…and this is a 
Fun with the godly loons
Category: Godlessness
Posted on: May 8, 2008 8:03 AM, by PZ Myers
Minneapolis's own little broadcaster of inanity, the evangelical radio station KKMS (Remember them? These are the guys who hosted a debate between me and Geoffrey Simmons, and when that didn't go so well, let Simmons debate dead air, where he fared better), is having another wacky program this afternoon at 4pm Central, on "Refuting the Arguments of Atheists."
David Aikman, Broadcast Journalist and Author will offer effective ways Christians can respond to the claims of atheists and why the new atheism is a threat to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Listen in and get refuted! Call in at 651-289-4499 or 888-332-5169 and testify! I'm sure this guy will persuade droves of atheists to let Jesus into their hearts.
Comments
Aikman is of course the author of this book: The Delusion of Disbelief: Why the New Atheism is a Threat to Your Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness
Try parsing that. By being atheists, we are a threat to life? A threat to liberty? A threat to the ability of others to pursue what they think will make them happy? Religious believers are the only ones I know who fit those descriptions.
(Related blog post, if I may.)
Posted by: Daniel | May 8, 2008 8:12 AM
"Refuting the Arguments of Atheists."
Undoubtedly featuring no actual atheists and few, if any, actual atheist arguments.
Just the sound of straw breaking...if they only had a brain.
Posted by: Jason Failes | May 8, 2008 8:19 AM
From: http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/enemy_image/
"The term "out-group" refers to anyone who is not in your own group. "Your group" can be any salient identity group: your nationality, your ethnicity, your race, your religion. In conflicts between groups of people, disputants usually view people outside their own group as less good, or in the case of the opposing group, as really bad. The term "enemy image" refers to the same thing. The opposing group is seen as the "enemy," who is inferior to one's own group in many ways.
For example, the enemy may be seen as stupid, selfish, deceitful, aggressive, hostile, or even evil. This perception remains, even if members of the out-group do nothing more selfish, deceitful, aggressive, or evil than do members of one's own group. However, when they are engaged in a serious conflict, people will normally project their own negative traits onto the other side, ignoring their own shortcomings or misdeeds, while emphasizing the same in the other.
Enemy images also involve "scapegoating." It is common for each side to decide that it is the other side (the "enemy") that is the source of all their problems. If only the enemy could be vanquished or eliminated, then those problems would go away."
As an atheist and a former christian, I am always increasingly alarmed at the language of hatred that disseminates from christians to non-christians. It first caught me off guard when I would have called myself a christian, and its shock was similar to that of a child discovering there are people in the world that will harm him/her.
Posted by: Chad | May 8, 2008 8:25 AM
From that guy's website
I don't know which is sadder, that the guy wrote a book about Bush, or that he thinks that having the book be an Evangelical Christian Bestseller is a good thing.
Posted by: Jan Chan | May 8, 2008 8:27 AM
How good are you at putting on a fake accent PZ?
I can smell the straw(men) from here - and I'm in Australia...
Posted by: Wowbagger | May 8, 2008 8:35 AM
Oh crap. I didn't know I was such an asshole.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | May 8, 2008 8:36 AM
Mr. Myers, have you got a call back from KKMS to do another debate?
Posted by: Corey Schlueter | May 8, 2008 8:53 AM
I don't get it. Does atheism make you a worse driver or more litigious or maybe just make you project sad vibes? Because I'm not picking up on them...
Posted by: wazza | May 8, 2008 8:55 AM
Perhaps the Pharyngulites can do to Amazon reviews what they've been doing to online polls in recent days. Here is the link to Mr. Aikman's latest book (the one that he'll be "discussing" on the radio later today).
http://tinyurl.com/4fduaw
Right now, there are 9 reviews, with the majority being "5-Star". You can read part of the first chapter online, as well as random excerpts from later in the book.
I wonder if the hosts will mention the reviews and ratings from Amazon on the air?
