Category Archives: Blog

School demolishes chapel, replaces it with science classrooms

Posted on by

Finally, some good news coming out of the UK. It seems a public school founded 500 years ago by the Dean of St. Paul’s Cathedral has decided to demolish its chapel in favor of building science classrooms. Can you imagine a more cheerful sign of progress?

St Paul’s School in south west London has knocked down its chapel to make way for new science classrooms, becoming the first of the country’s leading public schools to do without a place of worship.

While £5 million has been spent on a new theatre and £4 million on a sports complex, no money has been made available for a replacement chapel.

There are now plans to start saving money in 2020 to pay for the construction of the remaining buildings, but no date has been assigned to the chapel, leading to fears that it will be seen as expendable.

What’s the point? In a few decades, there won’t be enough religious rubes to pay for the damn thing anyways. What is a chapel but a testament to our own ignorance and superstition? I love the fact that a school originally founded by a church has made the decision to move forward and abandon its religious roots. It’s proof that the power of these institutions is seriously starting to wane. A few more decades, and they’ll hopefully be just a painful distant memory…

IHOP 24 hour prayer session does nothing

Posted on by

Remember these wackos? A few weeks ago, The International House of Prayer and their fearless leader Mike Bickle, made headlines after accusing Oprah Winfrey of being the Anti-Christ. These people are not to be underestimated. Since its humble beginnings, the church has grown by leaps and bounds. It’s recently opened a four-year Bible college, and plans of building a massive 100 million dollar church complex (which will undoubtedly be a gaudy monstrosity).

Their whole schtick involves a 24/hour, 7 day a week prayer session that never stops. It’s supposedly been going on for 12 years (I have my doubts about this claim), and in order to accomplish this, young volunteers pledge to spend a minimum of 25 hours a week at the church, often in late night shifts. They’ve been praying for gay marriage and abortion to be made illegal. Fortunately, they’re talking to their imaginary friend the whole time, so all of this prayin’ has done precisely shit in actually changing anything. Of course, this whole effort probably feels inspiring to the members, which explains why they’ve been growing so fast. They have vision, and regardless of how frightening it is (they subscribe to the “Seven Mountain Dominionism” scary bullshit), that’s what these kind of people want from their church these days: a clear idea of how to change society to fit their narrow worldview.

Life imitates Art for woman in Iran

Posted on by

It’s hilarious how most Muslims are convinced that their restrictive religious repression of women is somehow intended to protect them. You hear this all the time in Islamic countries; they think we let our women “run around unprotected” while they “bravely” restrict every part of their lives in the misguided belief that it’s really all for their own good. The culture of Islam makes women seem like dangerous, seductive weapons that cloud the judgement of men. Why else would they execute victims of rape, if not to vindicate the idea that it is always the woman’s fault for seducing the rapist in the first place?

In the light of this prism, the slavery of women is viewed as an extension of man’s submission to God, but as the old adage goes: ladies first! Rebelliousness, seen in any light, is to be extinguished, as was the case with actress Marzieh Vafamehr, who found out herself living out the plot of her new movie “My Tehran for Sale“. The scenario involves a young woman struggling to live in a country of contradictions, where young people live secret lives together in a brutal religious theocracy. This important movie is currently being distributed on the sly, since the country has banned it.

According to an interview with the director of the movie, the government sought a number of bogus charges, including failure to cover her hair with a hijab, consuming alcohol on set, and being part of the production (she wasn’t). The sentence is the kind of thing you’d expect from a theocratic and misogynistic society: 90 red-hot lashes and a whole year of rotting in jail, all for the “crime” of acting in someone else’s movie. Considering the number of women that often fail to survive the aftermath of such unnecessary brutality, I hope she’s made of tougher stuff.

The contradictory nature of Iran is why there are really two pictures of this place: one filled with young women who live out their lives in a secret world that resembles our own, and the other populated by religious thugs who patrol the streets looking for these secret places. When these worlds clash, the only ones to bother talking about it tend to be Persian Christian Missionaries operating out of the Alpharetta, Georgia. Their presence there only exacerbates the situation of course; religion is precisely the problem in Iran. Another faith is hardly the solution.

We have to ask ourselves what we can do ourselves to expose the evils of this religion outside of the sphere of influence of Christianity. It’s our duty to see that the injustices of any faith are given the proper attention they deserve. Until we do, how can we continue to claim the moral high ground?

Harold Camping does it again

Posted on by

There’s a new End Date, True Unbelievers. Harold Camping brings the good news of Armageddon, and you don’t have to wait very long: It’s October 21st!

Honestly, I thought the dude was dead after I saw that last video of him shying away from the spotlight after yet another failed prophesy. I’d feel sorry for this old man if it wasn’t for the fact that he’s a bigoted jackass who wants the world to erupt in bloodshed. That’s what Rapture is: a genocidal fantasy.

