America is in crisis. Your debt is spiraling out of control, and your own citizens have become consumed by deficit, of both the credit card and student loan variety. Many of your social programs, brought to their knees by conservative administrations, are being overtaxed by an increasingly aged population. As the average American begins to comprehend the grim situation, many are feeling desperate and afraid. So, as you can image, this is the kind of climate where religions thrive, and where naive rubes are convinced that the best way to solve everything is by asking help from a magical man in the sky (who happens to be a few thousand years late arriving). This, by the way, is the same dude who promised to come back and behead the majority of people on this planet in the worst bloodbath in human history. Who wouldn’t be excited?

The particular offender today is the new governor of Texas, Rick Perry. Now, the job of governor of the great state of Texas requires that the candidate have an overly developed religious muscle and a severely atrophied brain. Ricky has managed to outdo himself with his latest idea to solve the financial crisis in America: he wants to fill up a stadium full of Christians and have them all pray for the bad news to go away.

America is in crisis: we have been besieged by financial debt, terrorism, and a multitude of natural disasters. As a nation, we must come together and call upon Jesus to guide us through unprecedented struggles, and thank Him for the blessings of freedom we so richly enjoy.” The Texas Governor called on Americans to join him in asking for “God’s forgiveness, wisdom and provision for our state and nation. There is hope for America. It lies in heaven, and we will find it on our knees.

If America’s only hope is to pray to their imaginary friend for their debt to magically disappear, I’ve got some pretty grim news for them. You’re totally fucked. And considering how the average “IQ” of your government officials continues to plummet as your financial debt skyrockets, I’m surprised most of you haven’t just thrown your hands in the air and said “fuck this shit, I’m out of here”. If guys like Perry keep coming up with such brilliant plans to solve your problems, then it’s probably only a matter of time before you do.

Spread the outrage

From the songwriter’s own words:

I wrote a song called GOD SAID after watching Pat Robertson declare that the earthquake in Haiti was because of a curse from God. After hearing A man named Rev Wiley say that he was praying for President Obama’s death during the election (the prayer didn’t work BTW). After hearing people fiddle around with the idea of a curse on Japan after their recent disaster. After hearing about Koran burnings and battles that seem to have peoples interpretations of religious texts at the foundation of them all.

I’m not one of those who claims that religion is the ONLY thing that causes all of the wars and bloodshed, but it has caused many. But not necessarily even the religion but the interpretetation of a few dangerous minds put into the wrong position of power or influence. I figured it was time to have a conversation with extremists like this, and put that kind of thinking in it’s proper perspective.

I’m sure there will be some disagreements. I put some of my more radical ideas in there, and there will probably be some disagreement about a few things here and there. That’s ok with me, I’m all for civil discussion and people having their own ideas. I don’t mean any harm, but they’re my ideas (and the directors- we all pitched in). There will be places to have these discussions, but mostly, I tried to stick to the unifying point, which is anti extremism and fundamentalism. I mean well by it. I encourage THOUGHT, REASON, LOVE, and RESPECT. I hope that comes across at the very least.

It’s a great song with a powerful message. I don’t think we could ask for anything better.

Spread the outrage

A fan of the site sent me this Buddhist exchange that I had to say something about:

Curious Buddhist:

I have an odd question which was raised by a friend, who was asking me questions about Buddhism. They wanted to know how Buddhism deals with the concept of evolution? Are Buddhists creationists? Our teachings don’t seem to deal with such matters and I was rather at a loss as to how to answer them.

Lama Shenpen:

I suppose one would have to say Buddhists are evolutionists in the sense that they do not think God created everything in seven days.

That’s not really a good start. Creationists don’t all believe in that exact nonsense. Some are far more sophisticated in their stupidity.

The Buddhist view is that everything emanates from the Primordial expanse of Openness Clarity Sensitivity and is illusion-like, never really coming into existence but the illusion is created by infinite intricate connections that are not anywhere and not in time.

Wow, the bullshit train is riding hard right now. Am I to believe that the Universe is an expanse of Sensitivity? I would argue that stars exploding in massive gamma ray bursts might not be entirely too sensitive to the feelings of nearby planets.

