Pharyngula

Posted by: Rebecca Watson | July 11, 2008 12:24 PM

I'M EATING JESUS RIGHT NOW

Posted by: Rebecca Watson | July 11, 2008 12:26 PM

I'd just like to apologize for my previous comment. I called my local church and they explained that Chex Mix does NOT count as Jesus. So, never mind.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 12:28 PM

Andrew Sullivan's remark copied here, since, unless I am mistaken, he doesn't allow comments on his blog:

It is one thing to engage in free, if disrespectful, debate. It is another to repeatedly assault and ridicule and abuse something that is deeply sacred to a great many people. Calling the Holy Eucharist a "goddamned cracker" isn't about free speech; it's really about some baseline civility. Myers' rant is the rant of an anti-Catholic bigot. And atheists and agnostics can be bigots too.

Engaging loudly and publicly in the victimless crime of blaspheme is not bigotry, it's a responsibility. Andrew Sullivan conveniently avoids explaining how ridiculing the beliefs and the icons of all religions makes one a bigot towards those who practice a specific religion. I suspect trawling through Sullivan's posts over the last few years would make it much easier to make the case that Sullivan is an anti-Muslim bigot, but I haven't got the stomach for it.

Posted by: IasonOuabache | July 11, 2008 12:31 PM

Has anyone pointed out that it's just a fuckin' cracker yet? I think we need to keep that in mind.

Posted by: David_James | July 11, 2008 12:32 PM

For what it's worth, here's what I sent off to President Bruininks this morning. (I started off saying I'd be brief and then waffled on for a bit so I lost points on that I'm afraid.

"Dear President Bruininks,

I'll keep this brief and to the point as I'm sure you currently have more than enough verbose mail to deal with: I have just learned that there is a campaign underway to oust Professor Myers from his position at the university. I am appalled that he should be so ill-treated and I am very keen to add my name to the list of people that I'm sure will have rushed to come out in his support.

I find I can hardly overstate the value that Pharyngula has to me and to a great many other people as well. I read the article that has so offended the Catholic community, when it was first posted, and found it to be typically intelligent, amusing and well observed and am utterly horrified at the idea that the Professor could be harmed in any way as a result of it.

Professor Myers is a great ambassador for your institution and you should be deeply proud to count him among your staff. He does you great credit. Please do not allow this backlash to erode our precious values of freedom of speech and freedom of thought. I fear greatly for a world that punishes its stars for shining too brightly and I fear greatly for a world that fights against open and honest discussion. That is the path to intellectual and moral bankruptcy and a nightmarish future.

Thank you for your time. I trust this message is just one among a very many in strong support of Professor Myers. It's a great shame that something so noble should result in such unnecessary difficulty but I hope that it is as obvious to you as it is to me that the person responsible for this problem is not the Professor.

Yours Faithfully,

David (last name deleted)"

Posted by: Civil to Others | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM

Good morning President Bruininks -

PZ Meyers, an associate professor on the Morris campus, has recently inflamed Catholics with his most recent, curse filled, hateful blog entry criticism of their religion, practices, and beliefs. He has come under attack from many Catholics for this recent posting on his blog Pharyngula, and he has posted your email address so regular readers like myself can email you our opinions of his activities.

His hope is that supporters will flood your email with well reasoned defenses of his writings and activities. I write to share that I find his approach to criticism to embody everything that is wrong and divisive about supposed intellectual superiority. I'm quite certain you've been alerted to the profane, attacking nature of his blog entries in the past. Rather than open up lines of discussion for parties who disagree to engage one another respectfully, he coarsely targets groups and individuals for attack and rallies like minded posters to dehumanize those with different views and practices in the most vile writing style possible.

As a professor for the University of MN, one would expect a higher degree of tolerance from Professor Meyers for groups to which he does not belong and clearly does not understand. My wife both attended the University of MN Morris and worked in your office for a few years in your last assignment prior to taking the Presidency of the University. Her view of campus policy is that such behavior from a student, group, or professor would never be tolerated if it targeted minority groups. Professor Myers tends to target majority groups, and it seems that his constant, malicious attacks go unchecked and unaddressed. Surely a man of such hate and bitterness does not compartmentalize these views and feelings when he enters a classroom or has interaction with students. Is this representative of the open-minded pursuit-of-truth-and-conflicting-ideas environment that the University wishes to cultivate?

All the Best
Darren Libscomb

Posted by: paximperium | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM

Save the Body of Christ from the Cannibals!!

Posted by: Jonathan Rothwell | July 11, 2008 12:34 PM

I have just returned from the Post Office after sending a letter of support for PZ. Via air mail, after waiting thirty-five minutes in a queue whilst I was both boiling hot and missing Deal or No Deal.

This fact alone, that the letter has been halfway around the world (from the UK to USA), means the President should take everything I say in that letter to be the word of God. (No pun intended.)

To PZ, I advise you to hand the death threats to the police. Also, there probably really are people who now think you're more evil than Hitler, so my other piece of advice is to take care for your own safety.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 12:35 PM

Has anyone pointed out that it's just a fuckin' cracker yet? I think we need to keep that in mind.

No, it's the magic flesh of a supernatural being, sliced wafer-thin, and if you don't eat it, you don't get to go to heaven.

Oh, and if you take it but don't eat it, you're kidnapping Jesus and we'll have to hurt you.

Posted by: Devin Rambo | July 11, 2008 12:36 PM

Let's get this straight. For years, Catholic priests around the world molest little boys, and all we hear from Big Bad Bill is the sound of crickets chirping.

But sneak a host out of Mass and it's akin to seeing the world's rivers flow with blood.

Catholics believe that the host, once consecrated, is literally the flesh of Christ. So yeah, OK, I can see why some of them might find it offensive that someone would refer to the host as a "cracker."

But to call it a hate crime? To try and deny that person a living because of what they said on their own blog?

The Catholic League is offended. Fine. Duly noted. But by living in a society where we revere freedom of speech, being offended is one of the chances you take. The hyperventilating throngs at The Catholic League need to get the hell over it.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 12:38 PM

BobC #3

"Anyone who believes there's a magical sky fairy hiding in the clouds has got to have something very wrong with him."

It's a bit of an over simplification to think that god hides in the clouds. You see, god is full of much more trickeriness that that. He exists everywhere but can't be seen. He can make anything happen he wants to, even make us blind to him but not his works. He can even make it seem that everything has a Natural explanation and the need to explain things in human terms using mystery and magic is insane.

Therefore, god exists.

/sarcasm

Posted by: cm | July 11, 2008 12:40 PM

Done. I even through in the fact of my own Catholicism for good measure.

Posted by: Wing Nut | July 11, 2008 12:40 PM

Wow, FOUR threads? And two topping 1000? That's incredible, man!

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbCHimp | July 11, 2008 12:41 PM

No, it's the magic flesh of a supernatural being, sliced wafer-thin, and if you don't eat it, you don't get to go to heaven.

ah ha!

So it's like Jesus Carpaccio!

Damn, I love me a well prepared carpaccio. This one comes with a squeeze of fresh sacrilege.

Mmmmmmmmmmm

sacrilege.

Posted by: kmurray | July 11, 2008 12:41 PM

Andrew Sullivan gets a little over excited at times, but I believe he is one of the good guys. Sadly, his online debate with Sam Harris showed him to be incapable of recognizing the irrationality of faith and the danger it poses to the modern world.

As an openly gay republican, he has known some measure of persecution, so it is dissappointing that his own tolerance will not extend to atheists exercising their freedom of speech. Oh well, I'm sure that some of his best friends are atheists.

Posted by: Devin Rambo | July 11, 2008 12:42 PM

Ack. The response page I got said the site was busy and to resubmit. My apologies for the repeated posts.

Posted by: Diana Powe | July 11, 2008 12:43 PM

Here's my email to the president of the university. I hope it helps.

Dear President Bruininks;

I'm writing in absolute support of Dr. Myers not because I share his views regarding religion, but because I believe in the First Amendment to the Constitution and the principle of academic freedom. He is an important voice against the malign efforts of those who want to inject religious dogma into the teaching of biological science under the guise of "intelligent design". Even if I am right and he is wrong regarding the nature of a Communion wafer after it has been consecrated, I feel quite confident that the creator of the universe doesn't need any defense from screaming hate-mongers claiming the name of the Church as their authority.

Sincerely,

Diana Powe
Beaverton, Oregon

Posted by: tsg | July 11, 2008 12:46 PM

Yet more missing the point...

I guess pluralism means its ok to be pluralistic as long as everyone agrees with me. I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?

Nothing. It's the insistence that everyone also hold it sacred because you do that is the problem.

obviously, death threats are way out of line from the defenders of Donohue's position,

Keep in mind it is the death threats and attempts to force their view on others that this action is in response to.

but I also think asking folks to palm and steal something others consider sacred to be over the line.

Strange sense of priorities. Not eating a cracker given to you (not stolen) is an inappropriate response to death threats. Really.

Posted by: FW | July 11, 2008 12:47 PM

(A possibly stupid question - I haven't read every post in the previous threads:)

Aren't all these many letters to the President of the university a bit of an overreaction?

I mean, shouldn't we expect the university to dismiss Donohue's silly complaint any way??

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 12:49 PM

Christ died for your sins.
Christ died for your sins.
Christ died for your sins.
Christ died for your sins.

After 9 years of Catholic grammar school (including kindergarten) I will never get that out of my mind. Imagine having the same five words drilled into you several times a day for 9 years. It's child abuse and that's why I think nuns are assholes.

Posted by: Civil to Others | July 11, 2008 12:50 PM

"I think he understands those groups very well."

Apparently not or he would have written about how this onslaught was about to come his way when he did his first posting. PZ clearly does not understand how important the host is to Catholics. PZ toys with intellectual concepts and ideas while Catholics build their entire lives and identities around their religion and traditions. The idea that they would react strongly to his hateful words attacking one of the very cornerstones of their faith is completely predictable. One can criticize without insulting - if one is not PZ Myers that is. He opened this can of whupass on himself.

Posted by: jj | July 11, 2008 12:52 PM

@12
"professor would never be tolerated if it targeted minority groups. Professor Myers tends to target majority groups"
What? Minorities? Catholics... I think it's fair to say that PZ "targets" (I don't think he's targeting anyone, actually) irrational people, not minorities.

Posted by: Mark | July 11, 2008 12:53 PM

My apologies to Alexander Pope and real poets elsewhere:

When dire Offence from an Abused Triscuit springs,
And unleashes Bill Donohue's bellicose whinges,
This Verse--in support of Myers--is due,
This ev'n the Cath'lic League may vouchsafe to view.
Slight is the Subject, but not so the Storm that breweth,
For the Case of the Maligned Wafer has brought threats of death.
At such absurdity, Paul Myers raises his voice in protest thus:
"Should theft of one give such offense, then steal
one thousand, that we learn what they would do to us!"
This brings us to the point at present,
Wherein Bill Donohue demands both Discipline and Punishment.
I say instead that Paul Myers is well within his Right
To criticize and mock th' ignorant hypocrisy within his sight.
'Tis the legacy of th' Enlightenment and an assuredly Secular Democracy:
That Free Discussion and Open Debate safeguard a Free Society.
Ideas and customs should not be held Unquestionably Virtuous
Simply for being th' Opinions of Mobs Religious.
Sic semper tyrannis, Slavery, Creationism, Discrimination,
Thus also the Complaint of Donohue must be selected for Elimination.

This was sent by overland mail this morning to President Bruininks, Dr. Myers, and Dr. Donohue.

Posted by: ElJay | July 11, 2008 12:53 PM

If these crazy catholics are so certain that one cracker is somehow different after their magic ceremony, why don't we ask them to pick out the fleshy one from a pile of them?
Double blind tested of course.

Posted by: IsThatLatin | July 11, 2008 12:54 PM

Here is the main body of my letter, which I will be popping in the post in a moment. My boyfriend, an English prof, will also be penning a letter regarding academic free speech. Cheers to you, PZ:

I am writing on behalf of Professor P. Z. Myers regarding this Eucharist incident. I am an atheist and the fact is that Myers is a much-loved and well-respected member of our community. Many of us feel invisible, ignored, and downright hated. Lately, we've been gathering a little steam in the area of activism--sometimes it's writing letters, supporting lobbyists on our behalf, or it comes in the form of lawsuits--as we beg for, haggle for, and demand our equal and civil rights as American citizens. The activism takes other forms as well, forms well documented in any social movement for change. While Myers's suggestion to desecrate a Communion wafer might seem college-prankish, the fact is that it fits in with a number of attention getting stunts for respectable causes. All sorts of activists perform various antics to demand rights for blacks, women, gays, etc. This isn't anything new and whether one agrees with its effectiveness, it's a tactic I fully support so long as no one is hurt. This, I'm afraid, doesn't include the hurting of one's feelings.

Considering the tremendous amount of prejudice and general disdain coming from the Catholic community directed towards atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers, this threat to desecrate what we all know is basically a cracker (there is no need to test these wafers following the blessing that supposedly transforms them into the magical flesh of their consumer's Lord and Savior...it's a flaky, crispy cracker), the idea that what Myers did is beyond the pale is laughable. He may have incited the ire of one large group, but he's also gained even more respect and support from another, the secular community. We don't all agree, but mine is a voice that is absolutely raised in support. Please don't allow your University to be bullied by the likes of the Catholic League's Bill Donohue. Yes, he's loud, insistent, and becomes rabidly red-in-the-face at the slightest hint criticism, but he remains a bully and only that.

We without faith take a lot of flack and have few out there with enough courage and intellect to defend us, whereas most major religions have armies. Please consider Myers a much-needed representative of a movement in desperate need of change and do what you can to ensure his position (in light of demands for his removal) and his safety (in light of the death threats he's received).

Posted by: rd | July 11, 2008 12:57 PM

How much could you get for the body of christ on e-bay? We should kidnap several this weekend and put up for sale next week. Although, it would be hard to prove that had been blessed by a priest instead of just taking them out of box. I'm sure the catholic church has "Essence" detectors for these types of emergencies.

Posted by: I'm joining your Crusade | July 11, 2008 12:58 PM

I should have been here all along. I'm an atheist, my parents were both raised devout Roman Catholic and left the church as soon as they reached adulthood. They raised me as a free thinker, although in an extended family of three generations comprising roughly 24 others, the three of us are the only three apostates. I'm the only unababashed, unapologetic, and unrepentant atheist. (it's funny to think they call me unrepentent...who would an atheist repent to?)

And my cousin Mary (there is at least one Mary in three generations of our family, and in my town it dominates over other first names for women at least 1 in six) came to call on me. I said I felt like the red-headed bastard stepchild because I was the only atheist. Well then somehow she starts asking me why...

...so I answered...

and the memorable moment came when Mary, with that perennial smile on her face because she knows God or the virgin mother or Jesus or the Pope - I really don't understand who they worship - had her back: "Do you really think that scientists know why the sun stays up in ths sky?"

Now - where do you go from there but apart?

And I told her that I think the Catholic faith is a joke, but then I don't go run to a Catholic church when I need answers; She on the other hand thinks science is a joke, but has somehow accepted that it's still OK to drive around in cars, have electricity in her house, talk on a cell phone, and go to a doctor and receive modern medical treatments when she gets sick. "G"od apparently has little difficulty with hypocrisy, in fact his faithful seem to be silently commanded to be immune from criticism for it.

I think we need to start being as militant as they like to label us - if anyone religious really thinks that science is a fraud and scientists are evil, then we can watch them stand in the public square and dutifully disavow all articles in their posession that required a scientist, an engineer, or any other satanic free thinker to make or support it.

I mean all I have to do is look at the book of Leviticus to imimediately cry shenanigans on the Bible - there are two dozen or more situations where a faithful believer is supposed to run to a priest to be washed if they are caught doing. And despite all that washing, there's not a single chemical formula or even a family recipe for soap anywhere in the new or old testament. We had to wait until the eighteenth century until Louis Pasteur formulated the germ theory of disease, and we had to wait until almost another hundred years until Joseph Lister came up with the first primitive but relatively effective soap that made any of that washing do any good.

I'm tired of tolerating people who have no tolerance for us - that's bad enough. Although I'm grateful that people like you and me are no longer burned at the stake, I still don't think it's tolerable that these hypcrites had to create the United States of America in order to have freedom of religion, only to struggle all the while to deny freedom of thought to anyone who wasn't religious in the same way they were.

I want my own blog. Screw that, I want my own radio show. In ten minutes I will make Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage and Ann Coulter look like Mr Rogers meets Dr. Phil. Enough with the hypocrisy already. If they really think the Bible has all the answers, then leave them out in the desert with no clothes on, a Bible and a quart of water and let them show us where all those answers are.

/rant

Thank you for allowing me this forum. I'll wait on your gracious provision of a microphone so that I can get started making a living being this indignant.

Posted by: gdlchmst | July 11, 2008 1:04 PM

"I think we need to start being as militant as they like to label us - if anyone religious really thinks that science is a fraud and scientists are evil, then we can watch them stand in the public square and dutifully disavow all articles in their posession that required a scientist, an engineer, or any other satanic free thinker to make or support it."

Well said.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 1:05 PM

So, trying to educate brainwashed idiots is now called "targeting a minority?"

Clearly, the author of post #12 is unblemished by numeracy.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:06 PM

....you toucha my wahfur -- I KILL YOU DEAD!!!

Posted by: Alex

I'm gonna cutcha.

I'm gonna cutcha so bad, you're gonna wish I didn't cutcha so bad.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:07 PM

"Are you threatening me?"
- Beavis

Posted by: JoJo | July 11, 2008 1:08 PM

It's a bit of an over simplification to think that god hides in the clouds. You see, god is full of much more trickeriness that that. He exists everywhere but can't be seen.

When I was a little boy I knew that Jesus lived in our bathroom. Every morning my father would beat on the bathroom door and yell "Christ, are you still in there?"

Posted by: AndyD | July 11, 2008 1:09 PM

A diamond is just a rock. Short of its practical uses in engineering etc, its value is largely a matter of misguided stupidity and tradition. It's just a rock.

Just throwing it out there.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:10 PM

"How can someone not believe in evolution and still get vaccinations?"

If they can rationalize sending death threats because someone thinks a cracker is only a cracker, then it's easy.

