It seems as of late that atheist news has been experiencing a bit of a lull. It’s been a little tough sniffing out the really funny and interesting from the banal, but this week, we forced ourselves a bit and went all out to bring you 40 minutes of quality programming. This week, we cover UFOs, and those magical little crackers of hope, the delectable Eucharists.
This week, we review the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Well, if you can call this steaming pile of lies a movie… Anyway, this week, my co-host Ryan Harkness and myself try to explain what is broken about this documentary, as well as make some promises that are hard to keep!
The word freedom gets tossed around a lot. It seems like the mot-du-jour for anyone smart enough to realize manipulating people is as easy as telling them that such an important value might be taken away.
A few years ago, creationists wanted people to ‘tech the controversy’. That was their angle, and they had managed to make a few inroads in schools. After a devastating ruling in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, it was time for them to go on the offensive. That’s why they’ve decided the best way to push back is by invoking people’s sense of fairness and use the word ‘academic freedom’ as though they understand what that means.
The Governor of Louisiana, in his ‘infinite wisdom’, has helped pass a new bill that allows school to approve supplemental classroom materials to critique scientific theories they disagree with. In other words, religious creationists will bring in their intellectually disingenuous Intelligent Design into classrooms.
That means that if a school board is stupid enough to try and sneak their crap into biology classes, they open the door for possible litigation. Considering that the Dover trial cost over 2 million dollars in legal fees, you might be wondering what these idiots were thinking. It boils down to one thing: If you martyr small, ignorant school districts by feeding them to the courts, only to have them lose and become stifled in debt, you will create the illusion that government is out to take people’s freedom away. It will also look, to the uneducated many, as though science is deathly afraid of intelligent design.
Here’s my proposal to the ACLU, or any other group thinking it’s a good idea to sue the schools that will take this opportunity to try and teach their creationist garbage: go after the legislators instead. If you go after these tiny, ‘we don’t know what we are doing wrong’ school districts, you will only garner sympathy for their cause. You’ll also be regarded poorly for sending underfunded schools further into debt, likely decreasing the overall quality of their education. If you want to fight someone, fight the ringleaders, not the pawns.
Ever wonder what it would be like to kill Mohammad and Jesus to stop the spread of the powerful monotheistic religions they helped create? Yeah, me neither. But apparently, a small game developer in Virginia has decided it’s a good idea. Here’s an excerpt from the article:
The new game, not yet released, is giving a voice to the atheist community, that’s according to the game’s creator, a University of Virginia graduate student. He wouldn’t release his name, for fear of his safety.
Atheists have never really had anything to speak for them like this. It’s the general atheist premise that the world might be a better place without some of those religions, explained the creator of the game.
The object of the game is to stop the spread of Christianity and Islam by murdering Abraham and the authors of the Bible, before beheading Muhammad.
I don’t know about you, but it sounds like this game might seriously suck. I’m not entirely sure how this gives me a voice; I’d be just as offended if a bunch of Christian nutjobs made a game about killing Darwin, or Richard Dawkins. And what’s with beheading these guys? Seems just like a pathetic way to make a buck, and will only make us look like bloodthirsty bigots.
This week, we talk about Karma, more on Scientology, and why Ronald Reagan was a nutball.
This week, on The Good Atheist, we cover topics ranging from Ben Stein to The Russian Parliament. Also, we continue our weekly feature of idiot of the week. We’re not sure if it’s very popular yet, but certainly, it makes us look a little smarter.
Tune in to this week’s episode, which deals with video game violence, real violence in Somalia, a bunch of stupid young adults chasing ghosts, and a whole lot more!
This week, we talk about the Pope’s visit in America, secular ministers, and my special rant on Nay-Sayers. It’s 21 minutes of goodness coming at you!
If you’re already an atheist, you might feel as though the world around you is awash in delusion. You might also have noticed although a large number of people find comfort in the fanciful notions of religion, there are others who are entangled in guilt, pain, or violence because of it. The thought may have crossed your mind that a powerful and organized movement is required against religion to free mankind of their bondage of faith.
As I write this, an underground group called ‘Anonymous’ is waging war against Scientology, a rather recent inductee in the world of organized religion. Unlike most of their brethren, however, Scientology is aggressive and litigious against detractors, and this has spurred hackers and youthful protesters into action. They organize rallies, publish stories and videos, all in an effort to expose the morally questionable behavior of the ‘church’. So the question arises: should other similar movements be created to discredit and attack religion?
