Bad Times Draw Bigger Crowds to Churches

Bad Times Draw Bigger Crowds to Churches:

"...since September, pastors nationwide say they have seen such a burst of new interest that they find themselves contending with powerful conflicting emotions — deep empathy and quiet excitement — as they re-encounter an old piece of religious lore:

Bad times are good for evangelical churches."

Guess which emotion they feel more- "deep empathy" or not-so-"quiet excitement?" Consider these quotations from the article:

• “It’s a wonderful time, a great evangelistic opportunity for us."

• “I found it very exciting, and I called up that fellow to tell him so. We need to leverage this moment, because every Christian revival in this country’s history has come off a period of rampant greed and fear. That’s what we’re in today — the time of fear and greed."

So the message is that it's wonderful that there's massive unemployment, millions of people in foreclosure, and not enough food; it's all part of God's plan to bring people back to church. Well, I've said it before and I'll say it again- if this kind of sick and twisted god actually exists, I still would not worship him. Hunger and homelessness are up in a big way, and what god wants is your ass back in the seat? That sounds like extortion- not at all an admirable trait in a deity.

Instead of praying for better times, why not donate to a food bank, or do some other sort of charitable giving? It's like prayer because it helps you feel better, but it also has the added advantage of actually doing something to make the situation better.

Good Old-fashioned Christian marriage

Perhaps I was too hasty earlier as I advocated equal rights for homosexuals to marry and have long-term, loving, committed relationships. Maybe instead of pushing "equality" and "tolerance", I should have pointed out some of the common-sense rules that govern Christian marriage. Christians, please choose which forms of marriage you would like to see enacted as constitutional mandates, so we can get back to governing "God's way": (h/t DailyKos)

A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between one man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5)

B. Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines in addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)

C. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)

D. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

E. Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law. (Gen 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10)

G. In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with him (even if he had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)

And it goes without saying that as a good Christian, you should make sure that you don't serve lobster, crab, prawns, at your wedding reception- your god hates those too!

Face off: 10 commandments vs. 7 Aphorisms

The Raw Story | Supreme Court to hear Ten Commandments companion monument case

I heard about this story on NPR on my way into work this morning, and it made me laugh. Basically, some crazy cult was not allowed to donate a monument to the "7 Aphorisms" for placement in the city park alongside a monument of the "10 Commandments", which were allowed to be donated and placed in the park by some other crazy cult. The first group of crazy cultists sued, alleging a free-speech violation, a position that the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with. Now its on the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Here are my favorite things about this story, in no particular order:

• It's coming from the state of Utah, well-known for their religious tolerance and acceptance of alternative lifestyles. LOL
• The "cult" is named "Summum" and "was founded in 1975 by Summum Bonum Amon Ra (or Corky Ra), née Claude "Corky" Nowell, after an encounter with 'Summa Individuals'." OK, two things here: 1) the guy's name is Corky and 2) all of the names of everything in their cult just sounds like somebody mumbling.
• The first cult, Summum, actually sounds pretty cool:

Summum's one-acre compound sits 33 miles north of Pleasant Grove, in an industrial section of Utah's capital, surrounded by a graffiti-strewn building and a metal scrap center.

It's a tranquil spot, with fruit trees and peacocks. Dominating the site is a 27-foot-tall, 40-foot wide copper-shelled pyramid. An automatic door opens to a central space where members meditate.

Scattered about are preserved animals encased in bronze, Egyptian symbols, sofas, candles and bright murals adorning the walls. Off to the side is a large, stainless-steel fermentation tank, where sacramental "nectars" or "liquid knowledge" are produced for meditation sessions.

Oh yeah, those "sacramental nectars"? They're wine.

The city is arguing that once they accepted the first monument, the city adopted it as part of it's own free speech, and therefore are under no obligation to accept competing messages. As far as I can tell though, you can't have it both ways. Either this is free speech or it's not; either it's an unconstitutional establishment of a state religion or it's a public park open to other messages. The city's kind of in an impossible situation here- they have to argue that the 10 commandments display is not an establishment of state religion while also denying competing religions the right to a similar public forum.

They might have had a chance if they would have chosen to argue it based on the idea that it was part of the history of the area, and not part of government speech at all. Those types of arguments have been viewed sympathetically by the court, but I don't see how the city can win the case based on these arguments. Discussing a Texas case a few years ago

"No exact formula can dictate a resolution in fact-intensive cases such as this," Rehnquist read. "The determinative factor here, however, is that 40 years passed in which the monument's presence, legally speaking, went unchallenged.

"And the public visiting the capitol grounds is more likely to have considered the religious aspect of the tablets' message as part of what is a broader moral and historical message."

In a dissenting opinion, Souter wrote, "If neutrality in religion means something, any citizen should be able to visit [the capitol grounds] without having to confront religious expressions clearly meant to convey an official religious position."

So clearly, the court could be persuaded that the history of the monument should be taken into account, and the city may have won based on that argument. However, once the city began arguing that the 10 commandments were part of it's own free speech, then they are forced to admit that it is an establishment clause violation.