Posted by: Son of Strom | July 11, 2008 1:11 PM

I'm reminded of George Carlin's line: God is the all-powerful, all-knowing Supreme Being who created everything in the universe, and if you don't do what he wants he'll torture you for eternity. Why? Because he loves you!

Posted by: infidel57 | July 11, 2008 1:12 PM

"Catholics believe that the host, once consecrated, is literally the flesh of Christ."

So, it would seem that this could be proven or unproven with a simple DNA test on the wafer, once consecrated.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2008 1:12 PM

@43:

One can criticize without insulting

Ok, let's give that a go:

The notion that a particular cracker, when spoken to by a man dressed in flowing robes, physically becomes the flesh of another man who, if he existed at all, died almost 2000 years ago, is so ridiculous as to be almost beyond words. Those who believe this to be true are deluded, in the same way that people who believe that Elvis is alive are deluded. Moreover, the notion that removing a cracker, which has been freely given, from a certain building and doing whatever one wants with that cracker, is deserving of death threats, is more than ridiculous; it is batshit crazy stupid, not to mention scary and blatantly illegal.

Posted by: Damian | July 11, 2008 1:13 PM

#12 is basically deception from start to finish.

But then, anyone who can't tell the difference between threats to a persons life and lively-hood, and the criticism of ideas, is hardly likely to be morally grounded, are they?

Posted by: gdlchmst | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM

"Impossible. They can't give back their vaccinations."

We'll let that one slide. But they won't be getting any of our universal health care.

Posted by: sex_target | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM

@ alex-

Good point. I guess we shouldn't expect rational behavior out of these folks.

Funny thing is, I don't think they are a majority. In my little bubble of people, it seems like there are a lot more religious but not really folks- they claim it, say they are in that group, but don't really follow it (ie, still fuck people they aren't married to and generally act like a normal person). This confuses me b/c I always thought that if I really believed this bullshit, wouldn't I follow the rules if the end result could be my eternal salvation?

Posted by: Kristine | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM

I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?

Isn't that what started this in the first place - a student "holding" something "sacred"?

In the meantime, one of the honest priests has written a book about how the molestations in the church could have happened and what should still be done to prevent them, and they've come down hard on him, too. Well, I guess I see what these uptight Catholics hold as not sacred - i.e., people.

I'd rather desecrate symbols, thank you.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:16 PM

So, it would seem that this could be proven or unproven with a simple DNA test on the wafer, once consecrated.

Posted by: infidel57

It would be a fun test, wouldn't it? Imagine the looks on their faces to learn that Jesus has the DNA of dried instant pancake batter.

Posted by: Boosterz | July 11, 2008 1:18 PM

"PZ toys with intellectual concepts and ideas while Catholics build their entire lives and identities around their religion and traditions."

If someone wants to build their life around a belief in a magic cracker then that's THEIR fucking problem. They can kindly leave us sane people the fuck out of their delusion.

Posted by: sex_target | July 11, 2008 1:19 PM

@72-

But I'm sure they'd use the old "science can't be used to disprove the supernatural" or some bullshit on you which would both satisfy their stupid beliefs and contradict all their other ones.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:20 PM

#75

"What I notice about the Christian fundies is just how thin-skinned and insecure they are."

"There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Almost inevitably some part of him is aware that they are myths and that he believes them only because they are comforting. But he dare not face this thought! Moreover, since he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not real, he becomes furious when they are disputed." [Bertrand Russell, "Human Society in Ethics and Politics"]

Posted by: tsg | July 11, 2008 1:23 PM

A diamond is just a rock. Short of its practical uses in engineering etc, its value is largely a matter of misguided stupidity and tradition. It's just a rock.

Just throwing it out there.

I completely agree. And if it weren't for the fact that so many other people value it, it wouldn't be worth anything to me either. Just like gold, or rare stamps, or baseball cards, (and money, for that matter) or any number of other things that are "valuable". Value is purely subjective. But just because a large number of people value a particular object doesn't mean I should also.

If, given a diamond, I wouldn't throw it away because somebody else will give me money for it. But I won't spend my money on one.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:25 PM

...you toucha my dymon - I KILL YOU DEAD!!

Posted by: Rob | July 11, 2008 1:26 PM

Alex,

I have always found that people argue articulately when they are right and get angry when they are wrong or caught in a lie they don't want to admit.

I think these Catholics "doth protest too much" because they know their position is ridiculous.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:28 PM

Alright Starbuck. Let's have a shootout. I'll rely on science and engineering to build my gun. You offer some incantations to your deity to deliver from the heavens your gun. Let's see who has a gun.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 11, 2008 1:30 PM

For cryin' out loud, with all this hate, why don't you start a war against Christians and get it over with!

Whats that? You don't believe in violence? BS!

Whats that? You believe in freedom of religion? Ya.. BS

Whats that? You don't believe in the right to bear arms?
Well, if you are going to keep this crap up, you might want to rethink this one. Most Christians believe in the right to bear arms, and if you removed it from the constitution, that won't change their minds one bit. And most Christians are armed. So, when do you want to start a war against Christians?

That hate coming from you is the same as from the Christians.

So, start a war against the Christians.

I bet you don't have the guts!

Starbuck, '

You're not the brightest bulb on the tree are you?

How do you get from being an atheist critical of idiot religious people's actions to being against the right to bear arms? I'm sure some here are but I personally own firearms.

Difference is I don't threaten people with violence. You on the other hand have no problems waving it around.

Your rants show so little thought or ability to reason they are laughable.

Really Starbuck.

WE ARE LAUGHING AT YOU

Posted by: jj | July 11, 2008 1:32 PM

I want to see the number on how many times the word "batshit" comes up on PZ's blogs. Oh, and asshat too!

Posted by: Brian Gygi | July 11, 2008 1:33 PM

I sent an email to the Chancellor of the University and a snail mail to the university. Best of luck.

And to Bill: if you truly ARE a Ph.D. student, you should know a false analogy when you see (or produce) one. You can surely whip up a fake diploma, and while most people would not accept it (or find it slightly ridiculous) NO ONE would threaten your livelihood or send death threats over it. If you used it fradulently to obtain a job you did not deserve you would run afoul of the law, but that's it. Your analogy has NO relation to the matter at hand and I certainly hope your thesis is a lot more cogently reasoned than your tirade against Dr. Myers (but I'm not holding out any hope).

Posted by: blowme | July 11, 2008 1:34 PM

ent, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal

* Latest Posts
* Archives
* About
* Dungeon
* Blogroll
* Commenters
* RSS
* Contact

Search this blog

Profile

pzm_profile_pic.jpg
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
zf_pharyngula.jpg ...and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
tbbadge.gif
scarlet_A.png
I support Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
Random Quote
(Complete listing)

The universe doesn't much care if you tread on a butterfly. There are plenty more butterflies. Gods might note the fall of a sparrow but they don't make any effort to catch them.

(Terry Pratchett, Lords and Ladies)
Recent Posts

* Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* Friday Cephalopod: Foreplay
* Quaker cannons in a digital age
* Another off-the-wall argument against evolution
* KPFT interview
* Any TAM6 attendees here?
* Fight back against Bill Donohue!
* Fresh crackers!
* Tangled Bank #109
* Now I've got Bill Donohue's attention

A Taste of Pharyngula
(Complete listing)

A brief overview of Hox genes

The Cambrian as an evolutionary exemplar

Regulatory evolution of the Hox1 gene

Tentacle sex

I think I despise anti-environmentalists as much as I do anti-evolutionists

Generating right-left asymmetries

Cats, candy, and evolution

Pycnogonid tagmosis and echoes of the Cambrian
Recent Comments

* sjfish on Another off-the-wall argument against evolution
* scooter on KPFT interview
* Rev. BigDumbChimp on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* Greg on KPFT interview
* Ediacaran, FCD, Delta Pi Gamma on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* Alex on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* aiabx on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* Rob on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* Heathen Matt on Fresh crackers!
* Brownian, OM on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into

Archives

* July 2008
* June 2008
* May 2008
* April 2008
* March 2008
* February 2008
* January 2008
* December 2007
* November 2007
* October 2007
* September 2007
* August 2007
* July 2007
* June 2007
* May 2007
* April 2007
* March 2007
* February 2007
* January 2007
* December 2006
* November 2006
* October 2006
* September 2006
* August 2006
* July 2006
* June 2006
* May 2006
* April 2006
* March 2006
* February 2006
* January 2006

Blogroll
(Complete listing)
Other Information
koufax.jpg
2005 Koufax Award
Best Expert

wabs.jpg
2006 Weblogs Award

Subscribe via Email

Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.

Sign me up!

« Friday Cephalopod: Foreplay | Main
Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into

Category: Administrative
Posted on: July 11, 2008 12:16 PM, by PZ Myers

Aaargh, you keep filling up threads! I'm closing this one, you can continue the discussion here, if necessary.

ShareThis

Comments
#1

As promised, I just hand-delivered my letter to Pres. Bruininks' office. Text follows:

-------------------------

Dear President Bruininks,

I have read with great interest the story of University of Minnesota, Morris Professor P.Z. Myers being criticized by the Catholic League for his 'threats' against an inanimate disk of carbohydrates. The sheer audacity of the Catholic League to try and force the University of Minnesota to censor or censure a respected educator and researcher for comments made on a non-University website is astounding.

I trust that the University will do the right thing and not bow to the demands of the extremist ideology perpetrated by the Catholic League. In addition, I hope that the link to Dr. Myers webpage is restored to the UMM biology webpage, joining the scores of other faculty and students at universities across the country who have links to their personal websites from their departmental pages.

Sincerely,

Dr. Asad [last name]

Posted by: asad | July 11, 2008 12:23 PM
#2

I'M EATING JESUS RIGHT NOW

Posted by: Rebecca Watson | July 11, 2008 12:24 PM
#3

I was writing this on the other thread at the same time the thread was being closed.

Bill said "I'm not a religious whacko" "I do attend church"

Bill, sorry, but if you attend church, then you are a religious wacko, no matter how moderate you might think you are. Anyone who believes there's a magical sky fairy hiding in the clouds has got to have something very wrong with him.

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 12:26 PM
#4

I'd just like to apologize for my previous comment. I called my local church and they explained that Chex Mix does NOT count as Jesus. So, never mind.

Posted by: Rebecca Watson | July 11, 2008 12:26 PM
#5

What's to discuss? Catholics have finally demonstrated that they're no less unhinged than the Danish cartoon-hating Muslims.

Perhaps we'll live to see the day when an actor is accused of supporting terrorism because they wore a piece of clothing resembling a monk's robe on an advertisement.

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 11, 2008 12:27 PM
#6

Andrew Sullivan's remark copied here, since, unless I am mistaken, he doesn't allow comments on his blog:

It is one thing to engage in free, if disrespectful, debate. It is another to repeatedly assault and ridicule and abuse something that is deeply sacred to a great many people. Calling the Holy Eucharist a "goddamned cracker" isn't about free speech; it's really about some baseline civility. Myers' rant is the rant of an anti-Catholic bigot. And atheists and agnostics can be bigots too.

Engaging loudly and publicly in the victimless crime of blaspheme is not bigotry, it's a responsibility. Andrew Sullivan conveniently avoids explaining how ridiculing the beliefs and the icons of all religions makes one a bigot towards those who practice a specific religion. I suspect trawling through Sullivan's posts over the last few years would make it much easier to make the case that Sullivan is an anti-Muslim bigot, but I haven't got the stomach for it.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 12:28 PM
#7

"I hope that the link to Dr. Myers webpage is restored to the UMM biology webpage"

Me too and I requested that in my email.

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 12:30 PM
#8

Has anyone pointed out that it's just a fuckin' cracker yet? I think we need to keep that in mind.

Posted by: IasonOuabache | July 11, 2008 12:31 PM
#9

Let's get this straight. For years, Catholic priests around the world molest little boys, and all we hear from Big Bad Bill is the sound of crickets chirping.

But sneak a host out of Mass and it's akin to seeing the world's rivers flow with blood.

Catholics believe that the host, once consecrated, is literally the flesh of Christ. So yeah, OK, I can see why some of them might find it offensive that someone would refer to the host as a "cracker."

But to call it a hate crime? To try and deny that person a living because of what they said on their own blog?

The Catholic League is offended. Fine. Duly noted. But by living in a society where we revere freedom of speech, being offended is one of the chances you take. The hyperventilating throngs at The Catholic League need to get the hell over it.

Posted by: Devin Rambo | July 11, 2008 12:32 PM
#10

For what it's worth, here's what I sent off to President Bruininks this morning. (I started off saying I'd be brief and then waffled on for a bit so I lost points on that I'm afraid.

"Dear President Bruininks,

I'll keep this brief and to the point as I'm sure you currently have more than enough verbose mail to deal with: I have just learned that there is a campaign underway to oust Professor Myers from his position at the university. I am appalled that he should be so ill-treated and I am very keen to add my name to the list of people that I'm sure will have rushed to come out in his support.

I find I can hardly overstate the value that Pharyngula has to me and to a great many other people as well. I read the article that has so offended the Catholic community, when it was first posted, and found it to be typically intelligent, amusing and well observed and am utterly horrified at the idea that the Professor could be harmed in any way as a result of it.

Professor Myers is a great ambassador for your institution and you should be deeply proud to count him among your staff. He does you great credit. Please do not allow this backlash to erode our precious values of freedom of speech and freedom of thought. I fear greatly for a world that punishes its stars for shining too brightly and I fear greatly for a world that fights against open and honest discussion. That is the path to intellectual and moral bankruptcy and a nightmarish future.

Thank you for your time. I trust this message is just one among a very many in strong support of Professor Myers. It's a great shame that something so noble should result in such unnecessary difficulty but I hope that it is as obvious to you as it is to me that the person responsible for this problem is not the Professor.

Yours Faithfully,

David (last name deleted)"

Posted by: David_James | July 11, 2008 12:32 PM
#11

"Transubstantiated crackers." Great idea for the name of a new rock group.

Posted by: dale | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM
#12

Good morning President Bruininks -

PZ Meyers, an associate professor on the Morris campus, has recently inflamed Catholics with his most recent, curse filled, hateful blog entry criticism of their religion, practices, and beliefs. He has come under attack from many Catholics for this recent posting on his blog Pharyngula, and he has posted your email address so regular readers like myself can email you our opinions of his activities.

His hope is that supporters will flood your email with well reasoned defenses of his writings and activities. I write to share that I find his approach to criticism to embody everything that is wrong and divisive about supposed intellectual superiority. I'm quite certain you've been alerted to the profane, attacking nature of his blog entries in the past. Rather than open up lines of discussion for parties who disagree to engage one another respectfully, he coarsely targets groups and individuals for attack and rallies like minded posters to dehumanize those with different views and practices in the most vile writing style possible.

As a professor for the University of MN, one would expect a higher degree of tolerance from Professor Meyers for groups to which he does not belong and clearly does not understand. My wife both attended the University of MN Morris and worked in your office for a few years in your last assignment prior to taking the Presidency of the University. Her view of campus policy is that such behavior from a student, group, or professor would never be tolerated if it targeted minority groups. Professor Myers tends to target majority groups, and it seems that his constant, malicious attacks go unchecked and unaddressed. Surely a man of such hate and bitterness does not compartmentalize these views and feelings when he enters a classroom or has interaction with students. Is this representative of the open-minded pursuit-of-truth-and-conflicting-ideas environment that the University wishes to cultivate?

All the Best
Darren Libscomb

Posted by: Civil to Others | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM
#13

and you all think your are more enlightened?

I guess pluralism means its ok to be pluralistic as long as everyone agrees with me. I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?

obviously, death threats are way out of line from the defenders of Donohue's position, but I also think asking folks to palm and steal something others consider sacred to be over the line. you want to search for problems to solve, go ahead hold churches (and educational institutions) accountable for abuse, hold them accountable for wanting to start wars, but its stupid to go picking a fight over a cracker. Gee whiz, it was only a cracker wasn't PZ? why did the original guy want to take one to begin with? why do you all want to start a collection? Someone wanting to partake of something they consider a sacrament does no harm to you.

Posted by: randy | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM
#14

Save the Body of Christ from the Cannibals!!

Posted by: paximperium | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM
#15

Let's get this straight. For years, Catholic priests around the world molest little boys, and all we hear from Big Bad Bill is the sound of crickets chirping.

But sneak a host out of Mass and it's akin to seeing the world's rivers flow with blood.

Catholics believe that the host, once consecrated, is literally the flesh of Christ. So yeah, OK, I can see why some of them might find it offensive that someone would refer to the host as a "cracker."

But to call it a hate crime? To try and deny that person a living because of what they said on their own blog?

The Catholic League is offended. Fine. Duly noted. But by living in a society where we revere freedom of speech, being offended is one of the chances you take. The hyperventilating throngs at The Catholic League need to get the hell over it.

Posted by: Devin Rambo | July 11, 2008 12:34 PM
#16

I have just returned from the Post Office after sending a letter of support for PZ. Via air mail, after waiting thirty-five minutes in a queue whilst I was both boiling hot and missing Deal or No Deal.

This fact alone, that the letter has been halfway around the world (from the UK to USA), means the President should take everything I say in that letter to be the word of God. (No pun intended.)

To PZ, I advise you to hand the death threats to the police. Also, there probably really are people who now think you're more evil than Hitler, so my other piece of advice is to take care for your own safety.

Posted by: Jonathan Rothwell | July 11, 2008 12:34 PM
#17

"What's to discuss? Catholics have finally demonstrated that they're no less unhinged than the Danish cartoon-hating Muslims."

No less unhinged, just a little less murderous.

Posted by: gdlchmst | July 11, 2008 12:34 PM
#18

Has anyone pointed out that it's just a fuckin' cracker yet? I think we need to keep that in mind.

No, it's the magic flesh of a supernatural being, sliced wafer-thin, and if you don't eat it, you don't get to go to heaven.

Oh, and if you take it but don't eat it, you're kidnapping Jesus and we'll have to hurt you.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 12:35 PM
#19

Jesus Christ is not a Cracker.

Fer heaven's sake, don't you know, Jesus is a Cheetoh!

Dave

Posted by: Dave Thomas | July 11, 2008 12:35 PM
#20

Let's get this straight. For years, Catholic priests around the world molest little boys, and all we hear from Big Bad Bill is the sound of crickets chirping.