Posted by: Chuck | May 8, 2008 9:09 AM
And the mention of 'Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness' - because all atheists are, of course, unpatriotic and want to destroy your country. Damn their oily hides!
Question: the platypus (and its genome) is getting a lot of attention at the moment - has it ever come up in an argument for ID? I'd be fascinated to know what the ID people have to say about it. Especially those who like to jump up and down about the non-existence of 'weird hybrids' as an argument against evolution.
Posted by: Wowbagger | May 8, 2008 9:10 AM
No, no; he's saying that New Atheism™ is bad for you. Like cigarettes. Being a New Atheist™ is hazardous to your health, apparently. Perhaps the God Delusion should have a government warning label attached. And someone really needs to fund a research project to study the effects of second-hand atheism.
Posted by: MartinM | May 8, 2008 9:14 AM
Building on Post #3,
People should check out Bob Altemeyer's research into the personalities of authoritarian followers. One of their traits is severe "in-group" and "out-group" perceptions. They also can't follow logical arguments and ignore evidence that doesn't fit what their leaders tell them. Sound familiar?
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
There are ways to stop them, which might be useful in the scientific battles in the war against Christian supremacism. At the blog "Orcinus", Sara Robinson has two series about strategies that might help weaken authoritarian movements in the U.S. today.
"Cracks in the Wall" starts here:
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/08/cracks-in-wall-part-i-defining.html
And "Tunnels and Bridges" starts here:
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/08/tunnels-and-bridges-part-i-divide-and.html
The left-hand column has links to all posts in these series.
Posted by: Trefayne | May 8, 2008 9:16 AM
Hmm.. I would like to call in and remind the host that the "new atheists" are not a threat to anything important.
Not a threat to Christianity, not a threat to Christians, not a threat to evangelism, not a threat to anyone's salvation...
Maybe a slight "threat" to the collection plate as some who were attending church from social pressure feel more comfortable about "coming out" with their atheism. But that is nothing to worry about--and having them out of the pews is better for everyone.
Posted by: heddle | May 8, 2008 9:19 AM
Hmmmm... I dunno! They may actually have a point. Whenever I hear faithful morons like Aikman, I feel an increasingly strong urge to just bash his head on the table until he stops spouting brainless crap.
Which makes me think: If we take it as a given that the tolerance limits of Atheists and "the faithful" for the amount of stupid babble to endure before actually resorting to violence is about the same, Atheists may really be more violent.
Simply because the faithful do more of that horribly stupid babbling.
Posted by: Snark7 | May 8, 2008 9:23 AM
Maybe a good question for this guy would be, how does he explain that it is precisely in those countries which have the highest % of non believers such as in the Benelux, Scandinavia, France, Germany, Switzerland where they now account for a majority of the population, that according to neutral observers such as the UN one measures the best scores in terms of life expectancy, quality of life, healthcare, respect of human rights and individual liberties, level of violence...
That is a bit of a headache for his "theory" isn't it ?
Posted by: negentropyeater | May 8, 2008 9:24 AM
"And someone really needs to fund a research project to study the effects of second-hand atheism."
ROFL!
(imaginary documentary narrative)
"Yeah, you know, some of my friends were doing it, and I said, yo, hook me up with some of that atheism you got there man. It was kind of cool at first, y'know, but then when I went to church next Sunday, the reverend just wasn't making any sense anymore. I thought I was trippin'! Then I asked my teacher why the pledge has 'under God' in it, and she asked me if I'd been trying atheism behind my parents' backs, and I looked down and said 'yeah', and how it made me feel good, not believing in scary shit like hell anymore...I tried to quit it, but I just couldn't fit my brain back into that tiny box called Religion anymore. The Reverend told all my church youth group friends to keep way from me, didn't want them suffering the effects of that second hand atheism, like I did..."
Posted by: JJR | May 8, 2008 9:33 AM
Seeing as nothing would make them happier than stoning Jezebels and burning infidels, of course people like us are a threat to their "pursuit of happiness.
