at the very least, severely limited. Yes, the majority of Americans are Christians, but so what? It does not mean the entire country should be defined by what a large portion of the population believes. To do so misses the whole point and strength of the American model of government; that people should be free to seek out their own happiness as they themselves see fit. If that involves rejecting God, then anyone should be able to do so without fear or retribution, discrimination, or lost opportunity. Sadly, the reality is that Muslims, gays, and atheists are pariahs in the eyes of many Christians. Their livelihood is largely dependant on the fairness and objectivity of a secular society. This is why history is so important. We must learn the lessons of the past; that no one mode of thought or religion can be enforced on others, and no religion (or even lack of religion) should be forcefully imposed onto others. America is not a Christian nation, and you can thank some pretty smart guys for that one.

Romanian nun dies during exorcism

So here you are, a Romanian priest who’s been ‘trained’ by the Church to perform exorcism, and some poor nun has to die right in the middle of it. To make things worse, the police are at your front door, asking what the hell happened. You casually explain to the officers that you had bound, gagged and starved the woman for three days only for her to later die of asphyxiation. The police don’t seem very impressed with your answer, and all of a sudden, the media shows up. Talk about a bad day!

I wish I was making this story up, but unfortunately, I’m not. Father Daniel, who committed this vile crime, is unapologetic and has no remorse for his actions:

“I don’t understand why journalists are making such a fuss about this. Exorcism is a common practice in the heart of the Romanian Orthodox church and my methods are not at all unknown to other priests.”

In his eyes, he was following church doctrine. The nun was possessed by a demon, so he did the only logical thing: he crucified her, and she eventually died. What is most shocking about this is the fact he doesn’t think he’s done anything wrong. As far as he’s concerned, he saved that woman’s soul.

I predict this whole affair is going to get very messy. There are tons of Romanians who are deeply religious, and may feel the state getting involved is oppressive to their religious beliefs. These poor deluded fools actually trust a man who believes incantations and ‘holy’ water is enough to cure serious mental illnesses. Exorcisms are not only stupid, dangerous, and ignorant; they are quite obviously deadly.

Hopefully this nun’s death will not be in vain. If it can help stop this kind of practice, we can take comfort in the fact her death can at least prevent more tragedies like this from occurring.

Pharmacists sue for right to deny medication

There’s a disturbing new trend in the US. Pharmacists are attempting to prevent the sale of the morning after pill because of their belief life begins at conception. In Washington state, the government has taken the position it is illegal to deny any care based on religious convictions, due to the simple fact that their profession is not subject to theocratic moralization. This hasn’t pleased everyone, and now two pharmacists are suing the state saying their civil rights have been violated.

I’m sick and tired of every religious nut job coming out of the woodwork complaining modern society is imposing its values on them. Apparently not living in the Bronze Age has forced many Christians to compromise their antiquated belief system. These pharmacists are part of the overall health care system of the country, and as such, their priority is first to the well being of its citizens, and not their naïve belief that life begins at conception. If they aren’t happy, then they can open up a fucking hardware store.

Rhonda Mesler and Margo Thelen, owners of Ralph’s Thriftway, think scripture is clear that life begins at conception. They are sadly mistaken. The Bible is not a scientific document, and none of the writers had any idea what happens during pregnancies. Besides, the biggest abortionist out there is their god; a quarter of all pregnancies are terminated by the body within the first six weeks. If Christians are correct about life beginning at conception, it would appear the human body has no need for such sentimentality. It’s priority is the development of healthy embryo, not just ones that are ‘alive’.

We cannot allow religious beliefs to endanger the health services of any individual. These same pharmacists would love to stop providing birth control pills and other forms of contraceptives. I’m sure there are many who would gladly eliminate condoms as well. Does that sound like a good idea to you?

Afghan women are pelted by rocks at protest

A couple of days ago, I wrote a passionate entry stating my opposition to the Canadian government’s involvement in Afghanistan. It was in response to their new laws that make it impossible for women to refuse sex from their husbands, as well as making women eligible for marriage immediately following menstruation. As far as I’m concerned, these two laws alone make both rape and sexual abuse to children legal.