But sneak a host out of Mass and it's akin to seeing the world's rivers flow with blood.

Catholics believe that the host, once consecrated, is literally the flesh of Christ. So yeah, OK, I can see why some of them might find it offensive that someone would refer to the host as a "cracker."

But to call it a hate crime? To try and deny that person a living because of what they said on their own blog?

The Catholic League is offended. Fine. Duly noted. But by living in a society where we revere freedom of speech, being offended is one of the chances you take. The hyperventilating throngs at The Catholic League need to get the hell over it.

Posted by: Devin Rambo | July 11, 2008 12:36 PM
#21

"I guess pluralism means its ok to be pluralistic as long as everyone agrees with me. I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?"

Nothing, until they start making death threats against those who do not shared their belief in what is sacred. And nothing until they start demanding respect for their irrational views. Once those things start happening there is a problem. And look, ... those things have been happening.

Guess there is a problem.

Posted by: Matt Penfold | July 11, 2008 12:38 PM
#22

BobC #3

"Anyone who believes there's a magical sky fairy hiding in the clouds has got to have something very wrong with him."

It's a bit of an over simplification to think that god hides in the clouds. You see, god is full of much more trickeriness that that. He exists everywhere but can't be seen. He can make anything happen he wants to, even make us blind to him but not his works. He can even make it seem that everything has a Natural explanation and the need to explain things in human terms using mystery and magic is insane.

Therefore, god exists.

/sarcasm

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 12:38 PM
#23

I sent a letter too, along the lines of Glenn Davison's, that I think the host desecration threat is a bad idea, but that PZ has a right to do it and shouldn't be penalized by the university.
That said, I hope this thing blows over soon -- the kid who kicked this whole thing off was a douchebag for stealing the cracker, the (very few) Catholics who issued death threats were exponentially bigger douchebags, and this whole thing seems to be on the edge of exploding into a supernova of gratuitous asshattery.
(Yes, it's just a cracker, but it's a cracker that some people find very important, and the cracker-worshipers were doing their thing in a church service where the cracker-stealer didn't have to be, so there was no point in taking the damn thing except to piss a bunch of people off)
I look forward to reading more scientific and pro-reason posts, which is why I love this blog in the first place.

Posted by: vespera | July 11, 2008 12:39 PM
#24

Done. I even through in the fact of my own Catholicism for good measure.

Posted by: cm | July 11, 2008 12:40 PM
#25

"As a professor for the University of MN, one would expect a higher degree of tolerance from Professor Meyers for groups to which he does not belong and clearly does not understand."

I think he understands those groups very well. They're all morons and a large number of them are terrorists. Why don't you criticize the death threats for a cracker instead of complaining about free speech?

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 12:40 PM
#26

Wow, FOUR threads? And two topping 1000? That's incredible, man!

Posted by: Wing Nut | July 11, 2008 12:40 PM
#27

its stupid to go picking a fight over a cracker. Gee whiz, it was only a cracker wasn't PZ?

Tell that to the thugs who tried to strongarm the cracker away from the kid who claimed he wanted to show one to his guest back at his pew. Tell that to Bill Donahue and those who have sent multiple death threats to PZ Myers.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 12:41 PM
#28

No, it's the magic flesh of a supernatural being, sliced wafer-thin, and if you don't eat it, you don't get to go to heaven.

ah ha!

So it's like Jesus Carpaccio!

Damn, I love me a well prepared carpaccio. This one comes with a squeeze of fresh sacrilege.

Mmmmmmmmmmm

sacrilege.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbCHimp | July 11, 2008 12:41 PM
#29

"I guess pluralism means its ok to be pluralistic as long as everyone agrees with me."

Who said I wanted pluralism? Don't put words in my mouth.

"I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?"

Everything if the belief is superstitious.

"Someone wanting to partake of something they consider a sacrament does no harm to you."

They do if they demand that I hold that something sacred too.

Posted by: gdlchmst | July 11, 2008 12:41 PM
#30

Andrew Sullivan gets a little over excited at times, but I believe he is one of the good guys. Sadly, his online debate with Sam Harris showed him to be incapable of recognizing the irrationality of faith and the danger it poses to the modern world.

As an openly gay republican, he has known some measure of persecution, so it is dissappointing that his own tolerance will not extend to atheists exercising their freedom of speech. Oh well, I'm sure that some of his best friends are atheists.

Posted by: kmurray | July 11, 2008 12:41 PM
#31

PZ, have you heard anything from President Bruininks yet?

Posted by: bigjohn756 | July 11, 2008 12:42 PM
#32

Ack. The response page I got said the site was busy and to resubmit. My apologies for the repeated posts.

Posted by: Devin Rambo | July 11, 2008 12:42 PM
#33

The Catholic League is offended. Fine. Duly noted. But by living in a society where we revere freedom of speech, being offended is one of the chances you take. The hyperventilating throngs at The Catholic League need to get the hell over it.

Yep. As has been said many times, you do not have the right to not be offended.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 11, 2008 12:42 PM
#34

Here's my email to the president of the university. I hope it helps.

Dear President Bruininks;

I'm writing in absolute support of Dr. Myers not because I share his views regarding religion, but because I believe in the First Amendment to the Constitution and the principle of academic freedom. He is an important voice against the malign efforts of those who want to inject religious dogma into the teaching of biological science under the guise of "intelligent design". Even if I am right and he is wrong regarding the nature of a Communion wafer after it has been consecrated, I feel quite confident that the creator of the universe doesn't need any defense from screaming hate-mongers claiming the name of the Church as their authority.

Sincerely,

Diana Powe
Beaverton, Oregon

Posted by: Diana Powe | July 11, 2008 12:43 PM
#35

3rd Page, wow, PZ, you sure know to incite a [virtual] riot! Congrats!
PS - I email President Bruininks, for ya' hope the support helps! (even though it's probably needed)

Posted by: jj | July 11, 2008 12:45 PM
#36

Yet more missing the point...

I guess pluralism means its ok to be pluralistic as long as everyone agrees with me. I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?

Nothing. It's the insistence that everyone also hold it sacred because you do that is the problem.

obviously, death threats are way out of line from the defenders of Donohue's position,

Keep in mind it is the death threats and attempts to force their view on others that this action is in response to.

but I also think asking folks to palm and steal something others consider sacred to be over the line.

Strange sense of priorities. Not eating a cracker given to you (not stolen) is an inappropriate response to death threats. Really.

Posted by: tsg | July 11, 2008 12:46 PM
#37

John Lewandowski:

Look, I would not have been in favor of desecrating the Eucharist. I can't say that it would have bothered me greatly, but that is a consequence of an inability to understand how anybody can believe that a wafer/cracker turns in to the body of Christ, and I say that with absolute sincerity. That is, I think, part of the problem. It is so far removed from anything that I am familiar with that I cannot, as hard as I try, understand its importance.

However, I do not believe that PZ would have gone through with it, although I could of course be wrong. Just reading that original post made it clear to me how angry PZ was that the Webster Cook had been treated so appallingly. The death threats were no doubt from a very small minority, but I visited several Catholic sites where people were advertising the young man's email address and expressing some pretty vile opinions. This obviously cannot be applied to any more Catholics than I saw with my own eyes, but it is not terribly unreasonable to factor up based on a few hundred comments, if only to gauge a feeling.

In some ways, PZ has given you all a terrific excuse to gloss over the appalling behavior of more than a few Catholics, though I can't say that I am sorry for either his emotional reaction, or his wish to force people to confront what is surely the reality of the wafer not being, in any way shape or form, the body of Christ. Sometimes it takes a provocative act to shock people in to change. And by change, I would be happy if it simply reduced the sheer zealotry that I witnessed on those blogs, to be honest.

Lest we not forget, and as far as I am aware, no Catholics have been threatened with death over this incident, and it I have noticed a definite attempt to shift the moral burden from threats of serious harm, both bodily and professionally, to the casual threat of "desecration".

It would have been appropriate if more than the handful of Catholics that have visited this site had expressed concern, first and foremost, for the threats to the lives of two innocent individuals. That it hasn't been case is rather telling, in my opinion.

Posted by: Damian | July 11, 2008 12:46 PM
#38

(A possibly stupid question - I haven't read every post in the previous threads:)

Aren't all these many letters to the President of the university a bit of an overreaction?

I mean, shouldn't we expect the university to dismiss Donohue's silly complaint any way??

Posted by: FW | July 11, 2008 12:47 PM
#39

Don't forget. The "Catholic League" is just one loud, annoying person with a fax machine: Bill Donohue.

Posted by: Jake | July 11, 2008 12:49 PM
#40

Christ died for your sins.
Christ died for your sins.
Christ died for your sins.
Christ died for your sins.

After 9 years of Catholic grammar school (including kindergarten) I will never get that out of my mind. Imagine having the same five words drilled into you several times a day for 9 years. It's child abuse and that's why I think nuns are assholes.

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 12:49 PM
#41

I can see it now...

"You've got your Jesus in my peanut butter!"
"You've got your peanut butter on my Jesus!"

And, the Catholic response:
"I'll cut your face like a Tijuana whore!"

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 12:50 PM
#42

@ #23
the kid who kicked this whole thing off was a douchebag for stealing the cracker

Seriously? From one of the articles about all this:

"When I received the Eucharist, my intention was to bring it back to my seat to show him," Cook said. "I took about three steps from the woman distributing the Eucharist and someone grabbed the inside of my elbow and blocked the path in front of me. At that point I put it in my mouth so they'd leave me alone and I went back to my seat and I removed it from my mouth."

A church leader was watching, confronted Cook and tried to recover the sacred bread. Cook said she crossed the line and that's why he brought it home with him.

"She came up behind me, grabbed my wrist with her right hand, with her left hand grabbed my fingers and was trying to pry them open to get the Eucharist out of my hand," Cook said, adding she wouldn't immediately take her hands off him despite several requests.

Doesn't sound to me like he's such a douchebag. If the church hadn't freaked the fuck out over everything he would have gone back to his seat, shown his visiting friend what the cracker was, eaten the thing, and this all could have been avoided.

PZ's not the only person here who needs defending. The church attacked Cook before PZ ever said a thing.

Posted by: unicow | July 11, 2008 12:50 PM
#43

"I think he understands those groups very well."

Apparently not or he would have written about how this onslaught was about to come his way when he did his first posting. PZ clearly does not understand how important the host is to Catholics. PZ toys with intellectual concepts and ideas while Catholics build their entire lives and identities around their religion and traditions. The idea that they would react strongly to his hateful words attacking one of the very cornerstones of their faith is completely predictable. One can criticize without insulting - if one is not PZ Myers that is. He opened this can of whupass on himself.

Posted by: Civil to Others | July 11, 2008 12:50 PM
#44

@12
"professor would never be tolerated if it targeted minority groups. Professor Myers tends to target majority groups"
What? Minorities? Catholics... I think it's fair to say that PZ "targets" (I don't think he's targeting anyone, actually) irrational people, not minorities.

Posted by: jj | July 11, 2008 12:52 PM
#45

I'm amazed that how this issue has got so way out of hand in the US. I don't think this would have happened to the same degree in most other Catholic countries. If you don't believe me, in my URL there's a clip from the Mexican film "El crimen del Padre Amaro", (about 3:30 into the clip) which depicts an old woman spiriting the communion wafer away and then later giving it to her cat to eat. And although clearly cheeky in for a film from a majority Catholic county, it generated none of the fuss this has. This seem all down the rabble-rousers like Bill Donoghue, who seem more akin to evangelicals than Catholics in my country.

Posted by: Michael James | July 11, 2008 12:52 PM
#46

My apologies to Alexander Pope and real poets elsewhere:

When dire Offence from an Abused Triscuit springs,
And unleashes Bill Donohue's bellicose whinges,
This Verse--in support of Myers--is due,
This ev'n the Cath'lic League may vouchsafe to view.
Slight is the Subject, but not so the Storm that breweth,
For the Case of the Maligned Wafer has brought threats of death.
At such absurdity, Paul Myers raises his voice in protest thus:
"Should theft of one give such offense, then steal
one thousand, that we learn what they would do to us!"
This brings us to the point at present,
Wherein Bill Donohue demands both Discipline and Punishment.
I say instead that Paul Myers is well within his Right
To criticize and mock th' ignorant hypocrisy within his sight.
'Tis the legacy of th' Enlightenment and an assuredly Secular Democracy:
That Free Discussion and Open Debate safeguard a Free Society.
Ideas and customs should not be held Unquestionably Virtuous
Simply for being th' Opinions of Mobs Religious.
Sic semper tyrannis, Slavery, Creationism, Discrimination,
Thus also the Complaint of Donohue must be selected for Elimination.

This was sent by overland mail this morning to President Bruininks, Dr. Myers, and Dr. Donohue.

Posted by: Mark | July 11, 2008 12:53 PM
#47

I'm sure an Internet pole can settle this issue!

Posted by: Alexander Treseder | July 11, 2008 12:53 PM
#48

If these crazy catholics are so certain that one cracker is somehow different after their magic ceremony, why don't we ask them to pick out the fleshy one from a pile of them?
Double blind tested of course.

Posted by: ElJay | July 11, 2008 12:53 PM
#49

Pssssst.. Darren of #12...
1. That wasn't short.
2. The name is Myers instead of Meyers.
3. "dehumanize" is used when you describe a human being as being less than human. As an inferior creature whose existence is a waste and whose death is encouraged. The Nazi's did that for example in their treatment of anyone who was against them.
What Myers has done, is not an act of dehumanization: he simply attacks ideas and does not, in any way, call for violence against people who have other ideas. He uses arguments instead of violence, unlike various of those who disagree with him.
4. You have never seen Myers teach, so how can you tell he is a bad teacher? According to you though, he is so filled with hatred that he cannot control himself... Do I sense the first desire to dehumanize him there?
5. How nice to mention to the President that your wife worked there. I think such a thing is either "sucking up" or, from the way the letter continues, an argument from authority (with your wife being the source of authority in this case). You honestly think that that is doing your argument any good?
6. And a "vile writing style?" Oh, come on! Myers is an angel is his posts compared to the average user, and is definately more articulate than most creationists, whose arguments he despises for a very good reason.

Anyway, congratulations with your letter. Despite how its polite tone, it is still failing in every way possible.

Posted by: Arno | July 11, 2008 12:53 PM
#50

Here is the main body of my letter, which I will be popping in the post in a moment. My boyfriend, an English prof, will also be penning a letter regarding academic free speech. Cheers to you, PZ:

I am writing on behalf of Professor P. Z. Myers regarding this Eucharist incident. I am an atheist and the fact is that Myers is a much-loved and well-respected member of our community. Many of us feel invisible, ignored, and downright hated. Lately, we've been gathering a little steam in the area of activism--sometimes it's writing letters, supporting lobbyists on our behalf, or it comes in the form of lawsuits--as we beg for, haggle for, and demand our equal and civil rights as American citizens. The activism takes other forms as well, forms well documented in any social movement for change. While Myers's suggestion to desecrate a Communion wafer might seem college-prankish, the fact is that it fits in with a number of attention getting stunts for respectable causes. All sorts of activists perform various antics to demand rights for blacks, women, gays, etc. This isn't anything new and whether one agrees with its effectiveness, it's a tactic I fully support so long as no one is hurt. This, I'm afraid, doesn't include the hurting of one's feelings.

Considering the tremendous amount of prejudice and general disdain coming from the Catholic community directed towards atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers, this threat to desecrate what we all know is basically a cracker (there is no need to test these wafers following the blessing that supposedly transforms them into the magical flesh of their consumer's Lord and Savior...it's a flaky, crispy cracker), the idea that what Myers did is beyond the pale is laughable. He may have incited the ire of one large group, but he's also gained even more respect and support from another, the secular community. We don't all agree, but mine is a voice that is absolutely raised in support. Please don't allow your University to be bullied by the likes of the Catholic League's Bill Donohue. Yes, he's loud, insistent, and becomes rabidly red-in-the-face at the slightest hint criticism, but he remains a bully and only that.

We without faith take a lot of flack and have few out there with enough courage and intellect to defend us, whereas most major religions have armies. Please consider Myers a much-needed representative of a movement in desperate need of change and do what you can to ensure his position (in light of demands for his removal) and his safety (in light of the death threats he's received).

Posted by: IsThatLatin | July 11, 2008 12:54 PM
#51

....you toucha my wahfur -- I KILL YOU DEAD!!!

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 12:56 PM
#52

How much could you get for the body of christ on e-bay? We should kidnap several this weekend and put up for sale next week. Although, it would be hard to prove that had been blessed by a priest instead of just taking them out of box. I'm sure the catholic church has "Essence" detectors for these types of emergencies.

Posted by: rd | July 11, 2008 12:57 PM
#53

"I'm amazed that how this issue has got so way out of hand in the US. I don't think this would have happened to the same degree in most other Catholic countries. If you don't believe me, in my URL there's a clip from the Mexican film "El crimen del Padre Amaro", (about 3:30 into the clip) which depicts an old woman spiriting the communion wafer away and then later giving it to her cat to eat. And although clearly cheeky in for a film from a majority Catholic county, it generated none of the fuss this has. This seem all down the rabble-rousers like Bill Donoghue, who seem more akin to evangelicals than Catholics in my country."

And it would seem to a woman who had trouble remembering how to behave properly even while actually in church. I am pretty sure Catholics are taught assaulting people is a sin and yet she managed to forget that fact.

Posted by: Matt Penfold | July 11, 2008 12:58 PM
#54

I should have been here all along. I'm an atheist, my parents were both raised devout Roman Catholic and left the church as soon as they reached adulthood. They raised me as a free thinker, although in an extended family of three generations comprising roughly 24 others, the three of us are the only three apostates. I'm the only unababashed, unapologetic, and unrepentant atheist. (it's funny to think they call me unrepentent...who would an atheist repent to?)

And my cousin Mary (there is at least one Mary in three generations of our family, and in my town it dominates over other first names for women at least 1 in six) came to call on me. I said I felt like the red-headed bastard stepchild because I was the only atheist. Well then somehow she starts asking me why...

...so I answered...

and the memorable moment came when Mary, with that perennial smile on her face because she knows God or the virgin mother or Jesus or the Pope - I really don't understand who they worship - had her back: "Do you really think that scientists know why the sun stays up in ths sky?"