77 reasons to support bigotry

Posted on by

The Friendly Atheist has an interesting article written by two fans who recently attended a “Marriage Symposium” organized by the Illinois Family Institute and Patriots United (any time an organization has the words “Family” or “Patriot” in it, you know something racist/homophobic/ultra-conservative is going on). One of the pieces of literature at the event that intrigued me was the pamphlet entitled “77 Non-Religious Reasons to Support Man/Women Marriage“, (sounds more positive than “oppose civil rights, doesn’t it?).  This testament to ignorance has so many gems in it, I found it difficult to choose which one was my favorite…

#18: Without man/woman marriage, there will be no institution specifically protecting the right of children to be in a relationship with both parents.

[Translation: If gays are allowed to marry, parents will mysteriously be unable to have a relationship with their kids because gay sex is gross]

#22. If the love between adults were the only important factor, we would expect stepparents to be interchangeable with biological parents. But this is not generally the case.

[Translation: Because you don’t love your step-dad hard enough, “Todd and Fred” shouldn’t be allowed to care for another human being.]

#29 Same-Sex Marriage makes an implicit statement that mothers and fathers are interchangeable, and sex is irrelevant to parenting. The burden should be on those who make this strong, non-intuitive claim.

[Did religious people just say that the burden of proof is on people making extraordinary claims? Shocking. If proof can be shown that the gender of the parents makes no difference at all – say from a study conducted by the American Psychological Association– would they be willing to accept it?]

#32 Mothers and fathers each make unique contributions to the child’s development. Father’s absence creates risks in children that mother’s absence does not create.

[Translation: Dad’s are more important than moms. After all, they’re more likely to physically and sexually abuse their kids, based primarily on factors such as feelings of self worth, unemployment and substance abuse. Does that mean poor people shouldn’t have kids?]

#33 Teenage boys without fathers are at risk for juvenile delinquency, violence, criminal activity, gang membership and incarceration.

[Hey, I know a way that this kid could have not one, but two dads, making him twice as likely not to turn out shitty! Hint: it involves some degree of butt-sex]

#41 Once same sex marriage becomes legally and socially acceptable, more women will decide to raise children together. They will view this as easier than putting forth the effort of crossing the gender divide and cooperating with a man through marriage.

[Translation: Men will become increasingly marginalized because all women will magically lose their intense desire for sexual and emotional intimacy with the opposite sex, since men are such hard work that it’s not really worth it.]

#55 The judges who imposed same sex marriage in Iowa stated “The research…suggest that the traditional notion that children need a mother and father to be raised into a healthy, well-adjusted adults is based more on stereotypes than anything else.” This is not true as a general statement

[Translation: We refuse to accept any evidence that contradicts what we already know to be true.]

#57 If enough judges say enough implausible things, people will lose respect for the law.
[Translation: If the law doesn’t work to our advantage, we’ll ignore it.]

#60 By the time the activists are finished, there will be nothing left of marriage but a government registry of friendships

[Translation: if gays are allowed the same rights as everyone else, they’ll ruin it the same way they ruined Glee clubs, male cheerleading, and fashion.]

You’ll notice the document sounds like the paranoid ravings of emotionally insecure people (mostly dads) afraid of losing their place in society. It makes sense: most of these movements are populated by old, racist white people; exactly the types of folks that see their power and influence diminish in today’s society. Their fears about an uncertain future (something every generation has had to face) has found a perfect focal point in the Gay Rights Movement. And because they see themselves as crusaders working for the benefit of children, they will interpret their increasingly marginalized views as the right ones. It matters little what society itself wants: they already know the desired outcome. Now all they need to do is try and work for it. I’m happy to report that these efforts will ultimately prove futile. If you don’t believe me, ask yourself this question: “were you convinced that same-sex marriage should be opposed after reading this logical juggernaut?”

Nintendo Jesus

Posted on by

A fan found this article on Kotaku of a woman who supposedly found the image of Jesus on her old Nintendo. Truly it’s a message of hope for all of you gamers out there who worry that the “King of Kings” doesn’t approve of your lifestyle.

A Maryland woman said she was surprised to find what appears to be an image of Jesus Christ on the top of a used Nintendo Entertainment System she purchased on eBay for $US31 this week.

“We were inspecting it for cracks/damage and when we turned it just right into the light, the image showed up,” she said. “Our reaction was mainly curiosity at first. Then as we looked at it closer and ruled out what it couldn’t be, we began to get excited about it.”

They should be excited: think of how much money they can sell this console for now! Some gullible idiot paid $28,000 for a partially digested “Virgin Mary” grill-cheese sandwich, and that thing had to be encased in plastic to ensure it wouldn’t disintegrate into nothingness. Think of how much bread a hard-core Christian gamer will fork out for this piece of Jesus Junk? It’ll be way more than 31 bucks, I can guarantee you that!

Is this the best Christian Apologists can do?