Yesterday, about 300 Afghan women protested these laws, and for their bravery, they were pelted with stones. Police had to hold back the angry mob that accused the women of being ‘slaves to Christians’ and for not being ‘proper Shia women’.

The law as it’s written is only for the minority Shia community, but it would appear few native Afghans consider the issue important. In a way I can’t blame them; the country is a mess, and there are probably many who feel laws of this nature are not a huge concern.

I’m relieved the violence didn’t escalate any further, but it would be naive to assume this issue resolved. What usually scares me is the people who agitate for equal rights are usually met by people who physically crush all opposition. To say these women are in danger for holding their beliefs is an understatement.

Many Muslims feel attitudes of gender equality is a form of Western oppression, and I have no doubt these opposing world views will continue to be a great source of friction. It would appear we cannot force individuals to take the rights of women seriously, and that’s a very frightening reality.

Harris and Warren debate on Newsweek

No, contrary to what you may believe, this isn’t Sam Harris day, although I will admit the man has been on a bit of a tear lately. Here’s his debate with Rick Warren on Newsweek. Warren does what most religious people do in debates: create an intangible metaphysical entity that defies both explanation and reason, and most notably, scrutiny.

Here’s an interesting back and forth that shows you the level of understanding that Warren has for the term debate:

(when asked if he’s open to the idea that Jesus was real)

WARREN: And what are you doing to study that?

HARRIS: I consider it such a low-probability event that I—

WARREN: A low probability? When there are 96 percent believers in the world? So is everybody else an idiot?

HARRIS: It is quite possible for most people to be wrong—as are most Americans who think that evolution didn’t occur.

WARREN: That’s an arrogant statement.

HARRIS: It’s an honest statement.

I love how some people think telling someone they are wrong is arrogant. If you believe the earth is flat, you are making a statement about the natural world which can be verified. That’s the danger about making claims about the universe; someone will test out your theories, and if they are proven wrong, don’t be surprised if everyone else considers you a fool for your continued belief.

The real meat of the argument is when both men begin discussing slavery. Here, Warren would have benefited from reading a history book or two:

WARREN: You’d much rather have somebody—an atheist—feeding the hungry than a person who believes in God? All of the great movements forward in Western civilization were by believers. It was pastors who led the abolition of slavery. It was pastors who led the woman’s right to vote. It was pastors who led the civil-rights movement. Not atheists.

HARRIS: You bring up slavery—I think it’s quite ironic. Slavery, on balance, is supported by the Bible, not condemned by it. It’s supported with exquisite precision in the Old Testament, as you know, and Paul in First Timothy and Ephesians and Colossians supports it, and Peter—

WARREN: No, he doesn’t. He allows it. He doesn’t support it.

HARRIS: OK, he allows it. I would argue that we got rid of slavery not because we read the Bible more closely. We got rid of slavery despite the profound inadequacies of the Bible. We got rid of slavery because we realized it was manifestly evil to treat human beings as farm equipment. As it is.

Honestly Rick, he allows it but doesn’t support it? What the fuck does that mean?

Does loving dogs make you a genocidal monster?

Ok, that may sound like a stupid question, but let me refer you to the picture above. Hitler loved his dog, and he was responsible for the Holocaust. Surely, according to this logic, I’ve made a powerful case against owning canines.

If you think I’ve gone insane, rest assured I’m only trying to prove a point. There’s an article on Proud Atheist that tries to debunk the claim Christians make about Hitler’s personal religious beliefs, therefore encouraging me to write my thoughts on the matter. I’ve usually avoided this subject in the past, mostly because it’s spurious reasoning. However, it’s one of those old arguments that doesn’t go away, no matter what anyone has to say about it. It deserves to be discussed, and more specifically, to be put to rest.