Now - where do you go from there but apart?

And I told her that I think the Catholic faith is a joke, but then I don't go run to a Catholic church when I need answers; She on the other hand thinks science is a joke, but has somehow accepted that it's still OK to drive around in cars, have electricity in her house, talk on a cell phone, and go to a doctor and receive modern medical treatments when she gets sick. "G"od apparently has little difficulty with hypocrisy, in fact his faithful seem to be silently commanded to be immune from criticism for it.

I think we need to start being as militant as they like to label us - if anyone religious really thinks that science is a fraud and scientists are evil, then we can watch them stand in the public square and dutifully disavow all articles in their posession that required a scientist, an engineer, or any other satanic free thinker to make or support it.

I mean all I have to do is look at the book of Leviticus to imimediately cry shenanigans on the Bible - there are two dozen or more situations where a faithful believer is supposed to run to a priest to be washed if they are caught doing. And despite all that washing, there's not a single chemical formula or even a family recipe for soap anywhere in the new or old testament. We had to wait until the eighteenth century until Louis Pasteur formulated the germ theory of disease, and we had to wait until almost another hundred years until Joseph Lister came up with the first primitive but relatively effective soap that made any of that washing do any good.

I'm tired of tolerating people who have no tolerance for us - that's bad enough. Although I'm grateful that people like you and me are no longer burned at the stake, I still don't think it's tolerable that these hypcrites had to create the United States of America in order to have freedom of religion, only to struggle all the while to deny freedom of thought to anyone who wasn't religious in the same way they were.

I want my own blog. Screw that, I want my own radio show. In ten minutes I will make Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage and Ann Coulter look like Mr Rogers meets Dr. Phil. Enough with the hypocrisy already. If they really think the Bible has all the answers, then leave them out in the desert with no clothes on, a Bible and a quart of water and let them show us where all those answers are.

/rant

Thank you for allowing me this forum. I'll wait on your gracious provision of a microphone so that I can get started making a living being this indignant.

Posted by: I'm joining your Crusade | July 11, 2008 12:58 PM
#55

So, trying to educate brainwashed idiots is now called "targeting a minority?"

No wonder why these morons consider taking a goddamned cracker a hate crime.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:00 PM
#56

"I think we need to start being as militant as they like to label us - if anyone religious really thinks that science is a fraud and scientists are evil, then we can watch them stand in the public square and dutifully disavow all articles in their posession that required a scientist, an engineer, or any other satanic free thinker to make or support it."

Well said.

Posted by: gdlchmst | July 11, 2008 1:04 PM
#57

"I eat saviors like you for lunch."

Posted by: Badjuggler | July 11, 2008 1:05 PM
#58

So, trying to educate brainwashed idiots is now called "targeting a minority?"

Clearly, the author of post #12 is unblemished by numeracy.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 1:05 PM
#59

#56

Impossible. They can't give back their vaccinations.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:06 PM
#60

....you toucha my wahfur -- I KILL YOU DEAD!!!

Posted by: Alex

I'm gonna cutcha.

I'm gonna cutcha so bad, you're gonna wish I didn't cutcha so bad.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:06 PM
#61

How can someone not believe in evolution and still get vaccinations?

Posted by: sex_target | July 11, 2008 1:07 PM
#62

"Are you threatening me?"
- Beavis

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:07 PM
#63

Kudos to Mark at #46 for referencing "The Rape of the Lock" by Alexander [ironic snicker] "Pope." Well done.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 1:08 PM
#64

It's a bit of an over simplification to think that god hides in the clouds. You see, god is full of much more trickeriness that that. He exists everywhere but can't be seen.

When I was a little boy I knew that Jesus lived in our bathroom. Every morning my father would beat on the bathroom door and yell "Christ, are you still in there?"

Posted by: JoJo | July 11, 2008 1:08 PM
#65

So if these crackers are the body of Christ, doesn't that mean these Catholic League folks are cannibals? Spiriting the wafer out of the Catholic church's sacrificial grounds was likely the only way to prevent the desecration of Jesus by those, dare I say, blasphemous savages.

Posted by: Guy Kramer | July 11, 2008 1:09 PM
#66

A diamond is just a rock. Short of its practical uses in engineering etc, its value is largely a matter of misguided stupidity and tradition. It's just a rock.

Just throwing it out there.

Posted by: AndyD | July 11, 2008 1:09 PM
#67

@ Tim Miller

PZ - I have to disagree with your stance on this, as far as your request for wafers to be desecrated. You would consider somebody burning books to be essentially desecrating science (and reality) - this is no different to them.

It's very different (and interesting how all the apologists for the religionists keep coming up with rubbish analogies).

Book burners are generally trying to prevent anyone else from being able to read the book in their area or indeed anywhere ever, ie may even intend to wipe it out of existence (as per the Library of Alexandria). In contrast, no-one is preventing the magic cookie people from eating their own magic cookies or from making more magic cookies indefinitely via their magic ritual of magic cookie making. It's not as though they believe their Jesus-bits to be a limited resource!

On the rare occasions when someone burns a single book (or flag) as a protest, rather than trying to incite others to do the same and wipe them all out, no-one in the rational reality-based community would make a fuss about it. We might still laugh at the protester of course if their protest was an ill-founded one.

Posted by: SEF | July 11, 2008 1:10 PM
#68

"How can someone not believe in evolution and still get vaccinations?"

If they can rationalize sending death threats because someone thinks a cracker is only a cracker, then it's easy.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:10 PM
#69

Dear Mr. Bruininks:

I am writing to you to express support for Professor P.Z. Myers, in light of the recent protest against his blog "Pharyngula," by Mr. Bill Donohue and the Catholic League. Mr. Donohue may be characterized as a 'professional victim,' who keeps his name and that of his organization in front of the press by means of howling protest and threatened boycotts every time some public figure criticizes the doctrines, traditions, or actions of his church. It is not clear whether he is perpetually, deeply, offended, or if he is merely cynically exploiting the emotions of many people for personal aggrandizement. In any case, Mr. Donohue seems to need constant reminding that the 1st Amendment does not guarantee him, or anyone, freedom from being offended. (Some of us find him pretty offensive, but are not trying to limit his speech.) It also seems, despite his loud claims to be part of the One True Church, that he doesn't know how to "turn the other cheek."

Professor Myers' writings, while occasionally a bit bombastic, are always well-reasoned and compelling, and his enthusiasm for science in general and biology in particular provide inspiration for scientists, students, and amateurs across the US and the world. Any disciplinary or censorious action by the university would merely offend and harm a different group in order to placate the Catholic League. That would be unfair, don't you think?

Posted by: Mikey | July 11, 2008 1:11 PM
#70

I'm reminded of George Carlin's line: God is the all-powerful, all-knowing Supreme Being who created everything in the universe, and if you don't do what he wants he'll torture you for eternity. Why? Because he loves you!

Posted by: Son of Strom | July 11, 2008 1:11 PM
#71

When I was a little boy I knew that Jesus lived in our bathroom. Every morning my father would beat on the bathroom door and yell "Christ, are you still in there?"

Posted by: JoJo

I've heard it before, but I still laughed enough to almost tinkle a little.

Still, for what it's worth, I think everyone knows Jesus is in prison.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:11 PM
#72

"Catholics believe that the host, once consecrated, is literally the flesh of Christ."

So, it would seem that this could be proven or unproven with a simple DNA test on the wafer, once consecrated.

Posted by: infidel57 | July 11, 2008 1:12 PM
#73

PZ, glad to see you haven't been struck by lightning or buried by frogs yet.

Bill said "I'm not a religious whacko" "I do attend church"

Bill, sorry, but if you attend church, then you are a religious wacko

Anyone who goes to church is a loooooot closer to a religious whacko than they are to a sane person who doesn't go.

Posted by: Notorious P.A.T. | July 11, 2008 1:12 PM
#74

@43:

One can criticize without insulting

Ok, let's give that a go:

The notion that a particular cracker, when spoken to by a man dressed in flowing robes, physically becomes the flesh of another man who, if he existed at all, died almost 2000 years ago, is so ridiculous as to be almost beyond words. Those who believe this to be true are deluded, in the same way that people who believe that Elvis is alive are deluded. Moreover, the notion that removing a cracker, which has been freely given, from a certain building and doing whatever one wants with that cracker, is deserving of death threats, is more than ridiculous; it is batshit crazy stupid, not to mention scary and blatantly illegal.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2008 1:12 PM
#75

What I notice about the Christian fundies is just how thin-skinned and insecure they are. A guy in Minnesota writes a blog post, and they go batshit ballistic. If they were truly comfortable in their own beliefs, they would just shrug and carry on.

Posted by: global yokel | July 11, 2008 1:13 PM
#76

#12 is basically deception from start to finish.

But then, anyone who can't tell the difference between threats to a persons life and lively-hood, and the criticism of ideas, is hardly likely to be morally grounded, are they?

Posted by: Damian | July 11, 2008 1:13 PM
#77

It appears the series of tubes is getting backed up. Maybe time to contact the local pipe fitters union and install some bigger tubes. ;)

Posted by: Ben | July 11, 2008 1:13 PM
#78

"Impossible. They can't give back their vaccinations."

We'll let that one slide. But they won't be getting any of our universal health care.

Posted by: gdlchmst | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM
#79

Well mine its here...

To President Robert Bruinink

Im a deeply concerned foreign what happens to be a regular of the science blog Pharyngula and Biologist
undergrad student on PUCV in the country of Chile. Im sure my voice would not have as much weight for
you as one of a US citizen, but since a fine scientist has been threatened even to death by so
called Christians, its my moral duty to make a call for reason.
I know you all live in a country clouded by religious fear, where the people who
votes and therefore elect their representants are sure than the rapture its going
to happen in their lifetimes. But you have a serious responsability as a the president
of the University of Minessota to make a clear statement based on reason alone and not pressure
from religious fanatics who values more the integrity of a cracker than a human life and career.
Im unsure if you are even to read this, but i have a responsabily as a scientist to be and a
moral human being for make a effort no matter how little or useless its could be on the end,
to make reason prevalue over misticism, prejudice and ignrorancy.

Name: Miguel Angel Opazo Arancibia
Nationality: Chilean
College: Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Valparaiso
College ID: 520506-9

Posted by: Lord Zero | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM
#80

@ alex-

Good point. I guess we shouldn't expect rational behavior out of these folks.

Funny thing is, I don't think they are a majority. In my little bubble of people, it seems like there are a lot more religious but not really folks- they claim it, say they are in that group, but don't really follow it (ie, still fuck people they aren't married to and generally act like a normal person). This confuses me b/c I always thought that if I really believed this bullshit, wouldn't I follow the rules if the end result could be my eternal salvation?

Posted by: sex_target | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM
#81

"...magic cookie people..."

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

That's a keeper.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM
#82

I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?

Isn't that what started this in the first place - a student "holding" something "sacred"?

In the meantime, one of the honest priests has written a book about how the molestations in the church could have happened and what should still be done to prevent them, and they've come down hard on him, too. Well, I guess I see what these uptight Catholics hold as not sacred - i.e., people.

I'd rather desecrate symbols, thank you.

Posted by: Kristine | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM
#83

For cryin' out loud, with all this hate, why don't you start a war against Christians and get it over with!

Whats that? You don't believe in violence? BS!

Whats that? You believe in freedom of religion? Ya.. BS

Whats that? You don't believe in the right to bear arms?
Well, if you are going to keep this crap up, you might want to rethink this one. Most Christians believe in the right to bear arms, and if you removed it from the constitution, that won't change their minds one bit. And most Christians are armed. So, when do you want to start a war against Christians?

That hate coming from you is the same as from the Christians.

So, start a war against the Christians.

I bet you don't have the guts!

Posted by: Starbuck | July 11, 2008 1:16 PM
#84

So, it would seem that this could be proven or unproven with a simple DNA test on the wafer, once consecrated.

Posted by: infidel57

It would be a fun test, wouldn't it? Imagine the looks on their faces to learn that Jesus has the DNA of dried instant pancake batter.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:16 PM
#85

Anyone who has suggested that PZ needs to "respect" their religious tradition and never, ever, ever say anything against it is the worst, most disgusting kind hypocrite.

You people ought to be ashamed of yourselves. You scream and cry and plead persecution, all the while doing everything you can to turn atheism into a crime. You are so blinded by your fear and so busy trying to buy your way into some promised eternal paradise you're unable to see just how ugly and hateful you really are.

Well, I'm not going to mince words here: You can kiss my atheist ass. Where the hell do you get off telling PZ or anyone that they are required to respect anything about your traditions when you vilify them, hate them without even understanding what their beliefs are, profess the idea that they are less than human and do everything possible to make them uncomfortable as soon as you find out they don't believe the same things you do. You call them a murderer, a thief, a liar... and believe you are justified in doing so despite the fact that they have done none of those things... but if they call your host a cracker they need to be fired from their job, have their name dragged through the mud and get death threats.

If you ever have the courage to examine your behavior and compare it to the examples set in your holy book, I hope your despondence over your complete failure as a christian doesn't drive you even further down the path of insanity.

Posted by: Kate | July 11, 2008 1:17 PM
#86

"PZ toys with intellectual concepts and ideas while Catholics build their entire lives and identities around their religion and traditions."

If someone wants to build their life around a belief in a magic cracker then that's THEIR fucking problem. They can kindly leave us sane people the fuck out of their delusion.

Posted by: Boosterz | July 11, 2008 1:18 PM
#87

Sigh, what a load of bullshit.

Posted by: Not now | July 11, 2008 1:19 PM
#88

@72-

But I'm sure they'd use the old "science can't be used to disprove the supernatural" or some bullshit on you which would both satisfy their stupid beliefs and contradict all their other ones.

Posted by: sex_target | July 11, 2008 1:19 PM
#89

For cryin' out loud, with all this hate, why don't you start a war against Christians and get it over with!

You'll be able to read better if you wipe the spittle flecks off your monitor, tough guy.

Posted by: wÒÓ† | July 11, 2008 1:20 PM
#90

#75

"What I notice about the Christian fundies is just how thin-skinned and insecure they are."

"There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Almost inevitably some part of him is aware that they are myths and that he believes them only because they are comforting. But he dare not face this thought! Moreover, since he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not real, he becomes furious when they are disputed." [Bertrand Russell, "Human Society in Ethics and Politics"]

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:20 PM
#91

Dear Mr. Myers, I sent an email to the president for ya. I just want to say I support you totally and think you're awesome. You're intelligent, nice, and articulate. I appreciate your blog and enjoy it very much.

Thank you so much sir.

-John

Posted by: John Morris | July 11, 2008 1:21 PM
#92

A diamond is just a rock. Short of its practical uses in engineering etc, its value is largely a matter of misguided stupidity and tradition. It's just a rock.

Just throwing it out there.

I completely agree. And if it weren't for the fact that so many other people value it, it wouldn't be worth anything to me either. Just like gold, or rare stamps, or baseball cards, (and money, for that matter) or any number of other things that are "valuable". Value is purely subjective. But just because a large number of people value a particular object doesn't mean I should also.

If, given a diamond, I wouldn't throw it away because somebody else will give me money for it. But I won't spend my money on one.

Posted by: tsg | July 11, 2008 1:23 PM
#93

I wonder who would be offended if I put my Jesus cracker in a toaster?

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:24 PM
#94

...you toucha my dymon - I KILL YOU DEAD!!

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:25 PM
#95

Well, if you are going to keep this crap up, you might want to rethink this one. Most Christians believe in the right to bear arms, and if you removed it from the constitution, that won't change their minds one bit. And most Christians are armed. So, when do you want to start a war against Christians?

Again, Starbuck, you never fail to disappoint. Thanks for confirming that 'most Christians' fail to follow the most basic of Christ's teachings.

Well done. I'm glad you're on our side.

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 11, 2008 1:26 PM
#96

Alex,

I have always found that people argue articulately when they are right and get angry when they are wrong or caught in a lie they don't want to admit.

I think these Catholics "doth protest too much" because they know their position is ridiculous.

Posted by: Rob | July 11, 2008 1:26 PM
#97

I'd just like to apologize for my previous comment. I called my local church and they explained that Chex Mix does NOT count as Jesus. So, never mind.

*gesture* Bless this Chex Mix.
Now eat up. There are children in Israel who have no messiah to eat at all.

Posted by: aiabx | July 11, 2008 1:27 PM
#98

Alright Starbuck. Let's have a shootout. I'll rely on science and engineering to build my gun. You offer some incantations to your deity to deliver from the heavens your gun. Let's see who has a gun.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:28 PM
#99

Way off topic, unless you like flounder with your crackers, but I just had to tell somebody about these new transitional fossils discovered in museum collections:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-fish_eyesjul10,0,2859782.story

Scientia et Fermentum!

Posted by: Ediacaran, FCD, Delta Pi Gamma | July 11, 2008 1:29 PM
#100

For cryin' out loud, with all this hate, why don't you start a war against Christians and get it over with!

Whats that? You don't believe in violence? BS!

Whats that? You believe in freedom of religion? Ya.. BS

Whats that? You don't believe in the right to bear arms?
Well, if you are going to keep this crap up, you might want to rethink this one. Most Christians believe in the right to bear arms, and if you removed it from the constitution, that won't change their minds one bit. And most Christians are armed. So, when do you want to start a war against Christians?

That hate coming from you is the same as from the Christians.

So, start a war against the Christians.

I bet you don't have the guts!

Starbuck, '

You're not the brightest bulb on the tree are you?

How do you get from being an atheist critical of idiot religious people's actions to being against the right to bear arms? I'm sure some here are but I personally own firearms.

Difference is I don't threaten people with violence. You on the other hand have no problems waving it around.

Your rants show so little thought or ability to reason they are laughable.

Really Starbuck.

WE ARE LAUGHING AT YOU

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 11, 2008 1:30 PM
#101

The closing 'grafs from my dead-tree message to Pres. Bruininks:

I have no doubt that others in the University of Minnesota disagree vehemently with Prof. Myers's statements, and am quite confident that he accepts their right to criticize him without any expectation that the administration should muzzle them for expressing themselves. That is as it should be, and UM would do itself proud by supporting the rights of all its faculty to take controversial stands.