I noticed, while Huckabee was still in the GOP race, that fundies use "liberty" as a dog-whistle term, they seem to use the term to mean "submission to the will of god" (never mind that that's precisely what "islam" means). What we would term "liberty" is "licentiousness" to them.
Posted by: Longtime Lurker | May 8, 2008 9:36 AM
Would any other group accept this?
Find/Replace 1, Jews:
"David Aikman, Broadcast Journalist and Author will offer effective ways Christians can respond to the claims of Jews and why Judaism is a threat to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Find/replace 2, African Americans:
"David Aikman, Broadcast Journalist and Author will offer effective ways Christians can respond to the claims of African Americans and why African Americans are a threat to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Posted by: Jason Failes | May 8, 2008 9:47 AM
Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | May 8, 2008 9:50 AM
Sorry for the OT comment, but has anyone noticed that over at UD DaveScot has gone completely off the reservation? Check out his comments on the last few posts he's made--he just about gives away the whole ID store. It will be interesting to see how Dembski and O'Leary deal with this.
Posted by: ds | May 8, 2008 10:08 AM
To negentropyeater (#15), can you cite a source on that? I'm not challenging you or anything, I've been looking for a source for... well, for a while.
Also, I'm in central IL, but I want to listen to this. Or, even better, get a recording of it (on the free, can't be letting them get my money) and save it for the weekend, so I can get rip-roaring drunk and yell at the recording. Anyone have any tips?
Posted by: D | May 8, 2008 10:11 AM
How are the "new atheists" any different than the old ones?
Do they have 20% less fat?
Do they have better fuel efficiency?
Do they come a new set of standard features?
I am starting to think that it is all in the packaging.
Posted by: Tony Popple | May 8, 2008 10:26 AM
#21, I think he may have been referring to this one:
http://moses.creighton.edu/jrs/2005/2005-11.html
Posted by: Helping D | May 8, 2008 10:36 AM
I would discourage people from doing that. I consider it unethical to file a review of a book I haven't even seen, let alone read.
You can mark the various reviews as being helpful or not, with a clear conscience though. Some of the five star reviews look like Christian puff pieces to me, which is probably not helpful.
Posted by: neil h | May 8, 2008 10:43 AM
Yeah, no kidding. Perhaps "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" is simply becoming Dominionist code for "Christian control over all aspects of public and private life." Or maybe it's code for "The imposition of lock-step conformity upon the citizenry by the Christian Elite."
In either case then yes, [New] {A|a}theism is a threat - but so is any non-Christian religion.
Have we arrived at the root of the "problem" yet?
*snicker*
Posted by: Kseniya | May 8, 2008 10:44 AM
Jason Failes @ #18 - You are right on the money...it's ok to say bad things about atheists, just don't question anybody's religion or skin color. Well said.
CL
http://www.coulterlewkowitz.com/
Posted by: CL | May 8, 2008 10:54 AM
Is the new atheism like the old atheism? Has something changed over the past four hundred years or so? I must alert my family if that's the case, we can't stand to be out of the loop.
As for Jesus, whoever he may have been, if he was a real person and not just an allegory, I have no problem at all with the philosophy and in fact, I generally live by most of it.
If the so-called Xtians actually followed the tenets of their moral code, this would be a better place indeed.
I guess it's up to us atheists to be the bastions of morality in a depraved and decaying world, as usual.
Posted by: Caveat | May 8, 2008 10:57 AM
I had always assumed that "New Atheism" referred to the ideas of modern western atheists, like humanism, skepticism, and criticism of religion as being opposed to those qualities. This distinguishes it from communist totalitarians, etc. and from a simple lack of belief in any god.
Posted by: qbsmd | May 8, 2008 11:00 AM
Aw, c'mon, people--don't you read Chick Tracts? We atheists are all planning to throw all Christians into re-education camps and force them to get gay abortions while brainwashing their children to worship our mother goddess, Satan.