To religious people: you are idiots and I hate you

This kind of sums up my feelings on the matter.

religionexplained.jpg (JPEG Image, 578x554 pixels)

I stumbled to the following image:
religionexplained.jpg (JPEG Image, 578x554 pixels)




Sometimes atheists are accused of being shrill, arrogant, blasphemous and rude when we criticize religion in terms like depicted above. That doesn't mean we're wrong, but it may turn some away from our message. However, I think it wins far more arguments and converts than it loses.

Hyperbole can be a useful tool in debates, especially when categorizing your opponent's arguments. Hyperbole has a way of simplifying the debate instantly. Once we refuse to respect conventions about blasphemy, "God" becomes a god, and then a target of ridicule.

But, it's more than that. Extreme characterization of the Christian beliefs like the one above can force Christians to examine their beliefs more closely. The reader who is shocked by the mockery implicit in the "imaginary man" reference to their god is forced to ask themselves, "in what way is that characterization wrong?" "In what ways do my beliefs differ from this idea of a capricious, malicious god?" The cumulative effect of these internal questions, even if subconsciously, can have a powerful effect, I believe. Even forcing them to ask themselves why atheists would believe this way about "God" can cause them to put themselves into our shoes and manufacture reasons for our disbelief.

This will never produce instantaneous results (other than offending the unsuspecting Christian), but I believe that it will have an effect. And always remember, "blasphemy is a victimless crime".

GamePolitics.com � Blog Archive � Game Industry Vet: Bible Has More Adult Content than Video Games

No kidding, has anybody really read that thing?

Game Industry Vet: Bible Has More Adult Content than Video Games

A veteran video game marketing exec claims that the Bible contains more mature-themed content than most games.

Bruce Everiss, whose resume includes stints at Imagine and Codemasters, writes in his Bruce on Games blog:

Despite what some ignorant politicians and journalists might tell you, video games are fairly bland when it comes to how “adult” their content is. In fact they are usually too bland to emotionally engage and would be far better if they moved a bit in the “adult” direction…

Another reason for the blandness is the dull censoring hand of the platform holders who are amazingly prudish.

The fact is that established old media have vastly more shocking content than video games… a prime example of a book that children are encouraged to read is the Bible.

Everiss used a website known as Bible Gateway to conduct searches and found a number of themes which would be considered racy if they appeared in a video game:

The King James version has “harlot” in it 48 times, “sodomite” 5 times, “fornicator” 5 times, “smite” 133 times, “kill” 208 times and “maim” 7 times. This is shocking, you have to wonder what any right minded parent is doing exposing their children to this stuff.

Interestingly enough, University of Michigan professor Brad Bushman, a leading critic of video game violence, also found links between Biblical violence and real-life aggression in a 2007 study.

Bushman is one Jack Thompson’s expert witnesses in a pending wrongful death lawsuit against Rockstar and other video game industry defendants in Alabama.

Thumbs up for hands-only CPR :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Health News

Thumbs up for hands-only CPR :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Health News

In a major change aimed at getting more bystanders to do CPR, the American Heart Association now says it's OK to skip the mouth-to-mouth resuscitation when performing CPR on adults having a heart attack.

New guidelines issued by the organization Monday encourage non-medical professionals to use hands-only CPR -- doing hard, fast chest compressions -- instead of a combination of chest thrusts and rescue breathing, as long recommended.

By making CPR less complicated, the aim is to get more people to try doing it in an emergency.

"Many times, people nearby don't help because they're afraid that they will hurt the victim and aren't confident in what they're doing," said Dr. Michael Sayre, lead author of the new recommendation. "We want people to know that they can help many victims just by calling 911 and doing chest compressions. Don't be afraid to try it."

The shift is supported by evidence from three large studies done last year that found survival rates weren't hurt when mouth-to-mouth wasn't used, the heart association said.

However, important to note, prayer remains a non-viable alternative. If someone around you is choking, please DO NOT pray for them, please DO SOMETHING instead.

Biblically Correct Tours of Science Museums

Thanks to Dangerous Intersection for the tip on this ABC News Report about a group that offers tours of Denver area places like the zoo or the museum, but do so from a "biblical perspective". Which, of course, means "wrong and utterly mistaken perspective". As far as I can tell, this does little more than poison the well for these student's future education. This is the problem with homeschooling... at some point I believe it becomes child-abuse. I don't know quite where that point is, as I mentioned here, but it's certainly doing them a disservice. Here's a lesson:

"If you want to map out life through time, the fossil record is really great for doing that," he continued. "There's a really nice record of what happened on this planet from the first real life forms we know of about 3.4 billion years ago until today."

Out on the museum floor, Jack and Carter stopped the group in front of a window display that contains samples of sandstone that have ripples created by water and fossils of ancient life. Bill Jack asked his group, "How do they date the fossil? By the layer in which they find it. They date the layer by the fossil and the fossil by the layer," he said. "That's circular reasoning."

In the next moment he stepped past and turned his back to a display on radiometric dating, the method by which scientists determine the age of rocks through the rate of decay of their natural radioactivity.

When later asked why he skipped the display, Jack said simply, "We can't cover everything."

Inside the museum's expansive bone and fossil storage room, Johnson said, "They have no clue about how accurate it is … Now it's plus or minus a tenth of a percent."