Posted on by

It ain’t easy being a Christian: sure, they might be the majority (for now), but every other day the faith is challenged by objective reality. While many Christians will scoff at the idea that their religion is in trouble, the truth is that countries like Canada, Sweden, and Australia are quickly shedding their religious coat in favor of a broader “spirituality” that doesn’t have to deal with the many inconsistencies or outright lies of organized religion. Over half of all Canadians, according to a recent survey, are convinced that religion does more harm than good.

Enter the Apologist. Their “job” is to try and defend their faith against the harshness of reality. Christian Apologetics have been around since the very founding of the religion; St. Paul was the first to begin the tradition when confronted by desert shepherds possessing some measure of skepticism. In the modern world, it’s much more difficult to defend the faith, and so a whole cottage industry has sprung up to meet the demands of increasingly skeptically-minded kids.

I spotted this article entitled “Top 10 Defences youth can give for their beliefs“, and I thought I might share with you the kind of “advice” they’re giving young Christians in a vain attempt to prevent them from leaving the religion in frustration. I think you’ll agree that any teenager attempting to use any of these arguments would be eaten alive by anyone with a moderate understanding of history or science:

1. How can you know for sure that anything is true?
Among your acquaintances are likely to be some people who don’t believe in truth. That is, they don’t believe truth can be known. However, that idea is easily refuted, as this fictional conversation in the 2011 novel, “The Quest”, illustrates:
It took a minute, but I finally realized what she was waiting for. “You’re saying that if I think that’s a true statement, then I’ve claimed to know something that is true….By saying truth can’t be known. I contradicted myself.”

Here the author tries to argue that if an agnostic claims that truth cannot be known, this itself is a truth-claim and the statement is therefore inconsistent. While it’s true that consistency is a desirable attribute of any philosophy, we have to examine what’s actually being argued instead of over-analyzing the statement itself. What is truth? How do we determine what’s real and what isn’t? Humans create models to explain the natural world, and while they can be amazingly accurate, there is still much to discover. We must accept that our understanding of the Universe is limited, flawed, but constantly improving. To claim otherwise is only possible when one sees the world through the arrogant prism of religion.

2. Is God a human invention?
A popular view these days is the idea that humans invented God in order to meet their needs and fulfill their desires. But it is at least as reasonable to believe exactly the opposite: that the innate desire humans have for God exists because there is Someone who satisfies that desire.

“Observe that noses were made to wear spectacles; and so we have spectacles.”- Voltaire. The fact that we have a tendency to see patternicity, agency and intentionality has more to do with our environment than some invisible man in the sky. For millions of years, our ancestors braved a cruel, violent world which placed survival above skepticism. As a result, we’ve inherited brains susceptible to superstition, and the persistence of religion in a world of scientific discovery is an excellent example of this.

3. Doesn’t the Big Bang disprove Creation?
There is a common misconception that the Big Bang has pretty much eliminated the idea that God created the heavens and the earth. But the opposite is true. Former atheist Antony Flew, in his book “There Is a God”, explained that the Big Bang model eventually led him to believe in a God who created the universe, because it pointed to a beginning point in the universe, and to something (or Someone) behind that beginning that was too big for science to explain.

So the Universe needs a beginning, but Super-Monkey doesn’t? The best science we have now tells us that a Universe can indeed come from nothing, so while the science we have today tells us that the Universe requires no supernatural “party-starter”, religionists can’t seem to abandon this lost “first” cause. I won’t pretend to know for certain that a god couldn’t have done this; however, our faithful opponents have still failed to provide a compelling explanation of their deity’s apparent ability to transcend the law of causality. Lastly, this idea that something can be “too big” for science is just an invitation to ignorance.

4. How can an intelligent person not believe in evolution?

Atheist Richard Dawkins has famously written, “Beyond doubt evolution is a fact,” adding that no reputable scientist disputes it. However, neither statement is true. First, it is necessary to understand what people mean when they use the world “evolution,” because it can refer to both micro-evolution (the observable process by which change happens over time within species) and macro-evolution (the arguable claim that starting with a common ancestor, over time simple organisms have changed into the species that exist today). Macro-evolution is not as widely accepted as some claim. In fact, more than eight hundred world-class scientists have signed a formal dissent from Darwinian evolution.

So, you’re willing to accept that species gradually change over time, but somehow still can’t grasp that over geological time-frames (millions of years), these incremental changes would form entirely new species? Also, if you want to put this whole “over 800 scientists express doubt about evolution” number into perspective, there are currently over a million scientists working in the US alone. 90% of all the scientists who have ever lived are alive today. The fact that you have 800 dummies on your side only proves that education is no guarantee of intelligence.

5. How can you trust the Bible when it has been changed and corrupted so much through the centuries?
I aimed to show everyone that Christianity was nonsense. I thought it would be easy. It wasn’t. In fact, I discovered that the Bible is far and away the most meticulously preserved and widely attested document of the ancient world. No other book even comes close (we go into greater detail on this subject in our book, “Don’t Check Your Brains at the Door”). This reliability was confirmed by the 1948 discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which showed that after a thousand years of copying, the text as it appears in modern Bibles was more than ninety-five percent the same, word-for-word and letter-for-letter, as it had been three thousand years earlier! And what differences did exist were mainly spelling variations.