This is a tricky question, mostly because although we are loath to admit it, ideological movements, no matter how well intended, can often fall prey to the machinations of tyrants, who in turn use the momentum and frenzy to gain power. The persecution of religion has a tarnished and rather violent history, especially when these movements were subject to mob will. Ideologues, religious or not, are still dangerous, no matter how noble their original intent may be.
That is not to say we should remain silent regarding the infantilization of mankind by organized religion, who generally regard the world of the imaginary as more important, and more real, than the material world. Often, these religions become cults of death, focused almost entirely on a person’s immortal life, rather than the short time they actually do possess. We do need an organized movement, not to fight against religion, since this can only create violence, but rather fight for the right of individuals NOT to believe.
We must be as visible as possible, to show that a real alternative to religion exists. Atheism is generally mistrusted, since most individuals feel as though it is hopeless and dark. They fail to realize that by embracing the material world, our focus is not on what to do with our immortal souls, but rather how to live well during the brief time we have have on earth. We need to portray atheism not as a counter-culture movement, but as the natural progression of belief (or, more accurately, unbelief). Just as our ancestors clung to the primitive myths available to them, many of us retain this need to believe that something, or someone, larger than us is watching out for us. But the powerful desire for this to be true makes it no more true than any other intense dream. This is what we need to convey.
Many of you that have asked me countless times: where do we go from here? Although it seems unfair for us to admit, each unbeliever is a representative of atheism. The actions of one are interpreted as the whole. As such, it is important to maintain both an austere attitude and demeanor, to demonstrate that atheism is not the end of hope, but a new one: that although no god may be looking out for us, we can look out for one another instead.
If you’re like me, you use Facebook to keep in touch with friends and find people you haven’t talked to in years. But in restrictive, religious countries, the site has a reputation for being a ‘lustful hotbed of activity’. That’s why a young Saudi Arabian woman was murdered by her father, who caught her having a conversation with an unknown man. He beat and then shot his own daughter, presumably an honor killing, simply for having innocent conversations over the Internet.
Firstly, I’m not sure about you, but I’ve never had a ‘hot and lustful’ conversation on Facebook, much to my dismay. I normally just wish people a happy birthday, and occasionally try and organize a house party. The clerics who claim that Facebook is a place of debauchery have more than likely never visited it.
Secondly, even if it was a place where young people were sharing naughty messages, what is the harm in that? Sexy notes shared between two forbidden lovers makes for great story telling. We can all identify with a love that was never meant to be, and sometimes, fantasizing about what could be is the only thing that makes our dreary lives bearable.
I’m always personally outraged every time an ignorant and highly religious man kills his own flesh and blood for some mistaken ideal. Although I have no children of my own, it blows me away that a person’s own protective instincts towards his children could so easily be ignored over the delusion an invisible cloud deity would seriously care that one’s daughter is on Facebook.
There is something terribly wrong with a religion that places outdated and dangerous concepts, such as ‘family honor’ over the lives of others. My disappointment is always furthered by the non existent protestations of moderate Muslims, who seem to regard such matters as being private, rather than symptomatic of the deeply violent nature of their faith.
A young man in Saudi Arabia is less than a month away from being beheaded for his part in a school yard brawl that ended with the death of an 18 year old student. Mohammed Kohail, who is a Canadian citizen, is only a few days from the chopping block, and Canada is seriously dragging its feet, and has refused to demand clemency, or take any diplomatic action.
This is all part of the Conservative Administration’s new policy of no longer seeking clemency for citizens who are sentenced to death in countries with an elected and democratic government. In other words, if you are convicted and sentenced to death in, say, Montana, you’re on your own.
There was a time not so long ago that the Canadian Government actually took a stand behind its commitment against the death penalty. The reversal of this policy is more evidence that the very conservative element of government now in power has no real problem with death sentences. Their failure to condemn this practice is a reigning endorsement, and seriously contradicts the majority’s attitude towards the practice.
This is now exacerbated by the fact Canada has dragged its feet on this issue in order to avoid poor diplomatic conditions with Saudi Arabia, since they would essentially put it in a different category than ‘democratic countries’ according to the new policy.
So disastrous is this new attitude we are now collectively responsible for the deaths of any citizen traveling abroad who is sentenced to death. We are, through proxy, part of the mechanism which will bring the end of this young man’s life. Forget the fact his trial lasted on 90 minutes, or the judge didn’t even allow any testimony on behalf of the defendant. The issue is how this country deals with the protection of its citizens according to our laws and values. The Conservative government, in their growing ambition to usurp the humanitarian values of this nation, have proven once again why they are not proper representatives of this country. Shame on you, Mr. Harper, for making me a part of this mechanism of death.