How does +/- .1% equate to "no idea how accurate it is"? I guess they haven't covered statistics in their homeschooling yet. Ha, you've got to love the chief curator's response. "Regardless of what the tour guide is saying, some of those kids are going to start thinking for themselves," says Kirk Johnson, chief curator.

An Atheist in the Pulpit

Psychology Today has a very interesting article about the de-conversion process, especially among various clergy members they profile. Although it was more about the clergy and their struggles once they begin to doubt religion, I recognized a lot of myself in their comments as well. You can read the full article here: Psychology Today: An Atheist in the Pulpit

As I wrote about here, I was once a pretty fundamentalist Mormon. Frankly, I'm not sure that there are any other kind of Mormon, which is why it's a wonderful thing Mitt Romney is not in the race any more. My de-conversion process was similar to that of many others: I got a taste of the "outside" world, and the cognitive walls that religion forced me to construct came tumbling down. From the Psychology Today article:

"We tend to ignore how much cognitive effort is required to maintain extreme religious beliefs, which have no supporting evidence whatsoever," says the evolutionary biologist David Sloan Wilson. He likens the process to a cell trying to maintain its osmotic pressure. "You're trying to pump out the mainstream influences all the time. You're trying to maintain this wall, and keep your beliefs inside, and all these other beliefs outside. That's hard work." In some ways, then, at least for fundamentalists, "growing out of it is the easiest thing in the world."

This is why religion is forced to remain so dogmatic-- once they begin to admit that small pieces of their proposed worldview no longer make sense given what we now know about man's place in the universe, the whole structure comes down. That's certainly the way it was for me, once the leaks sprung in the levees, it was too late to save them. Not that I would have it any other way. I felt the same kind of liberation experienced by Dan Barker of the Freedom From Religion Foundation as profiled in the article:

The confirmation, as Barker interpreted it, came one night in November, as he lay on a burlap cot in a church in a Mexican border town where he'd come to give a guest sermon. As he peered out at a splash of stars, Barker had a sudden profound sensation that had nothing to do with intellect, the kind of deeply felt moment more commonly associated with finding God than losing Him. He was, Barker understood, utterly alone here.

"For my whole life there had been this giant eyeball looking at me, this god, this holy spirit, this church history, and this Bible. And not only everything I did but everything I thought was being judged: Was God pleased? I realized that that wasn't there anymore. It occurred to me, 'I own these thoughts. Nobody knows what I'm thinking right now. There's no fear of hell, no fear of judgment, I don't have to be right or wrong, I can just be me.'" It felt as if charges had been dropped for a crime for which he had been falsely accused. It was exhilarating and frightening all at once. "When you're ready to jump out of an airplane to skydive, you can be terrified but excited at the same time," he says. "There's a point where you go, all right, let's do this."

Those thoughts almost brought tears to my eyes, so close were they to what I went through: "I own these thoughts. Nobody knows what I'm thinking right now....I don't have to be right or wrong (or good or evil based on outdated mores), I can just be me." After a lifetime of being told that there was this Big Brother entity that had access to all my secret thoughts, dreams, and desires, to realize that I was in control of my life was like a breath of air to someone who had been slowly suffocating.

There was not much room for nihilism in my new world view. I passed briefly through the nihilism stage, to emerge on the other side emboldened and exhilarated. Life now had so much to offer, that was previously closed off to me. Like Richard from De-Conversion had experienced:

I myself found that my own meanings eventually expanded, after I finally left the Christian faith. “Saying yes to life” for me meant, initially, the exploration of life, making up for lost time so to speak, from all those years spent as a neurotic fundamentalist. I wanted to taste life in all its forms and in all its experiences — to “suck the marrow from life”, as Thoreau had put it. I developed friendships with non-Christians, I traveled, I explored new foods, I learned about wine (I had never drunk much as a Christian), I started dating (I had never dated much as a Christian, either), I explored ideas I had never allowed myself to consider (like Nietzsche’s!), I learned about other religions, and more. Just going out dancing was one of the highlights of that time of my life.

In short, the main theme, for me, for these many years of my life, was: the world is good, and beautiful, and that is why life is worth living.

And that's where I find myself now. I love the intellectual freedom that I have, and I love the freedom to just enjoy spiritual experiences without trying to read some other kind of meaning into them. I don't have to worry if god is trying to get my attention with some subtle message or "still small voice".

But my dad does. The thought of coming out as an atheist has been on my mind a lot recently. I didn't feel as though it was the right time a week or so ago as my wife and I had dinner with my dad. He had just returned from a brief trip to Utah to spend some time with his father (my grandfather) before he passed away, then attend his funeral. One of the primary reasons for religion to exist is that it provides some kind of comforting answer for the question "What happens when we die." I think my dad needs that comfort right now, and no matter how much it grates on me to hear his religious gyrations, I held my tongue and just tried to let him get out the feelings.

All of this is part of why I feel sometimes like an atheist evangelist. We are the ones that really have the good news: you are free to live your life without fear of eternal damnation. You can be a good person because you truly are a good person, not out of fear or seeking for an eternal reward. The world is a beautiful place, made more precious because we realize that every day is a gift; we have but one life to live. The same sense of freedom and exhilaration is available to everyone, if only they will open their eyes.