Time and space are part of the illusion that is emanating from that Primordial expanse – so it’s all very mysterious. From the Buddhist perspective there is no problem with life on earth having evolved somehow – but evolution is not in itself a full story or full account of life on earth – it leaves quite basic questions left unanswered.

Yes, evolution leaves tons of unanswered questions for Buddhists, such as “how did the first human exist if we’re all reincarnated”, and “how can human beings be so fucking gullible”?

In a way one might want to argue Buddhism is closer to creationism because our world is created by awareness – the awareness of the beings that inhabit it – evolution only gives a kind of history of how that illusion unfolds.

They love their whole “illusion” angle, don’t they. It’s a great way to avoid having to explain anything concrete about your stupid belief system. Hey, how do protons and electrons work? It’s all an elaborate illusion, so don’t bother trying to find out!

Buddhist do indeed share much in common with creationists: for starters, they have no desire to discover the natural world, and rely on tradition and superstition to tell them about the Universe. While they smugly assert that all the Cosmos is Maya (or illusion),this impossible to disprove condition is just another example of the nonsense of religion. If they had their way, scientific progress would end as we know it, in favor of mumbling some shitty prayers and believing that justice is handed out by an invisible force.

Isn’t religion great?

Spread the outrage

With all the bad press they’ve been getting recently for harboring child-rapists, continuing their campaign to prevent contraceptive use in AIDS-ridden Africa, and saying generally hateful things about gays, the Vatican is looking for a bit of good news. Their deliverance has taken the form of a disfigured young boy, saved from the clutches of death by medical science and a combative immune system. His parents happened to be Catholics, and the child’s “miraculous” recovery was seen as an opportunity to thank the wrong people for saving their son.

Catholics believe in the ability of dead people to intervene in prayer. Often this is referred to as “intercessory prayer”, a kind of bureaucratic way of talking to God. Because you’re a worthless ant, someone dead but far worthier of God’s love can attempt to compel this capricious entity to be merciful. In the case of Jake Finkbonner (yes, that’s a real last name), this apparently involved him being saved from one of god’s loving flesh eating viruses.

At the trauma unit at Seattle Children’s Hospital, Craig Rubens, a pediatric infectious disease specialist, instantly suspected a flesh-eating bacteria called strep A. It was consuming Jake’s face with terrifying speed.

“It’s like lighting one end of a parchment paper,” he says, “and you just watch it spread from that corner very fast, and you’re stamping it on one side, and it’s flaming up on another.”

Dr. Richard Hopper, chief of plastic surgery at Seattle Children’s, had never seen a case so dire.

“It’s almost as if you could watch it moving in front of your eyes,” he says. “The redness and the swelling — we would mark it and within the hour it would have spread another half-inch.”

While surgeons struggled valiantly to save Jake’s life, his parents busied themselves with superstitious nonsense.

“Donny and I went off to the chapel and just surrendered Jake back to God,” she recalls. “We just said, ‘God, he is yours. Thy will be done, and if it is your will to take him home, then so be it.’ “

Jake is of Native decent, so the local priest instructed his parents to pray through a dead Mohawk nun by the name of Kateri Tekakwitha. Born in 17th century America, Kateria had horrible scars from small pox (brought on by God’s love no doubt), and took an interest in Christianity, fleeing to a convent in Quebec. Her faith took on a masochistic element; she would often perform acts of self mortification such as sleeping on thorns or cutting herself while praying for the salvation of her people. This insane woman, who died at the age of 24, would later become the subject of Leonard Cohen’s second novel, Beautiful Losers.

And guess what? The doctors pull it off, and the kid gets a new lease on life:

Surgeon Richard Hopper says after two weeks and a dozen surgeries, the team of doctors had little hope they could get ahead of the bacteria. And when they realized they did, he says, it was breathtaking.

So where exactly is this fucking miracle, you ask? It seems pretty clear that the surgery worked, and yet purveyors of nonsense are tripping over themselves trying to congratulate a confused and isolated nun who died over 3 centuries ago. Congratulations, guys: you’re all fucking geniuses.