For the last few years, I have sadly watched the University of Florida, led by a recent Bush appointee, diminish itself through a steady attrition of talented faculty seeking greener pastures free from petty politically-driven interference by myopic administrators and legislators. You might do quite well by directing your academic talent scouts and head-hunters to our state; it would be a disservice to your own institution to emulate our deteriorating standards.

Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | July 11, 2008 1:31 PM

Posted by: 1 | July 11, 2008 1:35 PM

ent, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal

* Latest Posts
* Archives
* About
* Dungeon
* Blogroll
* Commenters
* RSS
* Contact

Search this blog

Profile

pzm_profile_pic.jpg
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
zf_pharyngula.jpg ...and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
tbbadge.gif
scarlet_A.png
I support Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
Random Quote
(Complete listing)

The universe doesn't much care if you tread on a butterfly. There are plenty more butterflies. Gods might note the fall of a sparrow but they don't make any effort to catch them.

(Terry Pratchett, Lords and Ladies)
Recent Posts

* Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* Friday Cephalopod: Foreplay
* Quaker cannons in a digital age
* Another off-the-wall argument against evolution
* KPFT interview
* Any TAM6 attendees here?
* Fight back against Bill Donohue!
* Fresh crackers!
* Tangled Bank #109
* Now I've got Bill Donohue's attention

A Taste of Pharyngula
(Complete listing)

A brief overview of Hox genes

The Cambrian as an evolutionary exemplar

Regulatory evolution of the Hox1 gene

Tentacle sex

I think I despise anti-environmentalists as much as I do anti-evolutionists

Generating right-left asymmetries

Cats, candy, and evolution

Pycnogonid tagmosis and echoes of the Cambrian
Recent Comments

* sjfish on Another off-the-wall argument against evolution
* scooter on KPFT interview
* Rev. BigDumbChimp on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* Greg on KPFT interview
* Ediacaran, FCD, Delta Pi Gamma on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* Alex on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* aiabx on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* Rob on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into
* Heathen Matt on Fresh crackers!
* Brownian, OM on Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into

Archives

* July 2008
* June 2008
* May 2008
* April 2008
* March 2008
* February 2008
* January 2008
* December 2007
* November 2007
* October 2007
* September 2007
* August 2007
* July 2007
* June 2007
* May 2007
* April 2007
* March 2007
* February 2007
* January 2007
* December 2006
* November 2006
* October 2006
* September 2006
* August 2006
* July 2006
* June 2006
* May 2006
* April 2006
* March 2006
* February 2006
* January 2006

Blogroll
(Complete listing)
Other Information
koufax.jpg
2005 Koufax Award
Best Expert

wabs.jpg
2006 Weblogs Award

Subscribe via Email

Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.

Sign me up!

« Friday Cephalopod: Foreplay | Main
Internet getting full, here's a new hole to dump comments into

Category: Administrative
Posted on: July 11, 2008 12:16 PM, by PZ Myers

Aaargh, you keep filling up threads! I'm closing this one, you can continue the discussion here, if necessary.

ShareThis

Comments
#1

As promised, I just hand-delivered my letter to Pres. Bruininks' office. Text follows:

-------------------------

Dear President Bruininks,

I have read with great interest the story of University of Minnesota, Morris Professor P.Z. Myers being criticized by the Catholic League for his 'threats' against an inanimate disk of carbohydrates. The sheer audacity of the Catholic League to try and force the University of Minnesota to censor or censure a respected educator and researcher for comments made on a non-University website is astounding.

I trust that the University will do the right thing and not bow to the demands of the extremist ideology perpetrated by the Catholic League. In addition, I hope that the link to Dr. Myers webpage is restored to the UMM biology webpage, joining the scores of other faculty and students at universities across the country who have links to their personal websites from their departmental pages.

Sincerely,

Dr. Asad [last name]

Posted by: asad | July 11, 2008 12:23 PM
#2

I'M EATING JESUS RIGHT NOW

Posted by: Rebecca Watson | July 11, 2008 12:24 PM
#3

I was writing this on the other thread at the same time the thread was being closed.

Bill said "I'm not a religious whacko" "I do attend church"

Bill, sorry, but if you attend church, then you are a religious wacko, no matter how moderate you might think you are. Anyone who believes there's a magical sky fairy hiding in the clouds has got to have something very wrong with him.

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 12:26 PM
#4

I'd just like to apologize for my previous comment. I called my local church and they explained that Chex Mix does NOT count as Jesus. So, never mind.

Posted by: Rebecca Watson | July 11, 2008 12:26 PM
#5

What's to discuss? Catholics have finally demonstrated that they're no less unhinged than the Danish cartoon-hating Muslims.

Perhaps we'll live to see the day when an actor is accused of supporting terrorism because they wore a piece of clothing resembling a monk's robe on an advertisement.

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 11, 2008 12:27 PM
#6

Andrew Sullivan's remark copied here, since, unless I am mistaken, he doesn't allow comments on his blog:

It is one thing to engage in free, if disrespectful, debate. It is another to repeatedly assault and ridicule and abuse something that is deeply sacred to a great many people. Calling the Holy Eucharist a "goddamned cracker" isn't about free speech; it's really about some baseline civility. Myers' rant is the rant of an anti-Catholic bigot. And atheists and agnostics can be bigots too.

Engaging loudly and publicly in the victimless crime of blaspheme is not bigotry, it's a responsibility. Andrew Sullivan conveniently avoids explaining how ridiculing the beliefs and the icons of all religions makes one a bigot towards those who practice a specific religion. I suspect trawling through Sullivan's posts over the last few years would make it much easier to make the case that Sullivan is an anti-Muslim bigot, but I haven't got the stomach for it.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 12:28 PM
#7

"I hope that the link to Dr. Myers webpage is restored to the UMM biology webpage"

Me too and I requested that in my email.

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 12:30 PM
#8

Has anyone pointed out that it's just a fuckin' cracker yet? I think we need to keep that in mind.

Posted by: IasonOuabache | July 11, 2008 12:31 PM
#9

Let's get this straight. For years, Catholic priests around the world molest little boys, and all we hear from Big Bad Bill is the sound of crickets chirping.

But sneak a host out of Mass and it's akin to seeing the world's rivers flow with blood.

Catholics believe that the host, once consecrated, is literally the flesh of Christ. So yeah, OK, I can see why some of them might find it offensive that someone would refer to the host as a "cracker."

But to call it a hate crime? To try and deny that person a living because of what they said on their own blog?

The Catholic League is offended. Fine. Duly noted. But by living in a society where we revere freedom of speech, being offended is one of the chances you take. The hyperventilating throngs at The Catholic League need to get the hell over it.

Posted by: Devin Rambo | July 11, 2008 12:32 PM
#10

For what it's worth, here's what I sent off to President Bruininks this morning. (I started off saying I'd be brief and then waffled on for a bit so I lost points on that I'm afraid.

"Dear President Bruininks,

I'll keep this brief and to the point as I'm sure you currently have more than enough verbose mail to deal with: I have just learned that there is a campaign underway to oust Professor Myers from his position at the university. I am appalled that he should be so ill-treated and I am very keen to add my name to the list of people that I'm sure will have rushed to come out in his support.

I find I can hardly overstate the value that Pharyngula has to me and to a great many other people as well. I read the article that has so offended the Catholic community, when it was first posted, and found it to be typically intelligent, amusing and well observed and am utterly horrified at the idea that the Professor could be harmed in any way as a result of it.

Professor Myers is a great ambassador for your institution and you should be deeply proud to count him among your staff. He does you great credit. Please do not allow this backlash to erode our precious values of freedom of speech and freedom of thought. I fear greatly for a world that punishes its stars for shining too brightly and I fear greatly for a world that fights against open and honest discussion. That is the path to intellectual and moral bankruptcy and a nightmarish future.

Thank you for your time. I trust this message is just one among a very many in strong support of Professor Myers. It's a great shame that something so noble should result in such unnecessary difficulty but I hope that it is as obvious to you as it is to me that the person responsible for this problem is not the Professor.

Yours Faithfully,

David (last name deleted)"

Posted by: David_James | July 11, 2008 12:32 PM
#11

"Transubstantiated crackers." Great idea for the name of a new rock group.

Posted by: dale | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM
#12

Good morning President Bruininks -

PZ Meyers, an associate professor on the Morris campus, has recently inflamed Catholics with his most recent, curse filled, hateful blog entry criticism of their religion, practices, and beliefs. He has come under attack from many Catholics for this recent posting on his blog Pharyngula, and he has posted your email address so regular readers like myself can email you our opinions of his activities.

His hope is that supporters will flood your email with well reasoned defenses of his writings and activities. I write to share that I find his approach to criticism to embody everything that is wrong and divisive about supposed intellectual superiority. I'm quite certain you've been alerted to the profane, attacking nature of his blog entries in the past. Rather than open up lines of discussion for parties who disagree to engage one another respectfully, he coarsely targets groups and individuals for attack and rallies like minded posters to dehumanize those with different views and practices in the most vile writing style possible.

As a professor for the University of MN, one would expect a higher degree of tolerance from Professor Meyers for groups to which he does not belong and clearly does not understand. My wife both attended the University of MN Morris and worked in your office for a few years in your last assignment prior to taking the Presidency of the University. Her view of campus policy is that such behavior from a student, group, or professor would never be tolerated if it targeted minority groups. Professor Myers tends to target majority groups, and it seems that his constant, malicious attacks go unchecked and unaddressed. Surely a man of such hate and bitterness does not compartmentalize these views and feelings when he enters a classroom or has interaction with students. Is this representative of the open-minded pursuit-of-truth-and-conflicting-ideas environment that the University wishes to cultivate?

All the Best
Darren Libscomb

Posted by: Civil to Others | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM
#13

and you all think your are more enlightened?

I guess pluralism means its ok to be pluralistic as long as everyone agrees with me. I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?

obviously, death threats are way out of line from the defenders of Donohue's position, but I also think asking folks to palm and steal something others consider sacred to be over the line. you want to search for problems to solve, go ahead hold churches (and educational institutions) accountable for abuse, hold them accountable for wanting to start wars, but its stupid to go picking a fight over a cracker. Gee whiz, it was only a cracker wasn't PZ? why did the original guy want to take one to begin with? why do you all want to start a collection? Someone wanting to partake of something they consider a sacrament does no harm to you.

Posted by: randy | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM
#14

Save the Body of Christ from the Cannibals!!

Posted by: paximperium | July 11, 2008 12:33 PM
#15

Let's get this straight. For years, Catholic priests around the world molest little boys, and all we hear from Big Bad Bill is the sound of crickets chirping.

But sneak a host out of Mass and it's akin to seeing the world's rivers flow with blood.

Catholics believe that the host, once consecrated, is literally the flesh of Christ. So yeah, OK, I can see why some of them might find it offensive that someone would refer to the host as a "cracker."

But to call it a hate crime? To try and deny that person a living because of what they said on their own blog?

The Catholic League is offended. Fine. Duly noted. But by living in a society where we revere freedom of speech, being offended is one of the chances you take. The hyperventilating throngs at The Catholic League need to get the hell over it.

Posted by: Devin Rambo | July 11, 2008 12:34 PM
#16

I have just returned from the Post Office after sending a letter of support for PZ. Via air mail, after waiting thirty-five minutes in a queue whilst I was both boiling hot and missing Deal or No Deal.

This fact alone, that the letter has been halfway around the world (from the UK to USA), means the President should take everything I say in that letter to be the word of God. (No pun intended.)

To PZ, I advise you to hand the death threats to the police. Also, there probably really are people who now think you're more evil than Hitler, so my other piece of advice is to take care for your own safety.

Posted by: Jonathan Rothwell | July 11, 2008 12:34 PM
#17

"What's to discuss? Catholics have finally demonstrated that they're no less unhinged than the Danish cartoon-hating Muslims."

No less unhinged, just a little less murderous.

Posted by: gdlchmst | July 11, 2008 12:34 PM
#18

Has anyone pointed out that it's just a fuckin' cracker yet? I think we need to keep that in mind.

No, it's the magic flesh of a supernatural being, sliced wafer-thin, and if you don't eat it, you don't get to go to heaven.

Oh, and if you take it but don't eat it, you're kidnapping Jesus and we'll have to hurt you.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 12:35 PM
#19

Jesus Christ is not a Cracker.

Fer heaven's sake, don't you know, Jesus is a Cheetoh!

Dave

Posted by: Dave Thomas | July 11, 2008 12:35 PM
#20

Let's get this straight. For years, Catholic priests around the world molest little boys, and all we hear from Big Bad Bill is the sound of crickets chirping.

But sneak a host out of Mass and it's akin to seeing the world's rivers flow with blood.

Catholics believe that the host, once consecrated, is literally the flesh of Christ. So yeah, OK, I can see why some of them might find it offensive that someone would refer to the host as a "cracker."

But to call it a hate crime? To try and deny that person a living because of what they said on their own blog?

The Catholic League is offended. Fine. Duly noted. But by living in a society where we revere freedom of speech, being offended is one of the chances you take. The hyperventilating throngs at The Catholic League need to get the hell over it.

Posted by: Devin Rambo | July 11, 2008 12:36 PM
#21

"I guess pluralism means its ok to be pluralistic as long as everyone agrees with me. I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?"

Nothing, until they start making death threats against those who do not shared their belief in what is sacred. And nothing until they start demanding respect for their irrational views. Once those things start happening there is a problem. And look, ... those things have been happening.

Guess there is a problem.

Posted by: Matt Penfold | July 11, 2008 12:38 PM
#22

BobC #3

"Anyone who believes there's a magical sky fairy hiding in the clouds has got to have something very wrong with him."

It's a bit of an over simplification to think that god hides in the clouds. You see, god is full of much more trickeriness that that. He exists everywhere but can't be seen. He can make anything happen he wants to, even make us blind to him but not his works. He can even make it seem that everything has a Natural explanation and the need to explain things in human terms using mystery and magic is insane.

Therefore, god exists.

/sarcasm

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 12:38 PM
#23

I sent a letter too, along the lines of Glenn Davison's, that I think the host desecration threat is a bad idea, but that PZ has a right to do it and shouldn't be penalized by the university.
That said, I hope this thing blows over soon -- the kid who kicked this whole thing off was a douchebag for stealing the cracker, the (very few) Catholics who issued death threats were exponentially bigger douchebags, and this whole thing seems to be on the edge of exploding into a supernova of gratuitous asshattery.
(Yes, it's just a cracker, but it's a cracker that some people find very important, and the cracker-worshipers were doing their thing in a church service where the cracker-stealer didn't have to be, so there was no point in taking the damn thing except to piss a bunch of people off)
I look forward to reading more scientific and pro-reason posts, which is why I love this blog in the first place.

Posted by: vespera | July 11, 2008 12:39 PM
#24

Done. I even through in the fact of my own Catholicism for good measure.

Posted by: cm | July 11, 2008 12:40 PM
#25

"As a professor for the University of MN, one would expect a higher degree of tolerance from Professor Meyers for groups to which he does not belong and clearly does not understand."

I think he understands those groups very well. They're all morons and a large number of them are terrorists. Why don't you criticize the death threats for a cracker instead of complaining about free speech?

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 12:40 PM
#26

Wow, FOUR threads? And two topping 1000? That's incredible, man!

Posted by: Wing Nut | July 11, 2008 12:40 PM
#27

its stupid to go picking a fight over a cracker. Gee whiz, it was only a cracker wasn't PZ?

Tell that to the thugs who tried to strongarm the cracker away from the kid who claimed he wanted to show one to his guest back at his pew. Tell that to Bill Donahue and those who have sent multiple death threats to PZ Myers.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 12:41 PM
#28

No, it's the magic flesh of a supernatural being, sliced wafer-thin, and if you don't eat it, you don't get to go to heaven.

ah ha!

So it's like Jesus Carpaccio!

Damn, I love me a well prepared carpaccio. This one comes with a squeeze of fresh sacrilege.

Mmmmmmmmmmm

sacrilege.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbCHimp | July 11, 2008 12:41 PM
#29

"I guess pluralism means its ok to be pluralistic as long as everyone agrees with me."

Who said I wanted pluralism? Don't put words in my mouth.

"I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?"

Everything if the belief is superstitious.

"Someone wanting to partake of something they consider a sacrament does no harm to you."

They do if they demand that I hold that something sacred too.

Posted by: gdlchmst | July 11, 2008 12:41 PM
#30

Andrew Sullivan gets a little over excited at times, but I believe he is one of the good guys. Sadly, his online debate with Sam Harris showed him to be incapable of recognizing the irrationality of faith and the danger it poses to the modern world.

As an openly gay republican, he has known some measure of persecution, so it is dissappointing that his own tolerance will not extend to atheists exercising their freedom of speech. Oh well, I'm sure that some of his best friends are atheists.

Posted by: kmurray | July 11, 2008 12:41 PM
#31

PZ, have you heard anything from President Bruininks yet?

Posted by: bigjohn756 | July 11, 2008 12:42 PM
#32

Ack. The response page I got said the site was busy and to resubmit. My apologies for the repeated posts.

Posted by: Devin Rambo | July 11, 2008 12:42 PM
#33

The Catholic League is offended. Fine. Duly noted. But by living in a society where we revere freedom of speech, being offended is one of the chances you take. The hyperventilating throngs at The Catholic League need to get the hell over it.

Yep. As has been said many times, you do not have the right to not be offended.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 11, 2008 12:42 PM
#34

Here's my email to the president of the university. I hope it helps.

Dear President Bruininks;

I'm writing in absolute support of Dr. Myers not because I share his views regarding religion, but because I believe in the First Amendment to the Constitution and the principle of academic freedom. He is an important voice against the malign efforts of those who want to inject religious dogma into the teaching of biological science under the guise of "intelligent design". Even if I am right and he is wrong regarding the nature of a Communion wafer after it has been consecrated, I feel quite confident that the creator of the universe doesn't need any defense from screaming hate-mongers claiming the name of the Church as their authority.

Sincerely,

Diana Powe
Beaverton, Oregon

Posted by: Diana Powe | July 11, 2008 12:43 PM
#35

3rd Page, wow, PZ, you sure know to incite a [virtual] riot! Congrats!
PS - I email President Bruininks, for ya' hope the support helps! (even though it's probably needed)

Posted by: jj | July 11, 2008 12:45 PM
#36

Yet more missing the point...

I guess pluralism means its ok to be pluralistic as long as everyone agrees with me. I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?