American Atheists definition of Atheism

I thought that the following definition of atheism was eloquent and covers all of the bases fairly well. It sure doesn't make us out to be the vile, morally degenerate, scheming, anti-American parasites that you always thought we were, right? :)

American Atheists -- Atheism

“Your petitioners are Atheists and they define their beliefs as follows. An Atheist loves his fellow man instead of god. An Atheist believes that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth for all men together to enjoy.

An Atheist believes that he can get no help through prayer but that he must find in himself the inner conviction, and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and enjoy it.

An Atheist believes that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfillment.

He seeks to know himself and his fellow man rather than to know a god. An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanquished, war eliminated. He wants man to understand and love man.

He wants an ethical way of life. He believes that we cannot rely on a god or channel action into prayer nor hope for an end of troubles in a hereafter.

He believes that we are our brother's keepers; and are keepers of our own lives; that we are responsible persons and the job is here and the time is now.”

Apologists Ask Churches to Step Up Response to Militant Atheism | Christianpost.com

Apologists Ask Churches to Step Up Response to Militant Atheism | Christianpost.com

The headline is not completely true. What's actually happening is that some well-known apologetics have realized that there is now a new lucrative opportunity to sell apologetic "research" in the wake of the new atheist movement.

"The arguments are not really new but the ferociousness" with which atheists are lobbing their attacks "are coming much stronger," Mark Mittelberg, primary author of Becoming a Contagious Christian, said in a teleconference on Tuesday.

The teleconference, hosted by Outreach Training, was for pastors who were interested in updating their churches' apologetics approaches amid an onslaught of pro-atheist books and movies in recent years. Books like Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion and Christopher Hitchens' God is Not Great have made best-selling lists. Meanwhile, movies like The Da Vinci Code, The Jesus Family Tomb and The Golden Compass have claimed widespread media attention.

These books and movies are not just posing challenges to the basic tenets of the Christian faith, according to Mittelberg, but they are also empowering attacks against Christianity.

Damn right we are! Did you catch that? We're "posing challenges to the basic tenets of the Christian faith".

Lee Strobel, author of the best-selling The Case for Christ, agreed with Mittelberg that many Christians are raised to believe in doctrine but are not adequately taught on why their faith is true or how to support their faith with evidence.

Could it be due to the total lack of "evidence"?

"A lot of Christians assume they are hanging on to a shred of faith – that they are clinging by their fingernails. They don't know that the truth is on our side," noted Mittelberg.

Ok, if the Christians don't even "know that the truth is on our side" then what are all the sermons about??

For churches with more limited resources, Strobel recommended subscribing to a satellite feed that would stream live broadcasts of his seminars straight to the church. His next scheduled one-day live training seminar, "Investigating Faith," will be held on March 8 at Word Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Northville, Mich. Churches will be able to view the presentation in real time through Church Communication Network.

Strobel also asked pastors to consider setting up seeker small groups. While Strobel's small group curriculum won't be available until this Fall, he recommended Garry Poole's Seeker Small Groups as a resource.

Oh, that's what it's all about- subscribing to a satellite feed or purchasing some new group curriculum to spread the apologetic brainwash...err... research. And then this from an older Christian Post article:

Churches are now finding a need to equip Christians with rebuttals and answers that go beyond an acceptance of the authority of Scripture. In response, Christian apologists are filling the void, teaching a language anchored in reason and science.

And if the Church wants to keep the younger generation, Christian leaders should start stressing evidence and proof, as one 17-year-old suggested.

"We've grown up in a place and a time where everything can be proven," Emily Koll, a member of Calvary Church, told the local newspaper. "And then, all of a sudden, with God, you have to take a leap of faith. We're not used to that. It's outside our comfort zone."

Maybe it's outside your comfort zone for a reason? There's a reason why everything else in your life can be proven, with the sole exception of religion!

"[I]f people look at science, they will find faith and they will find reason; the two cannot be incompatible and they have one author, namely God," said Midland theologian Norbert Dickman, who was scheduled to present what the Christian response should be to the rise of the atheist voice at an Illinois church on Tuesday.

Then why the relentless advance of science and retreat of religion? Why the religious opposition to scientific research and education of the youth with generally accepted scientific theories? Elsewhere, Dumbass D'Zousa points out to all the Christians who have never realized this before that

"[Christians] are going to meet arguments that cannot be settled simply by 'the Bible says this, the Bible says that' because the other person will promptly reply that they don't accept the authority of the Bible," D'Souza noted.

Huh, no shit?

You never really see things like this from the freethought community. Oops, with the exception of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, that guy is showing up all over!

Atheist sees image of big bang in piece of toast

Atheist Sees Image of Big Bang in Piece of Toast

For Immediate Release: Miracle Toast?

(ACPA-london) Excitement is growing in the Northern England town of Huddlesfield following the news that a local man saw an image of the big-bang in a piece of toast. atheist donald chapman, 36, told local newspaper, "the huddlesfield express" that he was sitting down to eat breakfast when an unusual toast pattern caught his eye.

"i was just about to spread the butter when I noticed a fairly typical small hole in the bread surrounded by a burnt black ring. however the direction and splatter patterns of the crumbs as well as the changing shades emanating outwards from this black hole were very clearly similar to the chaotic-dynamic non-linear patterns that one would expect following the big bang". "it's the beginning of the world" he added excitedly.