The relative consistency of nonsense is of little interest to us. The fact remains that the Bible is little more than a book of fairy-tales. The ancient stories of Gilgamesh and Enkidu have survived the ravages of time, and yet we do not believe that the ancient stories of Sumer are anything but poetic allegory. As a Christian, you’re far more likely to be asked “How can you trust the Bible to guide your morality when it advocates rape, incest, genocide, infanticide and cruelty?”. I’d try and work on the response for that one instead.

6. Hasn’t modern science pretty much disproved the Bible?
It’s hard to imagine anything that is farther from the truth than the idea that modern science has disproved the Bible. In fact, the science of archaeology, to name one field, has repeatedly confirmed the trustworthiness of the biblical accounts (we devote a chapter to this subject in our book, “Don’t Check Your Brains at the Door”). Archaeologist William F. Albright wrote,

The excessive skepticism shown toward the Bible by important historical schools of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, certain phases of which still appear periodically, has been progressively discredited. Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition to the value of the Bible as a source of history

We don’t need 18th century skepticism to tell us the Bible is full of holes. Where do we begin? The creation story perhaps, or Noah’s Flood? Shall we discuss what science has to say about the possibility of Jonah living inside a giant fish for three days, or Samson killing thousands of men with a donkey’s jaw-bone? As for the Bible’s take on history, modern archaeology has found little in the way of proof. Take the “City of David“. While Israeli archaeologists acknowledge that there is no evidence linking David to the site, they anticipate eventually finding this proof, and as far as they are concerned, there is no way to convince them otherwise. Proof has remained elusive for Israel’s archaeologists, but it hasn’t prevented anyone there from trying to use it as a political tool to bolster Israel’s claim to ancient Palestine. Does this sound like good science to you?

7. Who even knows if Jesus ever really existed?

The existence of a man named Jesus who lived in Galilee and Judea in the early part of the first century is utterly indisputable from a historical standpoint. In fact, if you ever encounter such a view from a friend or teacher, invite that person to travel with you to Israel. In the land where Jesus once lived, everyone—Christians, Jews, Muslims, atheists—consider the idea he that never existed to be laughable. Why? Because the evidence of his historicity is a daily reality there.

Is this guy for real? I don’t find the idea laughable at all, and I’m not the only one. Some of the very first Christians, the Gnostics, didn’t believe in a historical Jesus either. You don’t hear much about these early Christians since, like the Arians, they were mostly wiped out. Questioning the historicity of Jesus isn’t new; we just weren’t allowed to voice contrary opinions for a long time. To claim that everyone agrees on his historical existence is a pretty big disservice to Christian teens desperately trying to defend their bullshit, trust me.

8. Don’t you think Jesus could have been just a good teacher who didn’t intend to be worshiped as a god?

Though Christianity and Christians can be pretty unpopular these days, Jesus remains widely admired… even by many people who don’t profess to believe in him or worship him. He is revered as a “good teacher,” as a “philosopher,” but not as who he said he was, according to the historical record. C. S. Lewis famously wrote about this phenomenon:

A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God or else a madman or something worse…let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.

Creating this kind of dichotomy can’t possibly work in your favor, guys. Any person with a logical mind not indoctrinated to your cult would immediately realize that, if given the choice between God or madman, Jesus certainly fits the description of the latter. When he curses a fig tree for failing to give him fruit, the choice seems fairly obvious. When he claims that diseases are the result of demonic possession, we recognize the words of a loon. Giving him the status of godhood only serves to prove how little Jesus knew about the real world. If he did exist, he is no more remarkable than Apollonius of Tyana, who was claimed to have performed the exact same miracles as Jesus (with the added bonus of being able to pass through walls like David Copperfield).

9. Do you really believe that Jesus literally rose from the dead?
Many theories have been put forth to try to cast doubt on the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. All of  them are inadequate; some are even ludicrous (we devote three chapters to these theories in our book, “Don’t Check Your Brains at the Door”). In fact, the historical evidence for the resurrection is so overwhelming, historians have to become “anti-historical” in their efforts to build a case against it. As Lord Darling, a prominent English judge, once said, “No intelligent jury in the world could fail to bring in a verdict that the resurrection story is true.

Lord Darling, for any of you who gives a shit, was a minor historical figure of little importance, and little relevancy. Authority here, in any case, is not needed to contest the Resurrection of a Palestinian Jew 2000 years ago. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence, and what little there is consist of “witness” accounts written decades after his supposed death by people who never even met the guy. If our standards for evidence are so low, than should we also believe that Perseus really did kill the Medusa, and Orpheus braved the underworld to rescue his beloved?