Nothing. It's the insistence that everyone also hold it sacred because you do that is the problem.

obviously, death threats are way out of line from the defenders of Donohue's position,

Keep in mind it is the death threats and attempts to force their view on others that this action is in response to.

but I also think asking folks to palm and steal something others consider sacred to be over the line.

Strange sense of priorities. Not eating a cracker given to you (not stolen) is an inappropriate response to death threats. Really.

Posted by: tsg | July 11, 2008 12:46 PM
#37

John Lewandowski:

Look, I would not have been in favor of desecrating the Eucharist. I can't say that it would have bothered me greatly, but that is a consequence of an inability to understand how anybody can believe that a wafer/cracker turns in to the body of Christ, and I say that with absolute sincerity. That is, I think, part of the problem. It is so far removed from anything that I am familiar with that I cannot, as hard as I try, understand its importance.

However, I do not believe that PZ would have gone through with it, although I could of course be wrong. Just reading that original post made it clear to me how angry PZ was that the Webster Cook had been treated so appallingly. The death threats were no doubt from a very small minority, but I visited several Catholic sites where people were advertising the young man's email address and expressing some pretty vile opinions. This obviously cannot be applied to any more Catholics than I saw with my own eyes, but it is not terribly unreasonable to factor up based on a few hundred comments, if only to gauge a feeling.

In some ways, PZ has given you all a terrific excuse to gloss over the appalling behavior of more than a few Catholics, though I can't say that I am sorry for either his emotional reaction, or his wish to force people to confront what is surely the reality of the wafer not being, in any way shape or form, the body of Christ. Sometimes it takes a provocative act to shock people in to change. And by change, I would be happy if it simply reduced the sheer zealotry that I witnessed on those blogs, to be honest.

Lest we not forget, and as far as I am aware, no Catholics have been threatened with death over this incident, and it I have noticed a definite attempt to shift the moral burden from threats of serious harm, both bodily and professionally, to the casual threat of "desecration".

It would have been appropriate if more than the handful of Catholics that have visited this site had expressed concern, first and foremost, for the threats to the lives of two innocent individuals. That it hasn't been case is rather telling, in my opinion.

Posted by: Damian | July 11, 2008 12:46 PM
#38

(A possibly stupid question - I haven't read every post in the previous threads:)

Aren't all these many letters to the President of the university a bit of an overreaction?

I mean, shouldn't we expect the university to dismiss Donohue's silly complaint any way??

Posted by: FW | July 11, 2008 12:47 PM
#39

Don't forget. The "Catholic League" is just one loud, annoying person with a fax machine: Bill Donohue.

Posted by: Jake | July 11, 2008 12:49 PM
#40

Christ died for your sins.
Christ died for your sins.
Christ died for your sins.
Christ died for your sins.

After 9 years of Catholic grammar school (including kindergarten) I will never get that out of my mind. Imagine having the same five words drilled into you several times a day for 9 years. It's child abuse and that's why I think nuns are assholes.

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 12:49 PM
#41

I can see it now...

"You've got your Jesus in my peanut butter!"
"You've got your peanut butter on my Jesus!"

And, the Catholic response:
"I'll cut your face like a Tijuana whore!"

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 12:50 PM
#42

@ #23
the kid who kicked this whole thing off was a douchebag for stealing the cracker

Seriously? From one of the articles about all this:

"When I received the Eucharist, my intention was to bring it back to my seat to show him," Cook said. "I took about three steps from the woman distributing the Eucharist and someone grabbed the inside of my elbow and blocked the path in front of me. At that point I put it in my mouth so they'd leave me alone and I went back to my seat and I removed it from my mouth."

A church leader was watching, confronted Cook and tried to recover the sacred bread. Cook said she crossed the line and that's why he brought it home with him.

"She came up behind me, grabbed my wrist with her right hand, with her left hand grabbed my fingers and was trying to pry them open to get the Eucharist out of my hand," Cook said, adding she wouldn't immediately take her hands off him despite several requests.

Doesn't sound to me like he's such a douchebag. If the church hadn't freaked the fuck out over everything he would have gone back to his seat, shown his visiting friend what the cracker was, eaten the thing, and this all could have been avoided.

PZ's not the only person here who needs defending. The church attacked Cook before PZ ever said a thing.

Posted by: unicow | July 11, 2008 12:50 PM
#43

"I think he understands those groups very well."

Apparently not or he would have written about how this onslaught was about to come his way when he did his first posting. PZ clearly does not understand how important the host is to Catholics. PZ toys with intellectual concepts and ideas while Catholics build their entire lives and identities around their religion and traditions. The idea that they would react strongly to his hateful words attacking one of the very cornerstones of their faith is completely predictable. One can criticize without insulting - if one is not PZ Myers that is. He opened this can of whupass on himself.

Posted by: Civil to Others | July 11, 2008 12:50 PM
#44

@12
"professor would never be tolerated if it targeted minority groups. Professor Myers tends to target majority groups"
What? Minorities? Catholics... I think it's fair to say that PZ "targets" (I don't think he's targeting anyone, actually) irrational people, not minorities.

Posted by: jj | July 11, 2008 12:52 PM
#45

I'm amazed that how this issue has got so way out of hand in the US. I don't think this would have happened to the same degree in most other Catholic countries. If you don't believe me, in my URL there's a clip from the Mexican film "El crimen del Padre Amaro", (about 3:30 into the clip) which depicts an old woman spiriting the communion wafer away and then later giving it to her cat to eat. And although clearly cheeky in for a film from a majority Catholic county, it generated none of the fuss this has. This seem all down the rabble-rousers like Bill Donoghue, who seem more akin to evangelicals than Catholics in my country.

Posted by: Michael James | July 11, 2008 12:52 PM
#46

My apologies to Alexander Pope and real poets elsewhere:

When dire Offence from an Abused Triscuit springs,
And unleashes Bill Donohue's bellicose whinges,
This Verse--in support of Myers--is due,
This ev'n the Cath'lic League may vouchsafe to view.
Slight is the Subject, but not so the Storm that breweth,
For the Case of the Maligned Wafer has brought threats of death.
At such absurdity, Paul Myers raises his voice in protest thus:
"Should theft of one give such offense, then steal
one thousand, that we learn what they would do to us!"
This brings us to the point at present,
Wherein Bill Donohue demands both Discipline and Punishment.
I say instead that Paul Myers is well within his Right
To criticize and mock th' ignorant hypocrisy within his sight.
'Tis the legacy of th' Enlightenment and an assuredly Secular Democracy:
That Free Discussion and Open Debate safeguard a Free Society.
Ideas and customs should not be held Unquestionably Virtuous
Simply for being th' Opinions of Mobs Religious.
Sic semper tyrannis, Slavery, Creationism, Discrimination,
Thus also the Complaint of Donohue must be selected for Elimination.

This was sent by overland mail this morning to President Bruininks, Dr. Myers, and Dr. Donohue.

Posted by: Mark | July 11, 2008 12:53 PM
#47

I'm sure an Internet pole can settle this issue!

Posted by: Alexander Treseder | July 11, 2008 12:53 PM
#48

If these crazy catholics are so certain that one cracker is somehow different after their magic ceremony, why don't we ask them to pick out the fleshy one from a pile of them?
Double blind tested of course.

Posted by: ElJay | July 11, 2008 12:53 PM
#49

Pssssst.. Darren of #12...
1. That wasn't short.
2. The name is Myers instead of Meyers.
3. "dehumanize" is used when you describe a human being as being less than human. As an inferior creature whose existence is a waste and whose death is encouraged. The Nazi's did that for example in their treatment of anyone who was against them.
What Myers has done, is not an act of dehumanization: he simply attacks ideas and does not, in any way, call for violence against people who have other ideas. He uses arguments instead of violence, unlike various of those who disagree with him.
4. You have never seen Myers teach, so how can you tell he is a bad teacher? According to you though, he is so filled with hatred that he cannot control himself... Do I sense the first desire to dehumanize him there?
5. How nice to mention to the President that your wife worked there. I think such a thing is either "sucking up" or, from the way the letter continues, an argument from authority (with your wife being the source of authority in this case). You honestly think that that is doing your argument any good?
6. And a "vile writing style?" Oh, come on! Myers is an angel is his posts compared to the average user, and is definately more articulate than most creationists, whose arguments he despises for a very good reason.

Anyway, congratulations with your letter. Despite how its polite tone, it is still failing in every way possible.

Posted by: Arno | July 11, 2008 12:53 PM
#50

Here is the main body of my letter, which I will be popping in the post in a moment. My boyfriend, an English prof, will also be penning a letter regarding academic free speech. Cheers to you, PZ:

I am writing on behalf of Professor P. Z. Myers regarding this Eucharist incident. I am an atheist and the fact is that Myers is a much-loved and well-respected member of our community. Many of us feel invisible, ignored, and downright hated. Lately, we've been gathering a little steam in the area of activism--sometimes it's writing letters, supporting lobbyists on our behalf, or it comes in the form of lawsuits--as we beg for, haggle for, and demand our equal and civil rights as American citizens. The activism takes other forms as well, forms well documented in any social movement for change. While Myers's suggestion to desecrate a Communion wafer might seem college-prankish, the fact is that it fits in with a number of attention getting stunts for respectable causes. All sorts of activists perform various antics to demand rights for blacks, women, gays, etc. This isn't anything new and whether one agrees with its effectiveness, it's a tactic I fully support so long as no one is hurt. This, I'm afraid, doesn't include the hurting of one's feelings.

Considering the tremendous amount of prejudice and general disdain coming from the Catholic community directed towards atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers, this threat to desecrate what we all know is basically a cracker (there is no need to test these wafers following the blessing that supposedly transforms them into the magical flesh of their consumer's Lord and Savior...it's a flaky, crispy cracker), the idea that what Myers did is beyond the pale is laughable. He may have incited the ire of one large group, but he's also gained even more respect and support from another, the secular community. We don't all agree, but mine is a voice that is absolutely raised in support. Please don't allow your University to be bullied by the likes of the Catholic League's Bill Donohue. Yes, he's loud, insistent, and becomes rabidly red-in-the-face at the slightest hint criticism, but he remains a bully and only that.

We without faith take a lot of flack and have few out there with enough courage and intellect to defend us, whereas most major religions have armies. Please consider Myers a much-needed representative of a movement in desperate need of change and do what you can to ensure his position (in light of demands for his removal) and his safety (in light of the death threats he's received).

Posted by: IsThatLatin | July 11, 2008 12:54 PM
#51

....you toucha my wahfur -- I KILL YOU DEAD!!!

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 12:56 PM
#52

How much could you get for the body of christ on e-bay? We should kidnap several this weekend and put up for sale next week. Although, it would be hard to prove that had been blessed by a priest instead of just taking them out of box. I'm sure the catholic church has "Essence" detectors for these types of emergencies.

Posted by: rd | July 11, 2008 12:57 PM
#53

"I'm amazed that how this issue has got so way out of hand in the US. I don't think this would have happened to the same degree in most other Catholic countries. If you don't believe me, in my URL there's a clip from the Mexican film "El crimen del Padre Amaro", (about 3:30 into the clip) which depicts an old woman spiriting the communion wafer away and then later giving it to her cat to eat. And although clearly cheeky in for a film from a majority Catholic county, it generated none of the fuss this has. This seem all down the rabble-rousers like Bill Donoghue, who seem more akin to evangelicals than Catholics in my country."

And it would seem to a woman who had trouble remembering how to behave properly even while actually in church. I am pretty sure Catholics are taught assaulting people is a sin and yet she managed to forget that fact.

Posted by: Matt Penfold | July 11, 2008 12:58 PM
#54

I should have been here all along. I'm an atheist, my parents were both raised devout Roman Catholic and left the church as soon as they reached adulthood. They raised me as a free thinker, although in an extended family of three generations comprising roughly 24 others, the three of us are the only three apostates. I'm the only unababashed, unapologetic, and unrepentant atheist. (it's funny to think they call me unrepentent...who would an atheist repent to?)

And my cousin Mary (there is at least one Mary in three generations of our family, and in my town it dominates over other first names for women at least 1 in six) came to call on me. I said I felt like the red-headed bastard stepchild because I was the only atheist. Well then somehow she starts asking me why...

...so I answered...

and the memorable moment came when Mary, with that perennial smile on her face because she knows God or the virgin mother or Jesus or the Pope - I really don't understand who they worship - had her back: "Do you really think that scientists know why the sun stays up in ths sky?"

Now - where do you go from there but apart?

And I told her that I think the Catholic faith is a joke, but then I don't go run to a Catholic church when I need answers; She on the other hand thinks science is a joke, but has somehow accepted that it's still OK to drive around in cars, have electricity in her house, talk on a cell phone, and go to a doctor and receive modern medical treatments when she gets sick. "G"od apparently has little difficulty with hypocrisy, in fact his faithful seem to be silently commanded to be immune from criticism for it.

I think we need to start being as militant as they like to label us - if anyone religious really thinks that science is a fraud and scientists are evil, then we can watch them stand in the public square and dutifully disavow all articles in their posession that required a scientist, an engineer, or any other satanic free thinker to make or support it.

I mean all I have to do is look at the book of Leviticus to imimediately cry shenanigans on the Bible - there are two dozen or more situations where a faithful believer is supposed to run to a priest to be washed if they are caught doing. And despite all that washing, there's not a single chemical formula or even a family recipe for soap anywhere in the new or old testament. We had to wait until the eighteenth century until Louis Pasteur formulated the germ theory of disease, and we had to wait until almost another hundred years until Joseph Lister came up with the first primitive but relatively effective soap that made any of that washing do any good.

I'm tired of tolerating people who have no tolerance for us - that's bad enough. Although I'm grateful that people like you and me are no longer burned at the stake, I still don't think it's tolerable that these hypcrites had to create the United States of America in order to have freedom of religion, only to struggle all the while to deny freedom of thought to anyone who wasn't religious in the same way they were.

I want my own blog. Screw that, I want my own radio show. In ten minutes I will make Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage and Ann Coulter look like Mr Rogers meets Dr. Phil. Enough with the hypocrisy already. If they really think the Bible has all the answers, then leave them out in the desert with no clothes on, a Bible and a quart of water and let them show us where all those answers are.

/rant

Thank you for allowing me this forum. I'll wait on your gracious provision of a microphone so that I can get started making a living being this indignant.

Posted by: I'm joining your Crusade | July 11, 2008 12:58 PM
#55

So, trying to educate brainwashed idiots is now called "targeting a minority?"

No wonder why these morons consider taking a goddamned cracker a hate crime.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:00 PM
#56

"I think we need to start being as militant as they like to label us - if anyone religious really thinks that science is a fraud and scientists are evil, then we can watch them stand in the public square and dutifully disavow all articles in their posession that required a scientist, an engineer, or any other satanic free thinker to make or support it."

Well said.

Posted by: gdlchmst | July 11, 2008 1:04 PM
#57

"I eat saviors like you for lunch."

Posted by: Badjuggler | July 11, 2008 1:05 PM
#58

So, trying to educate brainwashed idiots is now called "targeting a minority?"

Clearly, the author of post #12 is unblemished by numeracy.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 1:05 PM
#59

#56

Impossible. They can't give back their vaccinations.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:06 PM
#60

....you toucha my wahfur -- I KILL YOU DEAD!!!

Posted by: Alex

I'm gonna cutcha.

I'm gonna cutcha so bad, you're gonna wish I didn't cutcha so bad.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:06 PM
#61

How can someone not believe in evolution and still get vaccinations?

Posted by: sex_target | July 11, 2008 1:07 PM
#62

"Are you threatening me?"
- Beavis

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:07 PM
#63

Kudos to Mark at #46 for referencing "The Rape of the Lock" by Alexander [ironic snicker] "Pope." Well done.

Posted by: Ken Cope | July 11, 2008 1:08 PM
#64

It's a bit of an over simplification to think that god hides in the clouds. You see, god is full of much more trickeriness that that. He exists everywhere but can't be seen.

When I was a little boy I knew that Jesus lived in our bathroom. Every morning my father would beat on the bathroom door and yell "Christ, are you still in there?"

Posted by: JoJo | July 11, 2008 1:08 PM
#65

So if these crackers are the body of Christ, doesn't that mean these Catholic League folks are cannibals? Spiriting the wafer out of the Catholic church's sacrificial grounds was likely the only way to prevent the desecration of Jesus by those, dare I say, blasphemous savages.

Posted by: Guy Kramer | July 11, 2008 1:09 PM
#66

A diamond is just a rock. Short of its practical uses in engineering etc, its value is largely a matter of misguided stupidity and tradition. It's just a rock.

Just throwing it out there.

Posted by: AndyD | July 11, 2008 1:09 PM
#67

@ Tim Miller

PZ - I have to disagree with your stance on this, as far as your request for wafers to be desecrated. You would consider somebody burning books to be essentially desecrating science (and reality) - this is no different to them.

It's very different (and interesting how all the apologists for the religionists keep coming up with rubbish analogies).

Book burners are generally trying to prevent anyone else from being able to read the book in their area or indeed anywhere ever, ie may even intend to wipe it out of existence (as per the Library of Alexandria). In contrast, no-one is preventing the magic cookie people from eating their own magic cookies or from making more magic cookies indefinitely via their magic ritual of magic cookie making. It's not as though they believe their Jesus-bits to be a limited resource!

On the rare occasions when someone burns a single book (or flag) as a protest, rather than trying to incite others to do the same and wipe them all out, no-one in the rational reality-based community would make a fuss about it. We might still laugh at the protester of course if their protest was an ill-founded one.

Posted by: SEF | July 11, 2008 1:10 PM
#68

"How can someone not believe in evolution and still get vaccinations?"

If they can rationalize sending death threats because someone thinks a cracker is only a cracker, then it's easy.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:10 PM
#69

Dear Mr. Bruininks:

I am writing to you to express support for Professor P.Z. Myers, in light of the recent protest against his blog "Pharyngula," by Mr. Bill Donohue and the Catholic League. Mr. Donohue may be characterized as a 'professional victim,' who keeps his name and that of his organization in front of the press by means of howling protest and threatened boycotts every time some public figure criticizes the doctrines, traditions, or actions of his church. It is not clear whether he is perpetually, deeply, offended, or if he is merely cynically exploiting the emotions of many people for personal aggrandizement. In any case, Mr. Donohue seems to need constant reminding that the 1st Amendment does not guarantee him, or anyone, freedom from being offended. (Some of us find him pretty offensive, but are not trying to limit his speech.) It also seems, despite his loud claims to be part of the One True Church, that he doesn't know how to "turn the other cheek."