Ever since news of the discovery made national headlines, local hoteliers have been overwhelmed by an influx of atheists from all over the country who have flocked to Huddlesfield to catch a glimpse of the scientific relic. "i have always been an Atheist and to see my life choices validated on a piece of toast is truly astounding" said one guest at the Huddlesfield arms hotel.

To the surprise of many, the UK national atheist association has asked its members not to pay attention to the story despite its potential to inspire less faith. "Given what the religious believe already, this is an easy sell" said one disgruntled activist who said he was going to huddlesfield anyway noting that "seeing is not believing".

Mormons Dismayed by Harsh Spotlight - WSJ.com

Mormons Dismayed by Harsh Spotlight - WSJ.com

This whole presidential campaign has been especially interesting to me, as a former (recovering?) Mormon. To see the way Mormons are portrayed in the media, to read the commentary from other religious and secular sources, and to consider my own thoughts and feelings has been a unique experience for me.

As a child and adolescent, I remember being taught in church the standard "party line" for questions like "are Mormons Christian?", "does your dad have lots of wives", etc.... At the time, I thought that the way we were perceived by mainstream Christians was silly-- after all, shouldn't we as Mormons have the right to self-identify as Christians? Doesn't professing belief in the divinity of Christ count? If the church outlawed polygamy a hundred years ago, why are we still getting this question? We were taught, both implicitly and explicitly, that the reason for these questions was essentially jealousy or other latent ill will because we were the "one true religion". All of these false churches were banding together against us because we had the revealed truth! It was so obvious!

Once in college, I devoured philosophy courses. I realized that the doubts that I had were not unique to me, that there was nothing wrong with pursuing metaphysical questions. When you're a Mormon, questioning is mildly discouraged. Questioning too much might lead you to false prophets, away from the truth. That mindset never really sat quite right with me, but I was always told to pray about it, listen for a "still, small voice" that would tell me God's will. Mormons place a great deal of emphasis on the concept that prophecy is not dead, that God personally, literally, speaks. Only, I never heard anything. I assumed that I was unworthy, that the very existence of my doubts had blocked me from being receptive to the voice of God. It wasn't until I started reading more of the philosophy of religion that I realized it was both normal and healthy to question the existence of god. Atheism was a viable alternative. Not only viable, it was the only option that made sense to me. The thing that I loved about philosophy was that nobody was telling me the answers. There were no "answers". There was a process of thought. Nobody was promoting atheism, or theism, or one religion over another; there was only an insistence that you had to have good reasons for whatever you believed. Your beliefs had to have intellectual consistency.

For me, there was no turning back. I tasted freedom, and reason was my new standard. It still is.

It wasn't until this year that I started thinking again about the issues that Mormonism raises, due primarily to Mitt Romney's campaign. Only now, I got to see the commentary from the outside, as a non-Mormon. What a difference! Then I read the front page article- above the fold no less- from today's Wall Street Journal. What a perfect catalyst for this post, which I had been considering writing for some time. Most Christians today seem to have a bit of a persecution complex (see also Bill Donohue), but Mormons have it worse than most. They've still got it in the back of their mind that the founder of their church was martyred and they were forced to flee to Utah in search of religious freedom (read: polygamy). Add to this the conviction that they are the "peculiar people" and that Satan is actively trying to keep people from their religion because of its truth, and one develops quite a heady mix of persecution complex.

In spite of this, there was always the sentiment within the church that they were making headway. The church was growing rapidly, both home and abroad, which only fed the conviction that people were finding the truth irresistable. That's the context behind the article in the Wall Street Journal- that's why Mormons are so surprised now to find that people still don't like them. *gasp* Mormon beliefs are still mistrusted within and without Christianity, and rightly so.

Mr. Romney's candidacy revived old lines of attack and mockery of some of the church's unusual practices, such as secret ceremonies, the wearing of special undergarments, and the baptizing the dead in the belief that it will help them join family members in heaven.

The only thing that I don't understand is why Mormon beliefs are ridiculed within Christianity, but Christian beliefs are not held up to the same level of ridicule in society at large.

I apologize, but I can't remember the radio show I was listening to, but the host had a brilliant bit of satire. It was several weeks ago, and he was trying to argue that the religion of a candidate ought not be a part of the equation for determining who you are going to vote for. He was deadpanning that "yes, those Mormons are so ridiculous for believing that an angel came to Earth with golden plates, revealing a new religion. All good Christians know that it really happened when a new star appeared in the sky and a virgin gave birth to the literal son of god. All good Christians know that they literally are eating the flesh and drinking the blood of this god-man when they take communion. They know that the universe was created in six days, and two of every animal in the world rode on a boat at the same time. And of course, all good Muslims know about the 72 virgins awaiting martyrs..." Again, I can't remember the exact source, but if someone remembers, please post it in the comments.

None of these beliefs make any damn sense given what a rational person can observe about the world around them. This is what I came to realize about all religions. The more I thought about them, the less sense they made. Once I stopped accepting the dogma I was fed, the scales fell from my eyes and I was able to think. This is why I make fun of you if you believe in unbelievable things. This is why I occasionally toy with the thought of moving to northern Europe, where things are a little more sane. This is why I'm outraged when you say you want to put prayer back in the schools, or change the constitution, or limit stem cell research, or any of thousands of things that you do that hurt other people or take away their rights without any good reason. This is why I'm an atheist.