Yes, it makes no sense, but in an abstract way, I suspect a lot of them really do think that. Maybe because that's equivalent to what they'd do, or simply because those are the sort of childrens' camp stories they get told.
We are the equivalent of those reptilian aliens from 'V', 'They Live' and David Ickes. We have incomprehensible hidden agendas from their point of view and cannot be trusted.
They run into dissonance if they actually meet one of us, but mostly they just get stories of supposed ex-atheists that reinforce the stories.
Steve "Not even gonna mention projection." James
Posted by: longstreet63 | May 8, 2008 11:03 AM
First, the sentence doesn't cohere.
Second, this shows the value of the "new atheism," which is that it is a new and wonderful "threat" to which they can respond. In a sense, they've already abandoned the idea that atheism per se is a threat, which was a sad little, increasingly transparent, lie. But oh, Dawkins, Hitchens, Myers, they'll bring us the long-prophesied apocalypse. No, really. It's true this time.
Well, it's too boring to get into the specifics, which we didn't get anyhow. Perhaps best of all is the fact that Expelled seems to have been as quietly shelved as possible, because rather than opening up a new avenue of "witnessing," it's simply an issue filled with embarrassing moments and facts that just about everyone on their side, save Mathis & Co., would like to forget.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | May 8, 2008 11:10 AM
Chuck @ #9:
I don't thing crashing the reviews is a good idea, though marking the puff pieces "not helpful" sounds right.
I've also been screwing with the tag system when I wander by the site, adding or promoting tags on religious nuttery like "fraud" "garbage" "mendacious intellectual porn" "creationist lies" "lying for jesus" and "waste of a good tree". A few of the ones promoting the Darwin -> Hitler fraud are tagged "Holocaust denial". Also, practically everything I can find by Ken Ham is now tagged "piglet rapist". :P
The fora there have some deeply delusional creationist idiots.
Posted by: phantomreader42 | May 8, 2008 11:15 AM
Sort of an ominous title. What does Aikman propose to do with people who are a threat to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Herd them into concentration camps?
The rise of the Militant Atheists is directly due to humanoid toads like Falwell, Hagee, Robertson, Dobson, Kennedy who are in fact a threat. They seek to destroy the USA, set up a theocracy, and head on back to the Dark Ages. And says so often. And have made a good start.
Posted by: raven | May 8, 2008 11:33 AM
Aikman is a professor at Patrick Henry College, an Xian school whose motto is "For Christ & For Liberty."
Here's an excerpt from an article on their site about one of his talks on "New Atheism":
As a college student I find the fact that people are wasting their college educations in environments where they get no dissenting or challenging opinions really quite sad....
A PDF file of the speech is here, and they have posted an mp3 of it as well. Just in terms of speaking style, he sounds strangely similar to Francis Urquhart (the Conservative chief whip played by Ian Richardson in the wonderful BBC miniseries House of Cards).
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 8, 2008 11:34 AM
I'm afraid we will all have to give up our atheism, be it new or old: Tom Disch, SF writer extraordinaire, has just revealed that he is God. As he is demonstrably real, rather than an imaginary friend, we should all go and worship him. And spread the Word.
Posted by: DominEditrix | May 8, 2008 11:36 AM
I'm afraid we will all have to give up our atheism, be it new or old: Tom Disch, SF writer extraordinaire, has just revealed that he is God.
But he is gay! How can god be gay? Damn! We need Kenny to show up to straighten this out.
Posted by: Janine ID | May 8, 2008 11:50 AM
Hey, Kenny hasn't been around in a while... maybe he was RAPTURED!
Posted by: Longtime Lurker | May 8, 2008 12:17 PM
Aikman is a professor at Patrick Henry College, an Xian school whose motto is "For Christ & For Liberty."
Etha Williams
This article is three years old but it does a fine job of explaining Patrick Henry College.
All I could think of is the old Subgenius line;"You'll pay to pull the wool over your own eyes."
Posted by: Janine ID | May 8, 2008 12:20 PM
No he isn't. Dan Bern is.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | May 8, 2008 12:31 PM
Ding-it! No one told me where to sign up for a gay abortion.