Professor Myers' writings, while occasionally a bit bombastic, are always well-reasoned and compelling, and his enthusiasm for science in general and biology in particular provide inspiration for scientists, students, and amateurs across the US and the world. Any disciplinary or censorious action by the university would merely offend and harm a different group in order to placate the Catholic League. That would be unfair, don't you think?

Posted by: Mikey | July 11, 2008 1:11 PM
#70

I'm reminded of George Carlin's line: God is the all-powerful, all-knowing Supreme Being who created everything in the universe, and if you don't do what he wants he'll torture you for eternity. Why? Because he loves you!

Posted by: Son of Strom | July 11, 2008 1:11 PM
#71

When I was a little boy I knew that Jesus lived in our bathroom. Every morning my father would beat on the bathroom door and yell "Christ, are you still in there?"

Posted by: JoJo

I've heard it before, but I still laughed enough to almost tinkle a little.

Still, for what it's worth, I think everyone knows Jesus is in prison.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:11 PM
#72

"Catholics believe that the host, once consecrated, is literally the flesh of Christ."

So, it would seem that this could be proven or unproven with a simple DNA test on the wafer, once consecrated.

Posted by: infidel57 | July 11, 2008 1:12 PM
#73

PZ, glad to see you haven't been struck by lightning or buried by frogs yet.

Bill said "I'm not a religious whacko" "I do attend church"

Bill, sorry, but if you attend church, then you are a religious wacko

Anyone who goes to church is a loooooot closer to a religious whacko than they are to a sane person who doesn't go.

Posted by: Notorious P.A.T. | July 11, 2008 1:12 PM
#74

@43:

One can criticize without insulting

Ok, let's give that a go:

The notion that a particular cracker, when spoken to by a man dressed in flowing robes, physically becomes the flesh of another man who, if he existed at all, died almost 2000 years ago, is so ridiculous as to be almost beyond words. Those who believe this to be true are deluded, in the same way that people who believe that Elvis is alive are deluded. Moreover, the notion that removing a cracker, which has been freely given, from a certain building and doing whatever one wants with that cracker, is deserving of death threats, is more than ridiculous; it is batshit crazy stupid, not to mention scary and blatantly illegal.

Posted by: Mike | July 11, 2008 1:12 PM
#75

What I notice about the Christian fundies is just how thin-skinned and insecure they are. A guy in Minnesota writes a blog post, and they go batshit ballistic. If they were truly comfortable in their own beliefs, they would just shrug and carry on.

Posted by: global yokel | July 11, 2008 1:13 PM
#76

#12 is basically deception from start to finish.

But then, anyone who can't tell the difference between threats to a persons life and lively-hood, and the criticism of ideas, is hardly likely to be morally grounded, are they?

Posted by: Damian | July 11, 2008 1:13 PM
#77

It appears the series of tubes is getting backed up. Maybe time to contact the local pipe fitters union and install some bigger tubes. ;)

Posted by: Ben | July 11, 2008 1:13 PM
#78

"Impossible. They can't give back their vaccinations."

We'll let that one slide. But they won't be getting any of our universal health care.

Posted by: gdlchmst | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM
#79

Well mine its here...

To President Robert Bruinink

Im a deeply concerned foreign what happens to be a regular of the science blog Pharyngula and Biologist
undergrad student on PUCV in the country of Chile. Im sure my voice would not have as much weight for
you as one of a US citizen, but since a fine scientist has been threatened even to death by so
called Christians, its my moral duty to make a call for reason.
I know you all live in a country clouded by religious fear, where the people who
votes and therefore elect their representants are sure than the rapture its going
to happen in their lifetimes. But you have a serious responsability as a the president
of the University of Minessota to make a clear statement based on reason alone and not pressure
from religious fanatics who values more the integrity of a cracker than a human life and career.
Im unsure if you are even to read this, but i have a responsabily as a scientist to be and a
moral human being for make a effort no matter how little or useless its could be on the end,
to make reason prevalue over misticism, prejudice and ignrorancy.

Name: Miguel Angel Opazo Arancibia
Nationality: Chilean
College: Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Valparaiso
College ID: 520506-9

Posted by: Lord Zero | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM
#80

@ alex-

Good point. I guess we shouldn't expect rational behavior out of these folks.

Funny thing is, I don't think they are a majority. In my little bubble of people, it seems like there are a lot more religious but not really folks- they claim it, say they are in that group, but don't really follow it (ie, still fuck people they aren't married to and generally act like a normal person). This confuses me b/c I always thought that if I really believed this bullshit, wouldn't I follow the rules if the end result could be my eternal salvation?

Posted by: sex_target | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM
#81

"...magic cookie people..."

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

That's a keeper.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM
#82

I agree Donohue goes overboard, but what is wrong with letting someone hold something sacred?

Isn't that what started this in the first place - a student "holding" something "sacred"?

In the meantime, one of the honest priests has written a book about how the molestations in the church could have happened and what should still be done to prevent them, and they've come down hard on him, too. Well, I guess I see what these uptight Catholics hold as not sacred - i.e., people.

I'd rather desecrate symbols, thank you.

Posted by: Kristine | July 11, 2008 1:14 PM
#83

For cryin' out loud, with all this hate, why don't you start a war against Christians and get it over with!

Whats that? You don't believe in violence? BS!

Whats that? You believe in freedom of religion? Ya.. BS

Whats that? You don't believe in the right to bear arms?
Well, if you are going to keep this crap up, you might want to rethink this one. Most Christians believe in the right to bear arms, and if you removed it from the constitution, that won't change their minds one bit. And most Christians are armed. So, when do you want to start a war against Christians?

That hate coming from you is the same as from the Christians.

So, start a war against the Christians.

I bet you don't have the guts!

Posted by: Starbuck | July 11, 2008 1:16 PM
#84

So, it would seem that this could be proven or unproven with a simple DNA test on the wafer, once consecrated.

Posted by: infidel57

It would be a fun test, wouldn't it? Imagine the looks on their faces to learn that Jesus has the DNA of dried instant pancake batter.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:16 PM
#85

Anyone who has suggested that PZ needs to "respect" their religious tradition and never, ever, ever say anything against it is the worst, most disgusting kind hypocrite.

You people ought to be ashamed of yourselves. You scream and cry and plead persecution, all the while doing everything you can to turn atheism into a crime. You are so blinded by your fear and so busy trying to buy your way into some promised eternal paradise you're unable to see just how ugly and hateful you really are.

Well, I'm not going to mince words here: You can kiss my atheist ass. Where the hell do you get off telling PZ or anyone that they are required to respect anything about your traditions when you vilify them, hate them without even understanding what their beliefs are, profess the idea that they are less than human and do everything possible to make them uncomfortable as soon as you find out they don't believe the same things you do. You call them a murderer, a thief, a liar... and believe you are justified in doing so despite the fact that they have done none of those things... but if they call your host a cracker they need to be fired from their job, have their name dragged through the mud and get death threats.

If you ever have the courage to examine your behavior and compare it to the examples set in your holy book, I hope your despondence over your complete failure as a christian doesn't drive you even further down the path of insanity.

Posted by: Kate | July 11, 2008 1:17 PM
#86

"PZ toys with intellectual concepts and ideas while Catholics build their entire lives and identities around their religion and traditions."

If someone wants to build their life around a belief in a magic cracker then that's THEIR fucking problem. They can kindly leave us sane people the fuck out of their delusion.

Posted by: Boosterz | July 11, 2008 1:18 PM
#87

Sigh, what a load of bullshit.

Posted by: Not now | July 11, 2008 1:19 PM
#88

@72-

But I'm sure they'd use the old "science can't be used to disprove the supernatural" or some bullshit on you which would both satisfy their stupid beliefs and contradict all their other ones.

Posted by: sex_target | July 11, 2008 1:19 PM
#89

For cryin' out loud, with all this hate, why don't you start a war against Christians and get it over with!

You'll be able to read better if you wipe the spittle flecks off your monitor, tough guy.

Posted by: wÒÓ† | July 11, 2008 1:20 PM
#90

#75

"What I notice about the Christian fundies is just how thin-skinned and insecure they are."

"There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Almost inevitably some part of him is aware that they are myths and that he believes them only because they are comforting. But he dare not face this thought! Moreover, since he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not real, he becomes furious when they are disputed." [Bertrand Russell, "Human Society in Ethics and Politics"]

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:20 PM
#91

Dear Mr. Myers, I sent an email to the president for ya. I just want to say I support you totally and think you're awesome. You're intelligent, nice, and articulate. I appreciate your blog and enjoy it very much.

Thank you so much sir.

-John

Posted by: John Morris | July 11, 2008 1:21 PM
#92

A diamond is just a rock. Short of its practical uses in engineering etc, its value is largely a matter of misguided stupidity and tradition. It's just a rock.

Just throwing it out there.

I completely agree. And if it weren't for the fact that so many other people value it, it wouldn't be worth anything to me either. Just like gold, or rare stamps, or baseball cards, (and money, for that matter) or any number of other things that are "valuable". Value is purely subjective. But just because a large number of people value a particular object doesn't mean I should also.

If, given a diamond, I wouldn't throw it away because somebody else will give me money for it. But I won't spend my money on one.

Posted by: tsg | July 11, 2008 1:23 PM
#93

I wonder who would be offended if I put my Jesus cracker in a toaster?

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 1:24 PM
#94

...you toucha my dymon - I KILL YOU DEAD!!

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:25 PM
#95

Well, if you are going to keep this crap up, you might want to rethink this one. Most Christians believe in the right to bear arms, and if you removed it from the constitution, that won't change their minds one bit. And most Christians are armed. So, when do you want to start a war against Christians?

Again, Starbuck, you never fail to disappoint. Thanks for confirming that 'most Christians' fail to follow the most basic of Christ's teachings.

Well done. I'm glad you're on our side.

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 11, 2008 1:26 PM
#96

Alex,

I have always found that people argue articulately when they are right and get angry when they are wrong or caught in a lie they don't want to admit.

I think these Catholics "doth protest too much" because they know their position is ridiculous.

Posted by: Rob | July 11, 2008 1:26 PM
#97

I'd just like to apologize for my previous comment. I called my local church and they explained that Chex Mix does NOT count as Jesus. So, never mind.

*gesture* Bless this Chex Mix.
Now eat up. There are children in Israel who have no messiah to eat at all.

Posted by: aiabx | July 11, 2008 1:27 PM
#98

Alright Starbuck. Let's have a shootout. I'll rely on science and engineering to build my gun. You offer some incantations to your deity to deliver from the heavens your gun. Let's see who has a gun.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:28 PM
#99

Way off topic, unless you like flounder with your crackers, but I just had to tell somebody about these new transitional fossils discovered in museum collections:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-fish_eyesjul10,0,2859782.story

Scientia et Fermentum!

Posted by: Ediacaran, FCD, Delta Pi Gamma | July 11, 2008 1:29 PM
#100

For cryin' out loud, with all this hate, why don't you start a war against Christians and get it over with!

Whats that? You don't believe in violence? BS!

Whats that? You believe in freedom of religion? Ya.. BS

Whats that? You don't believe in the right to bear arms?
Well, if you are going to keep this crap up, you might want to rethink this one. Most Christians believe in the right to bear arms, and if you removed it from the constitution, that won't change their minds one bit. And most Christians are armed. So, when do you want to start a war against Christians?

That hate coming from you is the same as from the Christians.

So, start a war against the Christians.

I bet you don't have the guts!

Starbuck, '

You're not the brightest bulb on the tree are you?

How do you get from being an atheist critical of idiot religious people's actions to being against the right to bear arms? I'm sure some here are but I personally own firearms.

Difference is I don't threaten people with violence. You on the other hand have no problems waving it around.

Your rants show so little thought or ability to reason they are laughable.

Really Starbuck.

WE ARE LAUGHING AT YOU

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 11, 2008 1:30 PM
#101

The closing 'grafs from my dead-tree message to Pres. Bruininks:

I have no doubt that others in the University of Minnesota disagree vehemently with Prof. Myers's statements, and am quite confident that he accepts their right to criticize him without any expectation that the administration should muzzle them for expressing themselves. That is as it should be, and UM would do itself proud by supporting the rights of all its faculty to take controversial stands.

For the last few years, I have sadly watched the University of Florida, led by a recent Bush appointee, diminish itself through a steady attrition of talented faculty seeking greener pastures free from petty politically-driven interference by myopic administrators and legislators. You might do quite well by directing your academic talent scouts and head-hunters to our state; it would be a disservice to your own institution to emulate our deteriorating standards.

Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | July 11, 2008 1:31 PM

Posted by: Johnnyjoe | July 11, 2008 1:36 PM

President Bruininks,

I will add my voice to the many I am sure who have contacted the University regarding the PUBLIC behavior of Mr. Myers.

I am all for free speech, and the right of the self important and profane to ridicule others; but you must recognize that Mr. Myers is not advancing science, but his own political view of science and his placing it in opposition against religion.

I'm not sure his fairly public position as a professor - paid with tax dollars - gives him the right to ridicule the faith of 1.5 billion people. Or that his self-important cynicism really propels the discourse intelligently in this cultural debate about the origins of man.

Does the University sponsor attacks on religion? Is this man's actions to ridicule and vilify the faith of over a BILLION people really something the University can watch with bemusement?

He has asked on his blog for many to write you in support - a sign that he knows he is treading on thin ice. I hope you have the capacity to talk some common sense into this man, for it would be a shame to have his career defined by a moment of cynical haughtiness. But do not be deceived. There is not one IOTA of contrition or remorse on his blog. Rather, he seems to be reveling in the notoriety. A sure first sign of a lack of perspective, and a willingness to savor the spotlight. As opposed to the notion that intelligent people can differ in matters of faith without threatening his little corner of the world.

I hope you have the courage to calm this man down, and reign in his offensive and reckless self-importance.

Posted by: Josh | July 11, 2008 1:36 PM

A diamond is just a rock. Short of its practical uses in engineering etc, its value is largely a matter of misguided stupidity and tradition. It's just a rock.

Because this thread could use some lightening up, I will point out that it's not actually a rock according to most definitions. It's a mineral.

And because I'm done lightening up the thread now: Hey Starbuck, toughguy...why don't you take the first shot? Initiate the war yourself. You will then become a domestic enemy and I will then be compelled by my oath to defend those you attack. Guess who shoots better...

Posted by: Chris H | July 11, 2008 1:38 PM

Unrelated, but you need to read/post about this, people. In my UK, the new-ish laws against "religious discrimination" have just allowed a woman registrar to refuse to perform civil partnerships on the basis of her religious views.

She is a civil servant, an employee and representative of the Government.

"I am delighted at this decision," Ms Ladele said. "It is a victory for religious liberty, not just for myself but for others in a similar position. Gay rights should not be used as an excuse to bully and harass people over their religious beliefs."

From now on all of the laws the UK has protecting people against discrimination of any sort are useless, because all that the bigots have to do is claim that they have a religious right to be bigoted.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/registrar-wins-right-to-refuse-gay-weddings-865042.html

Posted by: Nobody | July 11, 2008 1:39 PM

This is the funniest thing I have EVER seen here.

Thousands of comments because PZ shot his pudgy mouth off again, and incited to stupidity fools that happen to be Catholic.

Death threats would also come about from the unhinged wing of Atheism if someone suggested that Darwin buggered little boys (or iguanas). That is all beside the point (though Prof. Myers would be well-served to report such threats to law enforcement.

No, what really is funny is the perceived job threat. Donohue is a foolish windbag, and I try to ignore him. . .but if he actually pulls THIS off, it could get worse. PZ would then have to live off his speaking schedule and the amount of CRAP that he would babble here would increase exponentially.

Decisions, decisions. Do I ask Dr. Bruininks to save PZ's job so that he keeps (relatively) quiet, or do I endorse the pompous pronouncements of Donohue.

Maybe I can just ask for a real good reprimand. That might be the best route.

Posted by: Tsugradstudent | July 11, 2008 1:41 PM

Here is where I am having some serious problems with Mr. Donohue. He calls for the firing/censoring/censure of Dr. Myers as well as the explusion of the student who committed what he has deemed a heinous act against the church. On March 20, 2008 he agreed with American, British and European publishers not to publish the Danish cartoons which were considered offensive by many followers of the Muslim faith. He sided with the Church's stance against what I consider the first amendment "On February 4, 2006, the Vatican said of the Danish cartoon controversy, 'The right to freedom of thought and expression cannot entail the right to offend the religious sentiment of believers.'

My biggest issue is that further down in that same paragraph, he states that:

I concluded by saying, 'As for Muslims offended by the cartoons, they should learn what a civilized response entails.'

"In other words, bin Laden's latest salvo against the Vatican is wholly unwarranted.

http://www.catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1407

So calling the Danish cartoons an act of aggression against Muslims is an uncivilized response. I am still left wondering where the 'civilized response' is in this regards from the Catholic League. Although, from the above statement, Freedom of Thought should also be monitored. I am glad that Mr. Donohue cannot tell what I am thinking right now. Finally, Mr. Donohue concludes: "The latest bullying by bin Laden, then, is a sign that his grip on Muslims is slipping. Looks like it's time for him to crawl back into one of his lovely caves."

I guess bullying is reserved for the Catholic League. Maybe it is time for him to find a cave. I would like to remind him that bigotry and defamation are in the eyes of the beholder.

-Dr. Myers, my email has already been sent to the President of the University and in a few minutes, the snail mail version will be in the mail. Good Luck and don't let them get to you

Posted by: JohnA | July 11, 2008 1:43 PM

"Catholics build their entire lives and identities around their religion and traditions"

Their _entire_ lives? Jesuz Hussein Christ! Not family, or job, but their religion? Well then. Expect to be insulted on a site like Phayngula. I know that I am insulted when I visit Fox News, or the Catholic League's site.

But I don't threaten lives or livelihoods.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 1:44 PM

"Death threats would also come about from the unhinged wing of Atheism if someone suggested that Darwin buggered little boys..."