Omaha.com Metro/Region Section

Omaha says "no" to Madalyn Murray O'Hair Street

Anyone who thought it would go another way was, of course, crazy. By the way, here's the area that was at stake for a "commemorative" street naming:


View Larger Map



Not exactly asking for an empire, was he?

Councilman Garry Gernandt said after the meeting that he was contacted by close to 200 constituents concerning the Murray O’Hair sign, and not a single one was in support.

“They said we should keep religious and state issues separate,” Gernandt said.

I promise you that was the first time any of those 200 people had said anything close to "we should keep religious and state issues separate". Those are the same people who wrote letters to the editor bemoaning the lack of prayer in school and seeing this as another attempt of the godless majority (insert laugh here) to suppress the rights of good Christians. Do I get credit for being a prophet now? Here's what I said this morning:

Luckily, the city council meets today and will swiftly vote down this attempt to create a godless democracy where a theocracy ought to be. HA!

Firestorm begins over Omaha street sign

I told you it would happen. The furor has begun to kick up in Omaha over the dastardly plan to prove to Christians that they are second-rate citizens by placing a commemorative street sign on a small portion of a minor street. Here's the clipping from this morning's Omaha World Herald.

Billy Graham? Seriously? Mother Theresa? And what first amendment rights of Christians have been violated? Last time I checked, it was the atheists that were worried about our Constitutional rights! People throw around the term "First Amendment rights" a little cavalierly, I don't think that a lot of them actually know what the first amendment is. This is what most people think the first amendment says:

I can do or say whatever I want. Those who disagree with me are attempting to violate my rights and are attacking me personally, as well as all that I hold dear. Any attempt to have a rational debate should be met with extreme hyperbole, or possibly violence.

--Signed, "The Founders"
P.S. We were all Christian and meant for this country to stay Christian for ever and ever, k thx.

This is what the first amendment actually says:

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I know it's subtle, but do you see the differences there?

The second guy may be even dumber than the first. Sure, we're not sweeping the nation, but we're not a "microscopic" minority! Wikipedia indicates that "most studies indicate that the non-religious make up about 12-15% of the world's population". And I thought muslin was a fabric, not a religion?

Luckily, the city council meets today and will swiftly vote down this attempt to create a godless democracy where a theocracy ought to be. HA!

Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted): Top Fifty Atheist T-Shirt and Bumper Sticker Aphorisms

Thanks to Dangerous Intersection for the tip-off on this:

Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted): Top Fifty Atheist T-Shirt and Bumper Sticker Aphorisms

Top Fifty Atheist T-Shirt and Bumper Sticker Aphorisms

1. Abstinence Makes the Church Grow Fondlers


2. Honk If Your Religious Beliefs Make You An Asshole


3. Intelligent Design Makes My Monkey Cry


4. Too Stupid to Understand Science? Try Religion.


5. There's A REASON Why Atheists Don't Fly Planes Into Buildings


6. "Worship Me or I Will Torture You Forever. Have a Nice Day."­ God.


7. God Doesn't Kill People. People Who Believe in God Kill People.


8. If There is No God, Then What Makes the Next Kleenex Pop Up?


9. He's Dead.
   It's Been 2,000 years.
   He's Not Coming Back.
   Get OVER It Already!


10. All religion is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination, and poetry. Edgar Allen Poe.


11. Viva La Evolución!


12. Actually, If You Look It Up, The Winter Solstice Is The Reason For The Season


13. I Wouldn't Trust Your God Even If He Did Exist


14. Cheeses Is Lard. Argue With THAT If You Can.


15. People Who Don't Want Their Beliefs Laughed at Shouldn't Have Such Funny Beliefs


16. Jesus is Coming? Don't Swallow That.


17. Threatening Children With Hell Is FUN!


18. GOD - APPLY DIRECTLY TO FOREHEAD!


19. Jesus Told Me Republicans SUCK


20. God + Whacky Tobacky = Platypus


21. God Doesn't Exist. So, I Guess That Means No One Loves You.


22. When the Rapture Comes, We'll Get Our Country Back!


23. Q. How Do We Know the Holy Ghost Was Catholic?
    A. He Used the Rhythm Method Instead of a Condom.


24. You Say "Heretic" Like It Was a BAD Thing


25. I Love Christians. They Taste Like Chicken.


26. Science: It Works, Bitches.


27. "Intelligent Design" Helping Stupid People Feel Smart Since 1987


28. I Found God Between The Sheets


29. I Gave Up Superstitious Mumbo Jumbo For Lent


30. My Flying Monkey Can Beat Up Your Guardian Angel


31. Every Time You Play With Yourself, God Kills a Kitten


32. If God Wanted People to Believe in Him, Then Why Did He Invent Logic?


33. Praying Is Politically Correct Schizophrenia


34. ALL Americans Are African Americans


35. I Forget - Which Day Did God Make All The Fossils?


36. I Was An Atheist Until The Hindus Convinced Me That I Was God


37. The Spanish Inquisition: The Original Faith-based Initiative


38. If we were made in his image, when why aren't humans invisible too?


39. JESUS SAVES....You From Thinking For Yourself


40. How Can You Disbelieve in Evolution If You Can't Even Define It?


41. Q. How Can You Tell That Your God is Man-made?
    A. If He Hates All the Same People You Do.


42. Every Time You See a Rainbow, God is Having Gay Sex


43. I Went to Public School in Kansas and All I Got Was This Lousy T-shirt and a Poor Understanding of the Scientific Method.