If you want to know why Christians love telling people Hitler was an atheist, it is because he was one to some degree. I know there are a lot of examples in his book and speeches about him making reference to God, but the reason isn’t that he personally believed in a higher power; merely that he understood the appeal of it. He thought, as Karl Marx did, that religion was the opiate of the people.

Hitler’s beliefs were pragmatic to say the least. He identified more with Islam than Christianity, which he felt was meek and shapeless. In other words, Hitler favored ideologies and belief more suited for his own purpose, or what some would call ‘politically convenient’. It’s why he allied himself with the Catholic church in an attempt to eliminate Jews from society.

The Church likes to think we’ve all forgotten about Christian complacency in the light of the Holocaust simply because Pope John Paul II later apologized for what happened. His hollow words were of little comfort for the millions dead, many of them the direct result of the church’s involvement (or lack thereof).

The Nazis have come to symbolize evil in this world, and it’s not without merit. They were not, however, an atheistic organization in any sense. Hitler took great care to mask his non belief specifically because he knew support for his monstrous initiatives would derive from the largely religious German population. And because antisemitism had such a long history in Europe, it was easy to shape their mistrust of the Jews into outright genocide.

Still, the specter of Hitler haunts the world, and his ghostly image is often distorted to suit the needs of history’s revisionists. Rather than admit to their participation in the Holocaust, Christians want to put all the blame on Hitler, as if he single-handedly killed every Jew. His atheism, they believe, must have been the cause of his evil. Well, Hitler also loved his dog, but you don’t hear a lot of canine lovers being compared to him, do you? Obviously we understand the weakness in trying making a link between loving dogs and being a murderous psycho. Why is atheism any different? How does not believing in God suddenly lead a person to aberrant behavior?

The real problem is Christians haven’t put much effort into understanding our position as atheists. They believe the rejection of a metaphysical god somehow erases all moral impetus from a person. It is this lack of empathy I find frightening, because it is specifically our ability as humans to empathize with others that is our real moral compass, not some ancient manuscript. It’s why the best way to entice a population to act outside of their normal moral framework is to first dehumanize the enemy, thus rendering empathy impossible. If there’s a lesson to be learned from the tragedy of genocide, it’s once a population begins to see other people as less human, less moral, and less righteous than themselves, the consequences are indeed dire.

So next time you hear a Christian tell you Hitler was an atheist, simply tell him/her he was also a dog lover, painter, and budding architect. Surely those must have counted for some of his evil as well, no?

Sunday school teacher accused of murder and rape

Proving once again that religion has no special vanguard against immoral behavior, Melissa Huckaby, whose grandfather is a Baptist minister, was arrested today when the body of Sandra Cantu was found stuffed in a suitcase. The little girl was apparently also raped, which only makes the whole thing even more disturbing.

In typical ‘I know the killer but never really clued in’ fashion, her family describes Huckaby as having a strong religious upbringing, which leads me to believe any potential mental illness was probably disguised as simple religious faith. The criterion for crazy is a little different with religious people, so it never really surprises me anymore when one of them pops and takes a few victims with them. How tragic it had to be an innocent and beautiful little girl.

Christians have a hard time identifying why human beings occasionally do bad things. If you understand that unethical behavior can be heavily influenced by mental disorders, you’re in a better position to help avoid these kinds of tragedies. On the other hand, when you put your fate in ‘God’s Hands’, you can’t be surprised when everything goes terribly wrong.

Rick Warren thinks atheists hate their dads

I’ve always found it amusing how religious folks try to peg atheists. Most of them think we don’t believe in God simply because we were spurned in some way, and in our pettiness, we rejected God. I won’t deny there are definitely more than a few atheists who essentially hold their views more out of spite than reason, but it’s certainly not true for most of us. Pastor Rick Warren would disagree with me. He’s got a rather strange idea of why certain prominent individuals reject the idea of God:

Paul Vitz, who is an author with New York University, wrote a very fascinating book called Faith Of The Fathers, in which he went and studied the 72 most well-known atheists in history, the Bertrand Russells, the Voltaires, the Freuds, and the only thing he could find in common with every one of them is they all hated their dads. Every one of them. They had distant dad, demeaning dad, a dead dad, they had no relationships with their fathers.