Posted by: Patricia C. | May 8, 2008 12:33 PM
Glen #30: But don't the more extreme ones (and even some not so extreme) actually want the apocalypse, and the sooner the better? They should actually be thanking us atheists as our growing numbers actually signify the approaching "end days" which means they'll get raptured all the sooner.
I think we should try as much as possible to avoid the kind of "Us and them" scenario that seems to be emerging; we should avoid any antagonism towards them (i.e. don't play their game) and instead try as much as possible to encourage people to think for themselves and stop following the herd of mindless believers. Dawkins's "Out" campaign is the perfect vehicle for this passive stance - the more people that actually do "out" themselves, the less work we have to do settling silly straw man arguments. We have to stop arguing and focus on building bridges instead of walls.
Posted by: Elwood Herring | May 8, 2008 12:39 PM
I liked the Old Atheists so much better. The ones that cowered in their homes and didn't say anything.
Posted by: Rey Fox | May 8, 2008 1:22 PM
"David Aikman, Broadcast Journalist and Author will offer effective ways Christians can respond to the claims of atheists"
Well, looking at the biography on his Web page (here), I don't see what credentials he has that would allow him to refute atheistic claims--that is unless we're claiming that Russian & French language/history and apes evolved from common ancestry. Are we claiming that? I didn't get my copy of "Beelzebub's Evolution Quarterly" last month. I think the Bushies have ordered evangelicals to infiltrate the Post Office and snuff out all periodicals except "Creation Research Society Quarterly". Yep, they've got a magazine. Here are the bullets at the top of their Web page...
* Published continuously since 1964
* Peer-reviewed by degreed scientists
* World-wide circulation
* Scholarly articles representing the major scientific disciplines
* Fresh perspectives on science and society as impacted by origins
* Emphasis on scientific evidence supporting: intelligent design, a recent creation, and a catastrophic worldwide flood
And the stupid just keeps on coming...
Posted by: SiMPel MYnd | May 8, 2008 1:24 PM
These people insist that I should grovel before their omnipotent monarch and do whatever he orders, then turn around and tell me that they are the ones who are in favor of democracy and freedom. Idiots.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip | May 8, 2008 1:32 PM
#33, how does he resolve the notion of "freedom of religion" with the first commandment "have no other gods before me"? Also how does he justify the links between Christianity and democracy when 1) democracy does not appear in the bible 2) no Christian nations before the US were democracies?
Posted by: Alverant | May 8, 2008 1:54 PM
Seems to be emerging? Heh.
Well, I agree. Just about all the rest - alarmist talk of concentration camps and re-education centers, of putting christians/atheists to death, of psychopathology, of threats to life and liberty, are little more than provocative distractions - and what sorts of responses do provocations usually elicit?
What's needed is a sea change, a paradigm shift, away from superstition and towards rationality. That kind of thing can't be forced, any more than anyone can force Russia, China, Iran or Iraq directly from totalitarianism into some form of western-style democracy. What forces, other than education and time, can bring about such sweeping, profound changes?
What's so discouraging and troubling here in the USA is that we seem to be moving in the wrong direction.
Posted by: Kseniya | May 8, 2008 2:11 PM
D #21,
well, there are many ways to look at it, but I think the easiest way to refute the claim that atheism is a threat to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", using real data is to point to the fact that most of the top 10 countries according to the Human Development Index (Iceland, Norway, Australia, Canada, Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan, Netherlands, France) also happen to be amongst the ones with the highest percentage of non believers (Sweden, Norway, Japan, France, Netherlands above 40% Canada, Switzerland, Australia, Iceland above 25% Ireland being the exception for the time being).
Sources :
Human Development Index
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
List of non believing countries
http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html
NB : I'm not trying to demonstrate causation here (Atheism causes a better life, happiness, etc...), just refute a claim (Atheism is a threat to life, liberty,...), so these counter examples are largely sufficient.