44. WWJD = We Won. Jesus Died.


45. The Family That Prays Together is Brainwashing the Children


46. Oh, Look, Honey Another Pro-lifer For War


47. Another Godless Atheist for Peace and World Harmony


48. God is Unavailable Right Now. Can I Help You?


49. When Lip Service to Some Mysterious Deity Permits Bestiality on
    Wednesday and Absolution on Sundays, Cash Me Out. Frank Sinatra.


50. No Gods. No Mullets.

The Raw Story | Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in 'God's standards'

I'm sure you've seen this or heard about this by now, but in case you haven't:

The Raw Story | Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in 'God's standards'

"I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution," Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. "But I believe it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living god. And that's what we need to do -- to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view."

Contrast this with the constitution (from http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1)

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Hear that, Huckleberry!?!?!?!?! That's my constitution that you are threatening! And what parts of God's law do you want to amend the constitution to include? All excerpts below from Evil Bible.

Can we own slaves? Leviticus 25:45 “Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy … and they shall be your possession… they shall be your bondmen forever.” Genesis 9:25 “And he [Noah] said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.” Exodus 21:2 & 7 “If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing… And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.” Joel 3:8 “And I will sell your sons and your daughters into the hand of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people far off: for the Lord hath spoken it.” Luke 12:47-48 [Jesus speaking] “And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes.” Colossians 3:22

“Servants, obey in all things your masters.” So obviously the Biblical God thinks slavery is right, right? Just look at these: Isaiah 58:6 “Undo the heavy burdens... let the oppressed go free, ... break every yoke.” Matthew 23:10 “Neither be ye called Masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.” (Also see Exodus 22:21 & 21:16) Let it be known here that pro-slavery Bible verses were cited by many churches in the South during the Civil War, and were used by some theologians in the Dutch Reformed Church to justify apartheid in South Africa. There are more pro-slavery verses than cited here. I simply do not have the room to post all of them.

Should we pray in public? 1 Kings 2:22, 54 & 9:3 shows the Lord is joyed by public prayer and listens intently. Matthew 6:5-6 condemn public prayer and command people keep it a secret.

Should we circumcise males? Genesis 17:10 “This is my covenant which ye shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee: Every man and child among you shall be circumcised. Clearly this demands circumcision, yet Galatians 5:2 says “Behold, I Paul, say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.”

Do women have rights? Genesis 3:16 “And thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” 1 Timothy 2:12 says a woman must not teach, remain silent and must be subjugated to her man. 1 Corinthians 14:34 & 1 Peter 3:6 both say that women have limited rights and are under control of their men. Judges 4:4, 14-15, 5:7, Acts 2:18 & 21:9 all tell of powerful women who were not subjugated by men and were not punished for their authority of men.

So, Mr. Huckleberry Hound, which of these bat-shit insane, stupid, ass-backwards, neanderthal ideals should we amend our constitution to include?!?! Or is it just going to be the typical Christian Coalition stuff: banning abortion, eliminating stem cell research, stripping homosexual of any rights, getting rid of that pesky "evolution" in biology classes and so on?

THIS IS WHY ATHEISTS ARE SO FUCKING ANGRY!

Conservatipedia

Hat Tip to Stardust at God is for Suckers for the heads-up.
As if I ever need reminding why I'm an atheist:

Conservatipedia

Sometimes, on a cold winter day, my thoughts turn to dumbasses, and then I'm happy again. There, but for the grace of *reason* (sanity?) go I.

Let's talk about the age of consent. The law should be universal in every state, you must be 18 years of age to have sex. End of story. Liberals are constantly fighting on the side of pedophiles to lower it down. A lot of states have the age of consent at a disgusting 16 years old. Take a look at gay Canada, children as young as 14 can have sex with 40 year old men legally. What is the world coming to?

Hey, believe me, I hate Canada as much as the next guy, but seriously?

And, as a public service, here's a quick list of shows to avoid to keep your 8 year old from turning gay

There is a number of queer shows on television that not only promote the sinful "Gay Culture", but are probably filled with other subliminal messages to promote the homosexual agenda. Here are a list of shows to avoid:

• Queer Eye for the Straight Guy
• Boy Meets Boy
• Queer Eye
• Big Brother
• Survivor
• Family Guy
• The Sarah Silverman Program
• The War at Home
• The Simpsons
• Drawn Together
• Heroes
  
• The Ellen Show
• Dr. Phil
• Oprah
• Will & Grace
• Friends
• Seinfeld

There are many more, but these are the main ones to avoid. Just keep your head up and possibly buy a digital cable box or satellite dish, so you can control the content. Last thing you need is your 8 year old son asking you if his pants look "fabulous".