10. How can you believe in that stuff?

The most convincing evidence for the Christian faith is not historical, textual, or archaeological; it is the testimony of a changed life. When I (Josh) set out to disprove the Christian faith, my mind met unassailable facts… but my heart met irresistible love. I met a group of Christians at Kellogg College in Battle Creek, Michigan, who exposed me for the first time to the love of God. Oh, how they loved each other. And I wanted what they had. That love paved the road of faith for me, and thus began my journey of faith. All the evidence in the world—the most powerful arguments and most convincing proofs—probably wouldn’t have gotten through to me if the transforming power of God’s love had not reached my heart through that student group and others.

Always keep in mind that the same will be true of anyone who challenges or questions your faith. Your answers can help open their hearts, but the vibrant evidence of a changed life will always be the most convincing apologetic you can offer.

This is usually where arguments with Christians end: this idea that “a changed life” is somehow proof that their faith is real. While I don’t deny that their beliefs may be genuine, it has no bearing on reality whatsoever. The speed of light in a vacuum is 299,792,458 meters per second regardless of how I feel about it, or whether my life is transformed with such information. If relying on emotion is your idea of a strong defense in face of legitimate criticism, than there’s very little I can do to convince you otherwise. Of course, I can offer you this little piece of advice: don’t expect to blow anyone away with these kinds of pathetic arguments, boys and girls.

Pope attempts to recruit German bigots

Posted on by

Over the weekend, the Pope arrived in Germany on a tour designed to try and recruit Protestants and other estranged Christians who have grown tired of their religion’s increasing acceptance of homosexual marriage.

Knowing, too, the value of family and marriage, we as Christians attach great importance to defending the integrity and the uniqueness of marriage between one man and one woman from any kind of misinterpretation,” he said, according to the Associated Press. “Here the common engagement of Christians, including many Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians, makes a valuable contribution to building up a society equipped for the future.”

You wouldn’t want marriage to be “misinterpreted” by allowing your fellow human beings to enjoy the same rights as everyone else, right?. This could send a dangerous message of acceptance and tolerance that the Catholic Church has vowed to combat.

A society equipped for the future – according to these assholes- is one where gays and lesbians are marginalized and clearly not worthy of the same rights as heterosexuals. The Bible tells them so, and even though they’ve chosen to ignore all the other laws that make it a sin to eat bacon or to wear clothing made of two different fabrics, the ones they focus on tend to provide theological justification for whatever ignorant bullshit they’re trying to peddle.

I find it hilarotragic (my new word for anything both tragic and hilarious) that an organization that shelters thousands of child rapists has the audacity to claim to have society’s best interest in mind. I think their long history of repression, abuse and murder severely undermines this idea. I encourage the Catholic Church to keep fighting against the civil rights of gay people; it’ll be just one more reason for people to abandon their fucking nonsense.

7 Reasons why the Wizard of Oz is the work of Satan

Posted on by

Before listening to the enlightening sermon of Pastor David Grice, I thought the Wizard of Oz was a whimsical musical featuring a talented cast of actors bringing a classic tale to life. Little did I realize that it’s actually a psychotic story of a young murderer and her unwitting accomplices. Yes, the Wizard of Oz is Satanic, and with the help of David’s hilarious sermon (he reminds me of a chubbier Will Sasso), I aim to prove to you definitively that the movie “The Wizard of Oz” is in fact a secular plot to destroy the world.

#1: Dorothy is a rebellious girl
“For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft” [1st Samuel 15:23]

If there’s one thing the Bible can’t stand, it’s rebellious women. Not only is Dorothy rebellious: she often takes a leadership role, even when there are men around. She lacks discipline, she goes against the wishes of her elders, and she’s unusually curious and literate. The Good Book definitely has a lot to say about the role of women in society, and leading a murderous band of thugs (while not itself a sin) certainly isn’t one of them. Just ask Joan of Arc.

#2: Midgets not properly shunned
“Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God” [Leviticus 21: 17-23]

Don’t let their little dance fool you: midgets are evil, regardless of their relative cuteness or musical ability. The Bible is quite clear on the subject of these genetic monstrosities: they are to be isolated and killed immediately. Dwarfism is not the result of a genetic anomaly, malnutrition or a host of other problems, but rather the sinister work of Satan himself.

#3. Witches notoriously NOT on fire
“A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death” [Leviticus 20:27]

While the movie does seem to portray the murder of evil witches as both moral and desirable, the Bible makes no distinction between either good or bad sorcery. All must be tortured into confession, and finally offered a chance to repent before being burned alive. We’re trying to save these women, after all!

#4. People worship some kind of Wizard instead of stoning him to death
And the soul that turneth after such as have familiar spirits, and after wizards, to go a whoring after them, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people.[Leviticus 20:6]

While the “Wizard of Oz” uses technology rather than magic to trick people into worshiping him, his device – a kind of portal through which he voices the will of God and which seems to read people’s secret fears – is really just a subtle metaphor about priests being nothing more than con artists who send otherwise innocent and good people to commit murder for the sake of some esoteric reward.