Posted by: negentropyeater | May 8, 2008 2:49 PM
#33 Etha Williams,
You just keep hitting on all cylinders. I see a Molly in your immediate future.
This bit was very enlightening (if set about twenty years ago):
Posted by: Sili | May 8, 2008 3:07 PM
>new atheism is a threat to life, liberty and the pursuit
>of happiness.
I think they mean militant atheism like what you have in this forum and I agree. A regular atheist that is not millitant I don't have a problem with.
I don't think there is just one form of atheism, but at least two of them. I think one is okay to believe and the other more dangerous. The dangerous kind is being pushed by this blog/forum.
Posted by: Kenny | May 8, 2008 3:14 PM
@#48 Kenny --
Oh, Kenny. What dangerous, militant things are we doing? Crashing polls, expressing strong opinions, making fun of wacky superstitions, supporting separation of church and state...yes, I can see how these are very, very dangerous things indeed.
If we only all believed in an ancient book that promises eternal torment to unbelievers. The world would be such a better place!
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 8, 2008 3:24 PM
Don't know why, but I took the time (time I'll never get back) to look at some of his articles published in Christianity Today. Here's just one.
What vapid bullshit.
I mean, it would be nice if he had something to say against atheism, rather than just all the hand-waving crap...
Posted by: Bob | May 8, 2008 3:29 PM
Being a teacher at Patrick Henry College can't have helped his counter-atheist tactics. His students have all signed the Statement of Faith, so he wouldn't come up against serious opposition in class.
Posted by: SmartLX | May 8, 2008 3:33 PM
By militant, Kenny means those atheists who actually talk about atheism and publicly identify as such. They use... sarcasm. They know all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor, bathos, puns, parody, litotes and... satire. They're vicious.
Posted by: Rey Fox | May 8, 2008 3:34 PM
What are the okay atheists like? Can you describe them to us?
Posted by: windy | May 8, 2008 3:39 PM
@#50 Bob --
I particularly like the opening sentence:
Putting aside the bizarre capitalization of "the" after the colon, the silly use of geographical imagery here seems to be inspired by the writing style of Buck Cameron, the Greatest Investigative Reporter of All Time in the Left Behind series:
Posted by: Etha Williams | May 8, 2008 3:40 PM
I noticed, while Huckabee was still in the GOP race, that fundies use "liberty" as a dog-whistle term, they seem to use the term to mean "submission to the will of god"...
"Family life, family values, decent normal family fun, family shopping, family leisure. The word is used these days as the word 'Aryan' was used in Germany in the 1930s. Anything that isn't family is unfamily, and anything that is unfamily is unrepresentative of the joyful majority."
-- Stephen Fry, 1993
Posted by: Julie Stahlhut | May 8, 2008 3:47 PM
>Hey, Kenny hasn't been around in a while... maybe he was
>RAPTURED!
I haven't been raptured yet. Have you been trying to learn to do something for others besides yourself yet? After all we all know that the only people that atheists help are themselves. They are great critical thinkers on what is wrong with everyone else, but they are worthless as far as trying to help others out.
Posted by: Kenny | May 8, 2008 3:52 PM
Will some one please tell me:
Where do they have democracy in the bible?
Where do they have capitalism in the bible?
And how did democracy and capitalism get to be so entangled with christianity?
thank you kindly
Posted by: Britomart | May 8, 2008 3:54 PM
God helps those that help themselves.
Posted by: windy | May 8, 2008 4:02 PM
re: They use... sarcasm.
Just dropping in to admit that I'm one of the "new" (militant) atheists out to destroy life, liberty and happiness for Xians. Why I even have an EVOLVE fish on my car and I wrinkle my nose when I drive past the neighborhood churches with the stupid sayings on their signs (ala: God answers knee mail). So there Xians! Read my fish and die. And if my scrunched up visage when I drive by your church doesn't totally destroy you, I don't know what will. Gosh, I'm so dangerous.