So I apparently hate my dad or something. Paul Vitz is a hack who thinks not believing in God is tantamount to a form of dementia, and Warren is the idiot who trusts his conclusions. Yeah, not believing a bearded anthropomorphic entity created human beings in ‘his’ image apparently means my family relationship was damaged in some way. I’m sure if Vitz bothered to actually spend some time with atheists, he’d realize most of us just come to reject the notion of God simply because it just DOESN’T FUCKING MAKE ANY SENSE! It’s a pretty easy conclusion, honestly.

Canadian government isn’t doing the right thing

I’ve never understood why the Canadian government is so adamant about keeping certain immigrants while simultaneously trying to kick others out, especially when the people we send back to their home countries are in danger. While we harbor ex Nazis, mafia criminals, and other genocidal monsters, we also try to get rid of good people who seek our protection.

Roohi Tabassum is an illegal immigrant who says she will be killed by her estranged husband if she returns to her native Pakistan. She has received numerous threatening letters from him, but even with this evidence, my government seems not to care too much.

“The decision to remove someone from Canada is not taken lightly,” Giolti said by e-mail. “Under our laws, removal orders must be enforced as soon as possible.”

Giolti is a coward who is hiding behind the law; it’s quite clear here Roohi is in danger, and yet, our useless bureaucracy will end up failing her. Roohi is not a drain on society; she works at as a hair dresser, and has managed to make a life for herself in this country. Despite this, we are sending her back to a place where honor killings are common place.

I feel sick to my stomach about this. By sending her back, every Canadian is a silent partner on her eventual death. It isn’t too hard for us to do the right thing in this situation. All we need to do is let her stay and continue to live her life as she sees fit. Does that sound like a big deal to you?

National Secular Society goes after NHS chaplains

I have to admire the tenacity and boldness of Britain’s NSS. These guys are always looking for ways to untangle the church and state, and their battle recently has been to get the National Health Service to stop spending money on chaplain services. According to their report, the state spends close to 32 million pounds on these guys, which is an expense the NSS feels should be absorbed by the church.

Personally, I couldn’t agree more. Already religious organizations benefit from not paying any taxes. With that extra cash, the state could afford to hire 1,300 new nurses. That’s a lot of extra hands to help provide care to people who will actually make a difference in their health service. I’m guessing, of course, that the policy won’t change. If there’s one thing that is predictable in any bureaucracy, it’s that nothing ever gets done.

I’m not implying chaplain services aren’t appreciated by religious people who do get ill, but why the hell can’t the church contribute their services for free? The fact these institutions pay no tax represents a huge loss of tax revenues. Is it too much to ask that they stop suckling at our collective teat and start contributing more to society than their useless chants and dogmatic advice?

What to do when you’re a skeptic

I found this link at James Randi’s Educational Foundation, and thought a number of you might be interested in this free book entitled What to Do Next. It’s for skeptics interested in becoming more active, and it lists just about every skeptical activity you can get involved in. My suggestion to anyone interested in this is to pick a few of the suggestions and try them. What do you have to lose?

More honor killings in Germany

Here’s another tragic honor killing in Germany, this time by the woman’s own brother. According to reports, he lured her to the countryside, where he strangled her unconscious with a clothes line before beating her to death.

Her crime? Well, it turns out the family was trying to set up an arranged marriage and found out that not only wasn’t she a virgin, but she had also undergone at least one abortion. That was all it took for her to die at the hands of her family.

Europe is facing a unique problem these days. Their immigrant population is increasing, and as they do so, they bring with them many customs and rituals we find morally repugnant. It’s a serious issue, and it’s not disappearing anytime soon. My sad prediction is we’re going to continue to read about these tragedies for some time, at least until we stop beating around the bush on this issue and take a hard stance. Right now all we can do is prosecute the murderers. It seems to me that we should be doing more to protect these women when they are still alive.