Spread the outrage

A fan of the show sent me this letter:

I recently observed a “lunch-table” debate regarding religion, which I thought had a slightly different twist on morals. The debate quickly heated between a Muslim woman and a Christian man over why hard alcohol cannot be purchased on Sundays. The Muslim women, seeming a lot more level-headed, asked how this was not an affront to the separation of church and state. This was followed by several back-and-forth comments, but one of the comments made by the Christian man really intrigued me and I thought I would see what you thought. In defense of this absurd law, he said that all politicians bring in their own morals that are based on their own world views. He continued that whether you are an atheist, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, or anything else, that you have certain beliefs that make up your worldview. Thus, because these individuals are being elected, means that people want them to govern with their world view. It isn’t about separation of church and state to him because he views it as just another alternative background for moral teaching. I think he was trying to separate laws that are specifically indicative of the religion, like posting the 10 commandments at public buildings, or prayer in school, and those that are more disguised like, no alcohol on Sundays, no gay marriage, no abortions, etc. Not wanting to inject myself into a conversation with several colleagues, I sat back and listened.

Do you have any insights on how to address the Christian man’s assertions, or how to address the moral authority of the religious in general, specifically in a quick, succinct argument?

First of all, I have to fundamentally disagree with the Christian man’s opinion. In most countries, politicians are usually elected because they belong to a specific party, or because their political platform appeals to voters. It’s mostly in America that you find “value voters”, and these are merely religious folks masking their theological ambitions. The rest of us take a much more pragmatic view of politics.

Once they are elected, politicians have a duty to serve the interests of all their electorate, not just the people that voted them in office. Politics is about compromise; the ability to get the best results for the most people. Ideologues are the dangerous ones. The already fragile gears of bureaucracy can quickly come to a grinding halt if people refuse to play ball because of their “convictions”. That’s why your government has effectively stopped functioning. Rather than try and reach a consensus, the portion of american politicians who were voted in based on their “values” continue to undermine the system trying to square off their beliefs with the way politics works. As a way of leading, it’s an unmitigated failure.

If you’re engaged in an argument about religion “as an integral part of morality”, you’ll simple get caught in a different discussion altogether. It’s obvious to anyone with half a brain and a proper education in history that religion has NOTHING to do with morality. If it did, witch burnings, genocides, pogroms, infanticides et all would never have been a problem at all. How many religions can claim to have no blood on their hands? Why have they failed to provide the answer to such a simple question?

The simple fact is that the separation of church and state is the only way that our society can work for the good of more than the people in charge. What is their alternative to secularism? How would they feel if a religious minority dissimilar to them was suddenly in power? I bet you then that they would be much less excited about their “moral views” then…

Spread the outrage

Yesterday i posted a video of Jessica and her fight with Cranston West High School in Rhodes island over a prayer banner she sued to have taken down. I thought she was so brave for doing this that she deserved to have her interview posted up, especially after i noticed that it only received some 30 views so far. Surely we can do better, people!

Spread the outrage

Man, it takes guts to do this kind of thing. I can’t imagine how many of her fellow students are currently jumping down her throat over her objecting to a school prayer banner. It’s kids like this that give me hope for the future!

Spread the outrage

Alabama continues its campaign of stupidity by declaring March 25th a “Day of Prayer of Students Across Alabama”. You might recall that the governor of the state, a man named Robert Bentley, was the man who declared that:

“…anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I’m telling you, you’re not my brother and you’re not my sister, and I want to be your brother”

This is the same state that has introduced, on a number of occasions, a bit of legislation called the “Academic Freedom Bill“, right around the time when this day was officially dedicated to talking to one’s invisible friend. This impressive sounding bill (all terrible bills have great names) was designed to try and introduce creationism in schools, but luckily, the last time they tried in 2009, it died in committee.

“We are very encouraged by the Governor’s proclamation. While we know that many adults will want to have corporate prayer opportunities we know that this is not the real success of this emphasis. The real success of this special day will be in the home. Our hope is that people will start a new habit in their home, community or church of consistently lifting up the needs of today’s students,” said First Priority Greater Birmingham president Greg Davis.