Eat well, stay fit, Die Anyway.
Posted by: Die Anyway | May 8, 2008 4:06 PM
>Oh, Kenny. What dangerous, militant things are we doing?
>Crashing polls, expressing strong opinions, making fun of
>wacky superstitions, supporting separation of church and
>state...yes, I can see how these are very, very dangerous
>things indeed.
This is where it all starts. For example we have kids who are atheists who burn down churches and synagogues. The violence has to start somewhere. Making fun of Jews is how The Holocaust started. You only have to look to history to understand how things like this progress.
What is going to happen is that there are people who are not strong Christians who will stop saying that homosexuality is a sin because they don't want to get treated unfairly and the ones that do think it is a sin will be mocked at first and then put to jail for their hate crimes and then later on put to death.
So, what you see as harmless is not harmless at all. It all starts simple and easy and then it gets into real discrimination against people who are religious.
>If we only all believed in an ancient book that promises
>eternal torment to unbelievers. The world would be such a
>better place!
Well it is what it is. It is your choice and you have made that choice. That choice you have made is between you and the God you don't WANT to exist. Well what you don't want doesn't matter. He is real just like you are real.
Everything you do in life either good or bad is being recorded. We have had people that have come back from being dead and told us this. It is being recorded as proof to back up your judgement so that everyone can see (besides God) and you will see how you treated people and how they felt when you hurt them. I don't care if you can't handle the truth, it is what it is.
That is also not just for you but me too. Everything in my life is also being recorded. I always don't do whats right, but I ask forgiveness from Christ.
Posted by: Kenny | May 8, 2008 4:09 PM
I haven't been raptured yet.
maybe you just need some assistance?
hmm, I think i ran across an article about how to martyr yourself for your faith a while back...
Posted by: Ichthyic | May 8, 2008 4:11 PM
This is where it all starts.
no, Kenny, THIS is where it all "starts":
http://home.earthlink.net/~tjneal/goering.jpg
sound familiar?
Posted by: Ichthyic | May 8, 2008 4:12 PM
Everything in my life is also being recorded
damn that Bush and his illegal wiretapping!
Posted by: Ichthyic | May 8, 2008 4:13 PM
Thanks Kseniya, you put it better than I could.
I said "seem to be emerging" as I have no real first-hand experience of any of this. I've never visited the U.S.; my point of view is based on the antagonism that occurs on the Internet and blogs such as this one. The situation may well be a lot worse than I perceive it - and that's bad enough.
I try to look at the big picture - take a "Hari Seldon psychohistory" approach and attempt to figure out where all this is leading. I summed up my opinions on the Skepchick blog a while ago - if I can find it I'll post a link here.
Posted by: Elwood Herring | May 8, 2008 4:14 PM
And how did democracy and capitalism get to be so entangled with christianity?
google Leo Strauss.
Posted by: Ichthyic | May 8, 2008 4:15 PM
I think they mean militant atheism like what you have in this forum and I agree.
btw, Kenny, just because we make fun of you, it doesn't mean we care what you think.
Posted by: Ichthyic | May 8, 2008 4:18 PM
why the new atheism is a threat to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
i thought it was the "Liberals" who were the threat to life, etc.
oh, i get it, next month:
Liberal=Atheist
so to complete the final chain:
Liberal=Atheist=Scientist=Darwin=Hitler
whee!
Posted by: Ichthyic | May 8, 2008 4:21 PM
>By militant, Kenny means those atheists who actually talk
>about atheism and publicly identify as such.
No, it is a little more stronger than that. I mean look at the blog for example. I mean the disrespect of anyone who does not believe in the way you do. The persecution of Christians from the militant atheists in academia. The burning of churches from people who are atheists.
That is just right now. It's going to get a lot worse.
Matthew 10:22 (This is Jesus talking here)
"And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
Posted by: Kenny | May 8, 2008 4:24 PM
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 8, 2008 4:24 PM
Well, Madelyn Murray O'Hair was an okay atheist, because she got what she deserved. But Dawkins and Hitchens stubbornly refuse to be murdered, so they're mean.