#5. Oz is clearly trying to satirize heaven
“And the twelve gates were twelve pearls; every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass.” [Revelations:21-21]

God loves Gold more than most elements, and Revelations states that the streets will be paved in it. L. Frank Baum’s “yellow brick road” is intended to mock the idea that heaven should any have roads at all. The Emerald City is also clearly satirizing the “Emerald Throne” that God (who is made of Jasper Stone) is said to rest on.

#6. The cowardly lion is a mockery of Jesus
“And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.”[Revelation 5:5]

The Lion (a clear representation of Jesus) has no courage, and while his appearance at first seems powerful and commanding, Toto (who represents doubting Thomas) immediately exposes him as a coward. He is also unwise; he too falls for the campy illusion of the “Wizard” just as the others do.

#7. The Wizard of Oz is a celebration of humanism
Thou shalt fear the LORD thy God; him shalt thou serve, and to him shalt thou cleave, and swear by his name. [Deuteronomy 10:20]

Dorothy’s solution for returning home -namely the clicking of her heels- represents man’s independence from God. Since the solution to her problem was “inside her all along”, Dorothy does not need the fear of the Lord to guide her actions, nor does she need “his” power to solve her problems. This totally undermines God’s ability to command (through the loving and exploratory hands of the clergy) his sinful creation.

If you can’t see the work of Satan in this film, then you’re just being ignorant, dog.

German legislators plan to boycott Pope’s speech

Posted on by

When abuse allegations started popping up against the Catholic Church, Germany was one of those countries that, like Ireland, had suffered mightily at the hands of the clergy. When they opened up a hotline for victims of sexual abuse, they received 2700 calls after only 3 days. The Vatican, aware that it’s about as popular as mouth herpes, is setting off to Germany in a vain attempt to discuss how Protestants and Catholics can “work together”. While the Chancellor urged Germans to be wary of the growing “trend” of secularism, the ones with their heads still screwed on tight have decided to boycott the Pope’s visit out of protest that it violates the separation of Church and State in the country. Officials speaking on the behalf of the Vatican had this to say:

“The parliamentarians ought to consider how this will look from abroad,” Walter Brandmueller, who is German, told the mass-circulation daily Bild.

“They’ll boost the image of the ‘ugly Germans,’ which sadly still exists,” the cardinal added.

Yeah, pulling out the Nazi card isn’t the greatest idea when you were willing to forge an alliance with them (also, excommunicating Hitler would be a good start). Besides, why do they always seem shocked when some people don’t feel like going to their little parties? Recall that their current “mascot” sheltered known pedophiles from prosecution (as did his predecessor), and has done nothing to purge the organization of pederasts. What a surprise that no one wants to show them any support.

Here’s the core problem folks: the Catholic Church, more than any other religious organization, seems to have a serious pedophile problem within their ranks. Because of their rather disturbed idea of celibacy and sexual repression, Catholic priests don’t properly develop their sexual maturity, often staying in a child-like state. Obviously it’s not the sole reason the Church has such an infestation, since their strict rules about secrecy is an attractive options for pederasts hoping to avoid jail time. And while the Vatican may deny these allegations, you don’t see any other organization going to the same lengths they do to protect child rapists; withholding evidence, paying off families to stay quiet and moving around offending priests when accusations arise is not the kind of behavior we would tolerate from ANY other private or public institutions. Yet when these same assholes make a trip to a foreign country and get the cold shoulder, they act surprised that not everyone welcomes them with open arms.  The funny thing about people is that they tend to get upset when you start fucking their kids. Go figure!

Can we just jail these fuckers and call it a day already?

Reality is enough for me, thanks

Posted on by

Ever since Conservapedia put up a link to TGA declaring that there was “no such thing as a Good Atheist”, we’ve been getting a lot of great comments in a number of articles. The best one so far has to be from “Bob”, who is convinced that not only do we not exist, but that life on earth wouldn’t be worth living if it wasn’t for his imaginary buddy:

I want to know just one thing, if there is NO God, NO afterlife, No nothing, no point to anything what so ever, why do you continue to even exist? I mean if you could prove to me that there wasn’t a God, which you can’t because there is, I would be the first in line for suicide, NOTHING or NO ONE on this earth is worth putting up with the total bullshit that we put up with on a daily basis.

With a personality like yours, it’s a total mystery why your friends and family don’t offer you enough support and love to justify you “putting” up with existence for more than a minute. You sound like such a positive guy! Surely it must be your love of God that makes you this cheery.

I don’t believe true atheists even exist, just a bunch of snot nosed adults throwing temper tantrums because they can’t get their way and do what they want without repercussion for their actions.

He is aware that we have a justice system, right?

I think I’ve identified where you fucked up in your reasoning, Bobby. You think atheism leads to nihilism which then leads to violent anarchy. If that were the case, prisons would be filled with non-believers. So why are they disproportionately represented in correctional institutions?