I find it deeply ironic that the government who is working so diligently to make their own children completely ignorant of real science have devoted a day of prayer for them. Why don’t you quit wasting your time with nonsense and actually NOT try and sabotage their education for a change?

Spread the outrage

There are few men with the batting record of Peter Popoff. The man sems to have an innate ability to scam people out of their hard-earned money, and does so without breaking a sweat. He’s been largely free to bamboozle people out of their hard earned money using the best shield against rationality, responsibility and accountability: religion.

He began in the 70′s as a faith healer, racking up millions of dollars by making eerily accurate and dramatic “revelations” about his audiences illnesses, until James Randi exposed him on Johnny Carson in 1986. Turns out Popoff was using a hidden ear-piece and his wife’s rather unprophetic reading of pre-filled prayer cards to make his convincing “miracles” happen. Shortly after, Popoff’s ministry went bankrupt, and he disappeared.

But much like the plague, which lies dormant until our collective immune system is once again primed for infection, Popoff has had a number of resurrections. He first started popping up in Canada in the late 90′s selling holy water he claimed could work miracles (he also said the water came from a magic source near Chernobyl where animals had no diseases).

Apart from selling snake oil, he’s now turned his sights to those in need of debt relief. His latest scam, which he heavily advertises on BET (black entertainment television), is to ask people to make donations, and in exchange promises to ask God to relieve their debt.

When asked to answer critics who say he takes advantage of desperate people, Popoff issued a written response.

“As for religious leaders calling me a fraud, that places me in good company,” Popoff said. “The religious leaders of Christ’s day called him a fake and a demon-possessed fraud. They went so far as to crucify Him. I have no time for my critics, I have a job to do and I’m doing it for God’s glory.”

God’s glory, so far, has netted his ministry roughly 24 million dollars a year, and allowed him to command a salary of more than half a million dollars.

It would be easy to stop this man were it not for the fact that he is part of a whole industry of deceit and unaccountability. Prosperity gospels do very much the same thing he does, and the fact that all of this is considered a form of religious expression means that they aren’t doing anything illegal by lying to people in order to make money. After all, if you prosecuted every single preacher who took money from gullible people in exchange for some improvable supernatural blessing, every single God-pimp would be broke or behind bars.

So long as people continue to believe in absurdities without any critical thought, scumbags like Peter Popoff will enjoy all the luxuries afforded to them by such profound ignorance. You want to make people scam-proof? Start by teaching them enough critical thinking skills to see through the deception of religion. Otherwise, someone like Popoff will always be waiting to pounce on the weak minded and gullible.

Spread the outrage

Religious people are hilarious. How many times have we been accused of being “just another religion”? I imagine just stating this baseless canard must be a way for them to feel comforted by the idea that atheists base their beliefs on the same dogmatic mechanism they use. Unfortunately for them, it’s ludicrously easy to demonstrate just how wrong this idea is.

I fell upon an article this morning claiming that atheism is a religion (it wakes you up better than coffee). I thought it might be fun to pick apart these 8 pathetic arguments one by one, for your reading pleasure. I also suggest reading the comments, as I’m not the only one who’s done this.

1. They have their own worldview. Materialism (the view that the material world is all there is) is the lens through which atheists view the world. Far from being the open-minded, follow-the-evidence-wherever thinkers they claim to be, they interpret all data ONLY within the very narrow worldview of materialism. They are like a guy wearing dark sunglasses who chides all others for thinking the sun is out.

2. They have their own orthodoxy. Orthodoxy is a set of beliefs acceptable to a faith community. Just as there are orthodox Christian beliefs, there is an atheist orthodoxy as well. In brief, it is that EVERYTHING can be explained as the product of unintentional, undirected, purposeless evolution. No truth claim is acceptable if it cannot be subjected to scientific scrutiny.

3. They have their own brand of apostasy. Apostasy is to abandon one’s former religious faith. Antony Flew was for many years one of the world’s most prominent atheists. And then he did the unthinkable: he changed his mind. You can imagine the response of the “open-minded, tolerant” New Atheist movement. Flew was vilified. Richard Dawkins accused Flew of “tergiversation.” It’s a fancy word for apostasy. By their own admission, then, Flew abandoned their “faith.”