[/bad taste]
Posted by: stogoe | May 8, 2008 4:27 PM
No, wait, don't bother. You're just making shit up again for Jeebus.
Posted by: stogoe | May 8, 2008 4:33 PM
Elwood #64, that sounds interesting. Please post or post link.
There goes Kenny, with the "atheists are selfish" and "atheists want to put us to death" nonsense.
Kenny, again with expressing the bizarre fatal persecution complex - are you embarrassed yet? You should be.
Where's my rubber hammer? I have a point to make.
Hey, Kenny, I am related to some agnostics who are going to the Gulf Coast this summer, for the third straight year, to help rebuild a town that was devastated by Katrina three years ago. Remember Katrina?
No?
"We" all "know" that Xians like you talk the talk but don't walk the walk.
What's that? You don't like my blanket generalization? THEN STOP MAKING THEM YOURSELF.
Sheesh.
Posted by: Kseniya | May 8, 2008 4:37 PM
It's a slippery slope, people. From "making fun of" straight to Zyklon B, do not pass Go, do not collect 200 deutschmarks. We cannot let the wedge of the homosexual agenda be inserted any further into our beloved national asscrack! That way lies death...think of the Kinder!!
People have died and seen Santa Claus? Hey, how big are those elves, really?
Kenny, do me a favor and google up a couple of specific examples for me please? I'm pretty busy over here making fun of believers and designing gas chambers.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 8, 2008 4:37 PM
I mean the disrespect of anyone who does not believe in the way you do.
nope.
just disrespect of the blatantly stupid and dishonest.
Scott Hatfield
http://monkeytrials.blogspot.com/
is a xian we respect (in fact, he has a Molly here)
Ken Miller is a xian we respect.
you, regardless of what religion you claim for yourself, are not respected.
that you can't seem to figure out why is both humorous and tragic, which of course makes for great comedy.
Posted by: Ichthyic | May 8, 2008 4:39 PM
>Yes, yes...these are things we all know. Wait, Kenny, is
>that true of the okay atheists too? And selfish
>Christians? Where do they fit into your ingenious scheme?
Yes, there are Christians who can be selfish as well. However, if you actually look outside and look at this country and third world countries a lot of Christians are doing work by sending money or even going further than that they are helping get food, water, shelter, and education for people who need it. There are many Christian organizations that do this.
Like I said, I have not see many atheists do anything other than pat their own back and really what good do they do for human kind other than try to get rid of the "ignorance they call religion".
If dawkins or the author of this blog never were born, really how would people's lives have changed for the negative? I am sure people will respond and say well they changed my life because they got me out of the church, but really where you ever even with the church to begin with? Is it so bad?
I don't see most atheists helping humankind at all. In fact, I think they are a negative on people. They talk a lot of garbage but what good do they do?
Sorry guys but I have my doubts about atheists.
Posted by: Kenny | May 8, 2008 4:40 PM
Where's my rubber hammer? I have a point to make.
best you could do is dull the point on top of his head.
"How many lumps do you want, kenny?"
(OK, that might be an obscure Looney Tunes reference)
Posted by: Ichthyic | May 8, 2008 4:41 PM
People have died and seen Santa Claus? Hey, how big are those elves, really?
They look like PYGMIES + DWARFS!!!
Posted by: DwarfPygmy | May 8, 2008 4:41 PM
Kenny @60:
References?
Posted by: cicely | May 8, 2008 4:43 PM
but really where you ever even with the church to begin with? Is it so bad?
yes, it is. Especially for folks like you, Kenny.
it wasn't so bad for us.
we left, remember?
which either means we weren't exposed to the kind of cult programming you were, or else were smart enough to figure it out before it was too late.
It's sad watching you play the good little cult member.
but funny.
Posted by: Ichthyic | May 8, 2008 4:46 PM
Building on/replying to posts #3 and #13,
<