Family guy AND The Simpsons?!?! *Gasp* But, but... but... I've been watching those for years, and I'm still happily married. I'm not sure how you've been watching all of those shows without a digital cable box or satellite dish, but good to know!

Please, just read this whole post "Atheists Are Out To Get Your Children"


I can only hope it's satire, but I don't hold out a lot of hope.

Sermon Alive

I'm not really sure if this is true or a VERY clever parody. I guess I have to lean towards true. Apparently, the idea is to post a daily devotional or sermon.

Some choice tidbits from Sermon Alive:

Nevermind, I can't pick a few. I'm thinking about skewering the daily devotion on an ongoing basis, but let's just start with today's, OK?

FAITHFULNESS

A faithful man will be richly blessed, but one eager to get rich will not go unpunished. - Proverbs 28:20

In the Promised Land, we learn that obedience is the only thing that matters. We are called to execute, and leave outcome to God. Sometimes that outcome is very positive, yielding a return. In other cases, we may not yield a corresponding return. We may even get a negative outcome. The difference is that we know that we have been faithful to what God has called us to and we yield results to God. God often blesses obedience beyond what we deserve. If God brings wealth to your life, it should come as a by-product of obedience, not an end in itself.

God may call each of us to be obedient to situations that may not yield immediate, positive results. It is in these times that our faith must be obedience-based versus outcome-based. What if Jesus had considered the immediate ramifications of whether he would go to the cross? Based on the immediate outcome, the decision would have been an easy one. Who wants to die on a cross? However, for Him there was a higher purpose in that obedience. We are called to this same kind of obedience. This means putting our own flesh on the line daily, dying to our own self-will.

This is what it means to be a faithful man. Pray that God will make you a faithful man today.

Question yourself:

• Am I willing to be obedience in any circumstances?
• Why have faith in God’s promises resulting in total obedience irregardless of any circumstances?

So what I'm learning from this is if we work hard at obeying god's will, then sometimes we get stuff and sometimes we don't. However, if we are very lucky we might actually have to put "our own flesh on the line daily". And I just can't get enough of the questions to ask yourself:
"Am I willing to be obedience in any circumstances?"
"Why have faith in God's promises resulting in total obedience irregardless of any circumstances?"

I don't know how to "be obedience." Can someone please diagram the last sentence for me? I know "irregardless" is not a word, but I'm not sure what the subject of the sentence is? I'm going to take a stab at translating the question into one you might be able to read: "Come up with some reasons why you should have blind faith in god and blindly obey his various edicts, even when they contradict each other, despite any and all evidence to the contrary".

Other things that you can learn if you sign up for the daily devotional:

• how to sort out which of the many voices in your head is god's
• "You need more battles that will give you the opportunity to learn the art of spiritual warfare. Do not fear these battles that are before you. God has already given you the victory if you choose complete dependence and obedience to Him. Then you will become one of God’s greatest warriors, skilled in spiritual warfare."

I hear it now.... "ninjas for Christ"

Evolution and the race for President

Reason Magazine has a wonderful new article up by Ronald Bailey about why we should care what the various presidential candidates believe about evolution. He covers what most of the candidates have said about evolution so you can get an idea of who thinks what. He ends the article with this summation for why you should care what the candidates think:

A larger question is whether a candidate's belief about the validity of evolutionary biology has anything to say about his or her ability to evaluate evidence. A January 4, 2008, editorial by Science editor Donald Kennedy correctly argues, "The candidates should be asked hard questions about science policy, including questions about how those positions reflect belief. What is your view about stem cell research, and does it relate to a view of the time at which human life begins? Have you examined the scientific evidence regarding the age of Earth? Can the process of organic evolution lead to the production of new species, and how? Are you able to look at data on past climates in search of inferences about the future of climate change?" Kennedy concludes, "I don't need them to describe their faith; that's their business and not mine. But I do care about their scientific knowledge and how it will inform their leadership."

Since science and technology policy issues are only going to become more important as the 21st century unfolds, we should all care how scientific knowledge informs a president's leadership.

How do you fit this in with your prioritization of which candidate to support? As I argued here, once I find out you are a religious literalist, I can't take you seriously anymore.

Sadly, we do have a need to know as much as we can about the candidate's particular religious beliefs. If you believe that a 2000 year-old Jewish zombie is someday coming back, I want to know that about a candidate before I vote for them. If you believe that 72 virgins await martyrs in some idyllic paradise (although presumably not so idyllic for the virgins), then I have a right to question your basic sanity. All hyperbole aside, I need to know if your particular supernatural beliefs are going to influence your policies.

I was telling my wife the other night that I'm not so concerned about all the minutiae involved in the debate, but it's getting to the point that if you are religious I think that, in many ways, is mutually exclusive with being a reasonable, logical person. If you believe that the earth is only 6,000 years old, we don't have that much more to talk about. We're obviously not going to agree on environmental policy if you think the whole earth was created in 7 days. I can't listen to your position on taxes, or health care, or education, much less your ideas about more religiously charged topics like abortion, gay rights, stem cells, or even foreign policy. We're pretty much done at that point, and I can't take you seriously anymore. Can you see where I'm coming from? The inmates are out of the asylum and are running for president, unfortunately they all have a god-complex.