If I told you large groups of fundamentalists were threatening to commit acts of terror over the release of a simple movie criticizing Islam and the Qur’an, I’m sure none of you would be surprised. We take this kind of ridiculousness for granted now. You can’t release a cartoon, a book, or a documentary without fear of reprisal, and now, rather than only make threats at the authors of such works (which was already outrageous enough as it is), now an entire country is somehow responsible for the work of one of its citizens.
Geert Wilders, a Dutch politician, recently made a movie critical of the Qur’an. The hoopla that’s followed was no surprise; however, the reaction of his own government is beginning to showcase a dangerous and frightening precedence. His own Prime Minister has tried to delay the release of the film, and the Ministry of Justice attempted to find ways of killing the project all together, to no avail. The government claims this is to protect the lives of its troops in Afghanistan, there on a peace mission.
It sounds almost reasonable, doesn’t it? Maybe they should censor this movie to prevent innocent lives from being lost. Maybe they should succumb to the intense political pressure coming from Iran, who threatened to review their diplomatic stance with the Netherlands, right?
No. Although I’m not in a habit of writing this sort of tirade, I have no choice but to use strong language in my response to quantify my anger and disappointment at the Dutch government for succumbing to this pressure. Fuck you. Honestly, if we allow ourselves to be bullied by fear, what else are we willing to sacrifice? Do any of you think defending your principles would be easy? Does anyone think there isn’t a war of ideology being instigated by fundamentalists? Who looks like they might be winning? Terrorists are willing to die for their convictions, however convoluted and stupid they are; and yet when faced with the same choice, we run in fear, and submit to their demands. It makes us look weak and scared. It makes the enemies of reason emboldened in their efforts to suppress our beliefs and our rights. It makes their terrorism work on us.
I can only shake my head at how messed up this is.
I’ve written a few articles on many of the strange superstitions that run rampant in India. Luckily, this one is a much less harmful (especially compared to witch burnings), although still just as damn weird. It seems a baby was born near New Delhi that has two faces, and now the locals believe she is the reincarnation of a god.
Since I don’t like being a depressing atheist killjoy all the time, I’ll tell you a bit of good news for a change. It seems that the fascination of the locals may actually help the parents, since they are giving them gifts and donations in hopes of pleasing this new deity. Babies born with these kinds of serious deformities tragically die quite young, but so far, doctors are saying she’s fine. Hopefully, this harmless though relatively silly superstition will help a young girl get to experience the joys of being alive. Let’s just hope all this ‘God talk’ doesn’t get to her head…
Ok, well, maybe baby Jesus doesn’t cry, but that hasn’t stopped the Vatican from including failure to recycle as one of the new deadly sins.
In case you were unaware of what a deadly sin is, it’s a ticket straight to hell for eternity (remember the sins of envy, gluttony, and greed? They’re still there, but there have been some additions) . So, if you threw out your soda can in the garbage rather than the recycle bin, you might be bunkmates with Hitler.
If you need further proof that the Vatican is insane, consider the fact that it isn’t a deadly sin to forbid AIDS-ridden Africans from putting a small rubber sheath on their penis. It also wasn’t a sin, until recently it seems, to molest little boys, although technically, it still isn’t a deadly sin to cover it up.
The hypocrisy of the Catholic Church isn’t a surprise to anyone, especially me. I experienced it firsthand in my small French-Canadian hometown, when at funerals the priest would sing hymns about our greed and selfishness, all the while passing around the collection plate and enjoying his swanky well decorated house. But this latest effort to force people to recycle or face eternal punishment demonstrates just how twisted their view of humanity is. Do I need the threat of Hell to make me care about the environment? No. I do it because the Earth is my home, and unlike my religious, Armageddon wishing neighbor, I don’t expect Jesus to come down from the clouds and fix all my problems.
I’d like to revise the new deadly sins and add my own. Here’s my list:
1. It is a deadly sin to scare people into complacency
2. It is a deadly sin to lie to people about the origins of the Universe, and to suppress information and findings that give us a greater understanding of the Cosmos.
3. It is a deadly sin to allow your narrow religious views to interfere with the well being of others. It is also a sin to make people believe that if they don’t think the way they do, they will burn in a lake of fire forever.