The simple answer (the one you can’t seem to grasp) is that belief in God doesn’t actually make a person moral. In fact, it can often do the exact opposite. Just think of how many times someone has murdered their fellow human being because their God commanded them to do so. These psychopaths were the ones who did what they wanted without caring what the repercussions were.

science is so full of shit, takes a lot of faith to believe what you can’t see, right? when was the last time you could 100% prove science, all the way down to its truest form? you can’t you never will, most of what science says is all made up bullshit.

It’s impossible to prove science 100%. The whole process demands uncertainty, in a way. It invites change, because the people who believe in science realize that our picture of the universe is incomplete. That isn’t a weakness, Bobby. That’s a strength. I know it’s hard to grasp when you’ve been humping the Bible for so long, but certainty is not at all desirable. We used to be certain that the world was flat, that the Sun revolved around the Earth, and that diseases were caused by demons. All of these “facts” were written with total certitude in the Bible and all of them are dead wrong.

If you enjoy certainty at the cost of learning anything real about objective reality, that’s your choice. I might suggest, however, that you try and improve your relationships with people that actually exist. They are the ones that make life worth living, not some failed messiah living in “the clouds”.

I got another email

Posted on by

A fan – who shall remain anonymous for reasons that will be clear in the email – sent me a letter I thought I would share with the rest of you. I’m not the best at giving advice to people in awkward situation like his, but since this is an atheism site, readers are bound to have opinions that they’re only too happy to share.

Hi Jake,

How do I ask my boss for Friday off to attend the Texas Freethought Convention?

The financially-fit, skilled, and competent version of me that I strive to be would be honest. Regretfully, I am not that man, and honesty is not really an option here.

I just started an internship at the end of August following a long stretch of unemployment. As an intern, I am extremely dependent on both my boss and my coworkers to learn on the job.

Even though I’ve only been with the company for a few weeks, I’ve found that my co-workers are vocal about their lives outside of work. Through this I’ve gathered that the three people in my immediate group are Christians. One of them even expressed frustration with being set up on a blind date with an, “atheist.”

A couple of years ago, my Christian parents found out that I had discarded the belief in god that I was raised with. Aside from their initial negative reaction, my lack of belief has not been discussed. They are still expressive of their beliefs around me while I keep my outlook to myself. My immediate family and friends of the family are also un-aware of my lack of belief. I remain silent partially due to respect, but largely due to my poor financial state.

The complicating link between my family and my work is my father; he has been with this particular company for all of his life.

I need my both parents and this internship to survive. I don’t feel comfortable risking either direct or indirect recourse with my co-workers or my parents. I am – for lack of a better word – scared.

The most appealing solution I can discern is to say that I am attending a Leadership Conference. If my co-workers accept this at face value and don’t prod any deeper, then I might be okay, but I wouldn’t know how to answer the, “who is hosting it,” or the, “where is it at,” follow-up questions.

Do you have any suggestions?

Well, I’m not a big fan of lying, but I don’t see you having a lot of choice. It sounds like drawing attention to yourself isn’t a good idea. My long-term suggestion would be to find a way not to have your balls in that kind of vice. Maybe that means moving somewhere else, where you don’t have to hide your beliefs for the sake of your job. I don’t know your family situation (which is what makes this part almost impossible), but living in such a hostile environment to unbelief for the rest of your life doesn’t seem desirable in the slightest.

Your story makes me wonder if there shouldn’t be an “covert” option available for people wanting to attend atheist conventions where the event builds a fake site for people with bosses and colleagues that just wouldn’t “get it”. It’s true that makes us non-believers appear dishonest or “closeted” about our beliefs, but we can’t expect everyone to risk losing their jobs, their friends, or even their family to show up at one of these events. It would be a little like the site “Ashley Madison” which bills your credit card under a pseudonym to ensure your spouse is unaware of your actions. It’s sad that such a service seems necessary, but that’s just the way things have to go until religious people stop having a “problem” with our existence.

Why is Christianity growing in China?

Posted on by

If you were hoping that China would be immune from faith-pimps because of their long history of non-belief, then I apologize in advance for shattering your delusion. Not only is there a strong tendency for superstition in the country, they appear just as vulnerable as the rest of us to religious nonsense. How else can you explain the rise of Christianity in the East?

It is impossible to say how many Christians there are in China today, but no-one denies the numbers are exploding.

The government says 25 million, 18 million Protestants and six million Catholics. Independent estimates all agree this is a vast underestimate. A conservative figure is 60 million. There are already more Chinese at church on a Sunday than in the whole of Europe.

Keep in mind that everything in China is just ‘larger’ because of their huge population difference, so while 60 million sounds like an impressive figure to us, it represents a tiny fraction of their population. Still, I won’t deny that religion is growing, and this may have more to do with a lost sense of community than anything else. In countries with a lot of corruption, it’s difficult to trust any institution. Religions have always done a good job of providing that assurance and trust where none exists. Why should we be surprised the poor and indigent – increasingly ignored by their government – would turn to the comfort of religious dogma to escape their sorrow and connect with others like them?