4. They have their own prophets: Nietzsche, Russell, Feuerbach, Lenin, Marx.

5. They have their own messiah: He is, of course, Charles Darwin. Darwin – in their view – drove the definitive stake through the heart of theism by providing a comprehensive explanation of life that never needs God as a cause or explanation. Daniel Dennett has even written a book seeking to define religious faith itself as merely an evolutionary development.

6. They have their own preachers and evangelists. And boy, are they “evangelistic.” Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens (Speaking of which, our prayers goes out to Christopher Hitchens in hopes of a speedy recovery for his cancer, we need more time with him Lord) are NOT out to ask that atheism be given respect.

7. They are seeking converts. They are preaching a “gospel” calling for the end of theism.

8. They have faith. That’s right, faith. They would have you believe the opposite. Their writings ridicule faith, condemn faith. Harris’s book is called The End of Faith. But theirs is a faith-based enterprise. The existence of God cannot be proven or disproven. To deny it takes faith. Evolution has no explanation for why our universe is orderly, predictable, measurable. In fact (atheistic) evolutionary theory has no rational explanation for why there is such a thing as rational explanation. There is no accounting for the things they hope you won’t ask: Why do we have self-awareness? What makes us conscious? From what source is there a universal sense of right and wrong? They just take such unexplained things by … faith

.

1. So a world-view constitute a religion now? Religious people “postulate” a world that exists beyond what we can measure. They have the gall to call this imaginary world “supernatural” (as in “above nature). We simply chose to reject a notion that offers nothing in the way of proof. Materialism is simply postulating that everything in the Universe is the result of material interactions. So far, it’s the only explanation that holds any water.

2. If something needs to be subjected to scientific scrutiny, then it’s not orthodoxy. That word is defined as “of, pertaining to, or conforming to the approved form of any doctrine, philosophy, ideology, etc.” By its very definition, Orthodoxy is not open to debate or refinement. All beliefs must conform to previously held dogma. This is the very opposite of the way science work.

3. We’ll admit to being surprised if someone goes from atheism to theist, but that’s mostly because of how utterly rare it is. There’s certainly no punishment for it, and the only thing you lose is respect from fellow intellectuals. Where are the Inquisition and death threats you get from religions?

4. Nietzsche wasn’t an atheist (at least not a self professed one), and if you think Bertrand Russell is a prophet, then I think you’re profoundly confused as to what the word actually means. Prophets conjure messages they claim come from a supernatural entity. Philosophers attempt to use epistemology (the theory of how we know things) when formulating theories. Prophets just make shit up.

5. Charles Darwin, the anointed one who died for your sins, people! No doubt we can agree that evolution destroyed the religious argument for design, but that hardly makes Darwin messianic. The idea of evolution wasn’t new by the time Darwin postulated his theory of descent with modification, and isn’t even a hard one to grasp (if your mind isn’t polluted by religious dogma). We may respect him, but we certainly don’t revere him, or consider him our “Lord”.

6 +7. By this guy’s definition, someone trying to spread the word about vaccines and their benefits is “evangelizing”. We don’t use threats of hellfire, damnation, promise of eternal bliss for conversion, or any other tactic that religions use to try and “convert” people. We simply use reasoned arguments and logic to destroy superstitious notions about the world. What people do with that information is up to them.

8. If it required faith to believe in evolution, then it wouldn’t be science. Science is based on testable hypotheses. If you doubt the validity of the idea, you’re free to research it for yourself. Faith is not about questioning anything; it’s the persistent belief in a dogma DESPITE evidence to the contrary. That’s why whenever you have a conversation with a theist, they’ll fall back on this word as though it means something. “You can’t question my faith”. If an evolutionary biologist ever said that concerning a particular pet theory about some evolutionary process, he’d be laughed at.

While it’s true that we have only conjecture about consciousness and the evolution of morality (though still strongly supported by evolutionary mechanisms), this does not mean that religious ideas are therefor correct. They offer nothing in the way of verifiability, and are therefore invalid. The only recourse for believers is to disregard any competing idea in favor of a rigid persistence to maintain their belief structure. We call this process “faith”

Spread the outrage