What can our rational unbelief offer these people? We need to do more if we’re to win the hearts and minds of people. Merely disproving the tenets of faith doesn’t diminish the feelings of community, hope and certainty that religion offers. If we had to debate which side had the better argument to win over people, then we’d be all set. Unfortunately for us, humans aren’t rational. They don’t make up their minds after careful consideration of all the facts. Instead, they rely on intuition, feelings, and emotions to make their decisions for them, and only later intellectually justify these beliefs (we still want to THINK we’re rational, after all).

Education isn’t enough. We need to stop being gigantic pussies about it and take the ‘institutional’ plunge. We need to develop international support networks of the same complexity and devotion as our religious counterparts. We need to offer more than cold comfort, and we certainly can’t ignore all the roles filled by religion. If we truly want religion gone, then we’ll need to stop ignoring what works well for them, and instead embrace the positive attribute and appropriate them for ourselves (with a rational twist, of course).

Jerry Buell should be fired

Posted on by

Times are hard in America. Job security is eroding fast, as is the middle class. This puts everyone on edge, which would explain some of the blow-back from fans concerning my opinion that there is something fundamentally broken with the way teachers are unionized in America. Of course, that’s not to imply that I want to destroy all the rights workers have managed to harangue from the clutches of the very wealthy (far from it). I just find it strange that the prevailing attitude of many of my listeners down south concerning freedom of speech is this should not interfere with their ability to be gainfully employed. Trust me, when you aren’t an American, this idea is kind of crazy.

Take the case of Jerry Buell. He’s a teacher at Mount Dora High School in Lake County, Florida who was suspended, and later reinstated after posting a number of homophobic remarks on his Facebook account (which included many student “friends”). After learning that New York was finally allowing gay people to have the same rights as everyone else, he became so overwhelmed with disgust, he claims, that he threw up at the diner table.

The Friendly Atheist first came to his defense as a fellow teacher, but quickly changed his tune when he took a gander at Jerry’s very crazy school bio, where he admitted his intent to “teach God’s truth”. Still, a number of Hemant’s fans continue to support Jerry under the banner of free speech. They make a good point: If a teacher can be fired for holding “controversial” views, might the same not apply to non-belief as well?

Here’s my general problem with that idea. Hemant’s beliefs don’t condemn entire groups of people either privately or publicly. It isn’t predicated on the hatred of anyone who isn’t like him. The only thing “controversial” about atheism is that religious people don’t like it. If it wasn’t for these yahoos, we wouldn’t even give this thing we don’t believe in a name. We’re creating a false equivalency here between religious people being discomforted with our non-belief and gay teens being driven to suicide because of the relentless torture of bigots like Jerry. Undoubtedly he’s had a few gay students pass through his class already. What impression of themselves were they left with in his care? If some stories are to be believed, he’s stated that homosexuals should be killed, as should their “conspirators”. How are these vulnerable children affected by this type of hateful bigotry?

The ACLU came to Jerry’s defense because their greater cause is the belief that a person’s views shouldn’t interfere with them having a job. I’m not sure that should be universally true. He’s not working as a fucking office clerk. He’s a teacher, which means he’s been given the charge of educating the mind of our young, and as such Jerry’s beliefs are of extreme importance, especially when it comes to the mental health of the students. Their priority is spelled out clearly in the code of ethics of the school board:

[A Teacher] Shall not intentionally expose a student to unnecessary embarrassment or disparagement; shall not harass or discriminate against any student on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, national or ethnic origin, political beliefs, marital status, handicapping condition, sexual orientation, or social and family background and shall make reasonable effort to assure that each student is protected from harassment or discrimination.

The First Amendment isn’t a defense of people who willfully disregard the codes of conduct they agree to adhere to, and this is especially true for people who educate our young (how tolerant are we if they take other “liberties”?). He’s not being jailed for speaking his mind. He was being suspended for breaking the rules. Just because someone is allowed to say what they want doesn’t suddenly mean that there are no consequences. You can’t have free speech in a world without any fucking accountability.

New fossil discovery makes my day

Posted on by

The difference between science and other supposed “types” of knowledge that make similar claims about the universe can be illustrated with this cool new discovery: a team of archaeologists working in South Africa have found a fossil of a possible ancestor. The physical attributes of Australopithecus sediba suggests that it may be a direct ancestor rather than an unsuccessful offshoot. This discovery could (and this is the important part here) change our understanding of our own past as a species.

This offers yet another opportunity for science to correct itself, to refine our understanding of the history of life on earth. That’s fucking exciting. That makes my day. It should make all of our days, but it doesn’t. For a significant portion of the American population, this discovery is either irrelevant, unimportant, or a threat. The need for people to feel important and relevant in an uncaring universe has blinded them from a deeper and much more interesting possibility: that our existence, while impressive to ourselves, is the result of the same laws of physics that are universal. If we exist long enough to contemplate the Cosmos, then we cannot be the only ones who have, are, or ever will. How more exciting is this than “Super Ape-in-the-Sky did it”?