I'm not sure about that. I would be surprised if death threats would result. They're pointless in determining the truth. I think most of all, people would want evidence that supports the assertion.

I think there's some projection in your assertion.

Posted by: Justin Deveau | July 11, 2008 1:51 PM

Dear Robert Bruininks,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing this letter in support of PZ Myers regarding the recent irrational quest of the religious right to discredit and tarnish this great man's reputation. I have learned so much from reading his thoughts and blogs; sharing in his passion for evolution, biology, cosmology and this incredible universe we all find ourselves apart of.

His outspoken and comical approach to the delusional masses of most fundamentalist Christian's (and other superstitious, unverifiable madness) is a beacon of light for rationality and reason in the ever growing turmoil of religious dogma against truth and integrity of our humanity.

I hope you stand up for the free speech your country values so highly, to allow the expression of opinions and arguments on illogical or outright bad ideologies. As a president of a well known University, I hope you can see through the absurdity of the claim that removing a cracker from a building is equivalent to a hate crime and a worse offence then rape, for all those victims who truly have been wronged.

I would like to request your full support of PZ Myers, or at the least, withhold any action that may be requested with pressure from confused or mislead individuals who cannot understand the world beyond their in-group and a very old book.

Sincerely,

Justin Deveau
justinleodeveau@hotmail.com
Calgary, AB
Canada

Posted by: Mark | July 11, 2008 1:51 PM

Commenter #110:

Did you read the original article that spawned this whole brouhaha?

People are making death threats and calling for the ouster of a tenured professor over a cracker, and you have the audacity to accuse PZ of being recklessly self-important?

Yes, what the student in question did was disrespectful and ill-advised. Personally, I think he should apologize and mount his criticism of a state-funded religious institution in a more effective manner.

What happened to him after was an assault on common decency and reason, and for that, PZ was absolutely right to raise a voice in criticism. Given the backlash he's had to endure, it was perhaps one of the bravest moments I've had the privilege to witness.

Please also keep in mind that Bill Donohue escalated this whole thing by mounting what will be later known as the Triscuit Letter-Writing Offensive. I think PZ was justified to ask his readers for a civil and meaningful show of support in response. We have shown far more restraint and respect, thus far, than the religiously rabid who've made their presence known.

Posted by: Boosterz | July 11, 2008 1:52 PM

For all the rabid fundies currently trolling this thread, instead of confessing to your priest later this week for your actions over the past couple days, why don't you seek forgiveness instead from Butt Fur Jesus? http://loltheist.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/buttfurcanuseejebus.jpg

Go ahead, confess your sins to the dog's ass. We'll wait. lol

Posted by: Lord Zero | July 11, 2008 1:54 PM

If thratening a cracker its a lesser sin than
killing someone, then it should be a precedent
for every single murderer from now on...
"I did murdered him, but PZ makes fun of a cracker!!,
who its worse ?"

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 1:55 PM

Somebody said "Death threats would also come about from the unhinged wing of Atheism if someone suggested that Darwin buggered little boys...".

I don't know who said it because I'm not going to read more than 100 comments to find out, but I assume it was some god-soaked jesus freak.

I'm not saying all atheists are perfect, but I can't imagine any atheist giving a shit about what some christian liar says. In the newspaper I never read about atheist terrorists, but I read about religious terrorists every day, including Catholic terrorists who are willing to kill to defend a cracker.

Posted by: sex_target | July 11, 2008 1:58 PM

@ starbuck-

So Jesus gave you a gun??!!

OMGZ WUT DID HE LOOK LIKES?

Honestly, you purchased the gun didn't you? Or did you get it from your dad's night stand? I'm upset, I thought we may have something special here. Jesus handing you a gun would prove us all wrong.

:(

Posted by: rarus.vir | July 11, 2008 2:01 PM

It's totally astounding that the atheists here remark time and again at how violent and thin skinned Christians are. Have you never understood Ayn Rand? If there is a mind deluded by errors of this magnitude, how the hell do you reason that you might have honest intellectual, not to mention civil discourse with them.
THEY'RE ULTIMATE ARGUMENT IS A GUN.

Atheists better understand just how serious this can get. Atheists need to understand that sinking to their level is absurd and unproductive.
Take the high road.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 2:01 PM

"...Well, have you built your gun yet?
Because he already gave me my gun..."

For one numbnuts, I never said I would build the gun. I said I would rely on science you floundering moron. And you expect us to believe that your deity gave you a gun?

Go and grow a brain you idiot. And wipe the spittle from your chin while you're at it.

Posted by: Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. | July 11, 2008 2:02 PM

#116:

Darwin was not an iguana buggerer, but was a self-admitted iguana tosser:

"I threw one several times as far as I could, into a deep pool left by the retiring tide; but it invariably returned in a direct line to the spot where I stood. It swam near the bottom, with a very graceful and rapid movement, and occasionally aided itself over the uneven ground with its feet. As soon as it arrived near the edge, but still being under water, it tried to conceal itself in the tufts of sea-weed, or it entered some crevice. As soon as it thought the danger was past, it crawled out on the dry rocks, and shuffled away as quickly as it could. I several times caught this same lizard, by driving it down to a point, and though possessed of such perfect powers of diving and swimming, nothing would induce it to enter the water; and as often as I threw it in, it returned in the manner above described."

Chapter 17 from The Voyage of the Beagle

In the same chapter, he notes molesting land iguanas, too:
"I watched one for a long time, till half its body was buried; I then walked up and pulled it by the tail, at this it was greatly astonished, and soon shuffled up to see what was the matter; and then stared me in the face, as much as to say, "What made you pull my tail?""

And, of course, we all know about his pigeon fancying and his... interest... in barnacles.

Posted by: tsg | July 11, 2008 2:02 PM

To others: I say the Eucharist is more than a cracker because of what it symbolizes for both sides. For us it's the object of our faith and for you it's not the object that bothers you, but our faith in it. That's where we have the problem. The object of your attack is not the cracker but our faith in the Eucharist. And guess what? Our faith is not your concern and when it becomes your concern, you become a bigot.

Wrong. When you threaten us for not observing your faith, then it becomes our problem, and you are the bigots.

Re Webster Cook: He is a Catholic kid who entered a Catholic Mass and was expected to act as Catholics act. No mystery here.

He deserved to be physically assaulted for not eating the host immediately? Are you batshit insane?

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 2:03 PM

Starbuck said "I have seen athiests state that Christians should have their children removed from their homes for child abuse."

Really? I never heard that and I've been reading atheist blogs for a very long time.

I'm not in favor of removing children from their parents. Catholics have done this to Jewish families in the past, but that's no surprise. Catholics are assholes.

What Christians and Catholics and Muslims and religious Jews like to do is lie to their children about reality. They teach their children that faith (believing in idiotic things that have no evidence) is a virtue. This is mental child abuse and I can't imagine anything more immoral. It ruins the life of the child. The parents who do this, and all religious parents do it, can only be called stupid assholes. Their child abuse is legal so I can't stop it, but I sure never miss an opportunity to ridicule it and identify it as abusing children.

Posted by: Observer | July 11, 2008 2:04 PM

Mark@#126,

Minor correction: The kid in Florida did apologize. It was after he had apologized and returned the cracker that Donohue was calling for his expulsion. According to Donohue, it didn't matter what the kid's motivation was.

Posted by: Logicel | July 11, 2008 2:07 PM

"PZ toys with intellectual concepts and ideas while Catholics build their entire lives and identities around their religion and traditions."
______

I think you meant: "PZ builds his entire life and identity around intellectual concepts and ideas while Catholics toy with their entire lives and identities around their religion and traditions."

Posted by: raven | July 11, 2008 2:07 PM

Lying Death Cultist:

Death threats would also come about from the unhinged wing of Atheism if someone suggested that Darwin buggered little boys (or iguanas).

Naw, they would just assume it is another pointless lie from a dumb religious extremist. Who never back up their lies because, well because they are lies.

They would just yawn and point out the truth. Routine and boring.

If fact, I will call Darwin a child molester and iguana cannibal right here. Just leave the death threats on this thread. Include an email address so my employees can get back to you.

PS I realize that you are very stupid. Atheism has nothing to do with science in general and evolutionary biology in particular. 40% of biologists describe themselves as religious.

Posted by: Bronze Dog | July 11, 2008 2:07 PM

That hate coming from you is the same as from the Christians.

So, start a war against the Christians.

I bet you don't have the guts!

Oh, funny.

Shorter PZ: "Violence is wrong, especially if it's over an idea that's silly! I might make fun of the idea publicly if it'll expose the vileness and hatred of bigots for the world. They're violent and stupid, and we need civilized people to realize that!"

Shorter Starbuck: "I wish I was violent and stupid, then I'd show them!"

PZ's the one standing against violence. You're the one apparently condoning violence, Starbuck. Didn't your mama teach you that terrorism is wrong?

Posted by: Mark | July 11, 2008 2:09 PM

#135: Well, actually, they pay taxes, which are used in part to pay his salary, as well as a number of other things.

Keep in mind that we atheists pay our taxes even though we know that we are shouldering some of the burden imposed on us by religious institutions that are granted a tax-free status, many of which attack secularism and atheism without so much as a bit of supporting evidence or any regard for the so-called respect they insist we show them.

Even so, the origins of PZ's salary are irrelevant on this point: he makes his comments as a private citizen, not as a public employee. Pharyngula is not associated with the university's website, and as far as I know, his blog is not required reading for his students (though I suspect some of them read it as a matter of personal choice).

Posted by: Heh heh | July 11, 2008 2:10 PM

Man, now my cover is totally blown.

For the last twenty years, I've been attending mass at both Catholic and Episcopal churches all over North America, just so I can sneak out those little communion wafers.

Then I get 'em home, and I stick needles in 'em, or light matches right underneath 'em, and say, "Hah! Who's all-powerful now, Mr. So-called "God"?

"And if you don't like it, why don't you strike me with lightning?"

But nothing ever happens.

I figure this is the least God deserves--- have you ever noticed what a bully he is, how his so-called "Acts of God" always involve defenseless trailer parks, and how he let the Nazis do whatever they wanted to the Jews?

But, hey, I might even believe in that stupid cocksucker if he'd send a hurricane to hover over the Crawford Ranch, the White House, or maybe Dick Cheney's house.

Are you listening, cocksucker?

Posted by: scooter | July 11, 2008 2:12 PM

Mark #46

Brilliant!!!

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 11, 2008 2:16 PM

Maybe I can just ask for a real good reprimand. That might be the best route.

Posted by: Nobody

A reprimand for what, again?

Take your time, please. I wouldn't want you to hurt yourself.

Posted by: Chiroptera | July 11, 2008 2:16 PM

randy, #13: obviously, death threats are way out of line from the defenders of Donohue's position, but I also think asking folks to palm and steal something others consider sacred to be over the line.

Yes, obviously the two are comparable.

Personally, if Webster Cook understood the implications (according to the faith) of this act, then I would agree that he was a bit of a cad. But the hysterical (in both senses of the word) over-reaction to this completely absolves him from any guilt of anything whatsoever. In fact, the Catholic Church pretty much now has a duty to give him an unconditional apology.

Personally, I would agree that PZ Myers' threats against communion wafers may have been a bit confrontation, but now the over-reaction leads me to think that he now has a duty to "desecrate" the goddamn crackers.

Posted by: Flex | July 11, 2008 2:16 PM

John Lewandowski,

As you are no doubt aware, this entire tempest in a tea-pot came about because Mr. Cook walked out of church without swallowing the host he was given. Possibly it was in bad taste, and it is something the church discourages, but there it is.

The response from Mr. Donohue and others was uncalled for and represensible. It was not a matter of bad taste, it was a matter of claiming that a consecrated host was worth more than anything else, apparently including a human life.

From your posts I suspect you agree that Bill Donohue's reaction was not representative of the majority of Catholics.

Okay, call him on it. Get a bishop, an archbishop or the pope to excommunicate him. If you don't want Bill Donohue's views to be seen as reflecting the beliefs of all Catholics then disown him. Not with a courtiers reply either, there is an offical organization of Roman Catholicism, have them offically declare his opinions as not representative of the church.

Make it doctrinally clear that a human life, a unique person, is more valuable than the eucharist which is identically created in mass quantities every week. A loss of a few tons of consecrated host is nothing compared to the loss of a single human being. You can make more eucharist by performing the ritual, and it is identical to all the other eucharist made since the rite was instituted. You cannot say the same about a human being.

A representative of your church has spewed hatred and venom into the world. This is not an isolated incidence and your religion isn't the only one to have been embarrassed by the intolerant bigotry of one of their public representatives. When this happens the entire religion is shown in a poor light.

P.Z. is simply accenting the hypocrisy of a religion which claims tolerance and understanding yet allows one of it's self-appointed representatives to call for major retribution in retalition for an impolite action.

As for P.Z.'s threat to desecrate a consectrated host, I don't think pleading with him, or threatening him, will make him abandon the idea. If the Catholic Church takes some action, you may find him willing to discuss it. Action, not whining.

The Catholic Church, Mr. Donohue and his small-minded organization called the Catholic League have in a small way damaged the world. They have, by persecuting a collage student and then calling for the dismissal of a tenured professor, incited venom and hatred against those who do not deserve it. For all the invective P.Z. has already had lobbed at him, he hasn't done anything yet except mock the Catholic Church. As yet no hosts have been held hostage, no eucharists eliminated.

If you want to prevent your sacred wafer from desecration, take action to fix the damage that was done by Donohue and the Church. Actions. It is too late for apologies. If the Church, or even some members of the Church demonstrate some contrition for the actions of Bill Donohue, maybe we won't consider all the members of the Catholic church to be intolerant blowhards like Mr. Donohue so obviously is.

Would you like some suggestions?
- Set up a scholarship fund for Mr. Cook and people like him who have been excessivly and unjustly harrassed for an innocent exhibition of poor taste.
- Censure, and if necessary excommunicate, members of your church who threaten or incite threats against other human beings.

There are numerous other possibilities. For example, I'm certain that more than a few people here would like all the records concerning pedophilic priests opened to public scrutiny. But I recognize that this kerfluffle is too small to embarress the Catholic church enough to do that.

Best regards,

Posted by: raven | July 11, 2008 2:17 PM

A friend went to Catholic school. One time she walked in on a notorious Catholic priest who had his dick up the butt of a homeless kid about 5th grade. This priest has since fled the country with an arrest warrant after him and is believed to be buggering little boys in child molestor heaven, Thailand.

Everyone in the school knew it and the kid was lost and pathetic and somewhat ostracized. One day he jumped in front of a subway train and was killed instantly.

Catholics have got some 'splaining to do about why their magic crackers don't do anything magic.

Posted by: Boosterz | July 11, 2008 2:18 PM

"Yes, please do enlighten me: In the absence of a transcendent morality, what RIGHT have we to condemn any kind of behavior "

Ask yourself if you'd like that behavior directed at you or any member of your family. If the answer is no, then I'd say that behavior is probably wrong wouldn't you? I'll take the "treat others as you want to be treated" philosophy over your so called "transcendental morality" any day of the fucking week.

Btw, if you get your morality from your religion, does that mean you think it's morally acceptable to throw rocks at kids till they die if they back talk you? Just saying...

Posted by: E.V. | July 11, 2008 2:19 PM

Christ, are you still on this thread?!?? (rimshot)

Ok, let's see what we've learned so far:
*It's just a CRACKER
*It's NOT JUST a cracker, it's the flesh of JESUS, but only after magical words are spoken
*Many catholics have scarfed down host wafers outside of communion
*Host wafers are tastless
*Adding a topping is no longer funny after the 30th time it is suggested
*Not all Catholics are as offended (or offensive) as Bill Donahue
*Those who believe in transubstantiation are cannibals
*They're not in danger of consuming Jesus' foreskin since cicumcision is a Jewish rite and Jesus was a Jew
*Mr. Cook was assaulted and physically threatened for not consuming the wafer
*Even after returning the wafer to the church, Mr. Cook recieved threats of bodily harm
*PZ recieved death threats when he declared he might "desecrate" a "cracker"
*PZ recieved death threats and other verbal abuses
*Pious people assume Pascal's wager is an effective counter argument to non theism
*Pious people assume prayer is effective
*Those without a real argument call their opponents "cunts"
*Many theists are thin skinned
*Many atheists are thin skinned
*Many people support PZ regardless of religious orientation
*Some people oppose PZ despite religious orientation
*Some atheists hold other peoples beliefs above their own
*Many people find the idea of offending people very distasteful and throw words around like "juvenile" and "jerk
*People are offended when others don't hold their sacred cows to be dear
*People should not have the right to not be offended
*Atheists don't have sacred cows - they're secular, obviously
*Some people have a wonderful sense of humor and understand irony
*Some people are clueless
*Trolls contribute little to public discourse
*Some posters get cranky and tired and begin to fight each other even when they agree
*Bill D. is a bully and a punk bitch.
*Nuns can be assholes
*Many religious zealots lie outright to give themselves credibility
*Some posters are so entrenched in willful ignorance that reason and logic are useless against them
*All Jebus/cracker pun and allusions have been done ad infinitum, ad nausea - let it go people
*The same with the cannibal references and "it's just a cracker!" -we get it
*Using all the non sequiturs and off topic posts as evidence, many posters here are undoubtedly ADD/ADHD
*Despite modern technology, a shitload of people are still in the dark ages.
*Starbuck is a waste of protoplasm

I'm sure I left something out...

Posted by: k8 | July 11, 2008 2:20 PM

Flex,

You idiot - this kid in FL was harassed by a couple of classmates - his life was NOT in danger.

You guys are just using this as an excuse to express your anti-catholic bigotry, plain and simple.

YOU ARE A LOW LIFE BIGOT.....understand?

You just made up an excuse to express your true self.

Posted by: James Sorrell | July 11, 2008 2:21 PM

I sent a very courteous email to the President. Hope everything works out!

Posted by: Steve Jeffers | July 11, 2008 2:21 PM

'Yes, please do enlighten me: In the absence of a transcendent morality, what RIGHT have we to condemn any kind of behavior'

So are you saying that the only thing that's stopping you murdering people is the sense that God wouldn't like you to?
And, presumably, the corollary of that is that if you thought God *did* want to murder people, you'd do it in an instant.

*That* is infinitely more scary, horrifying and nihilistic than the atheistic position on morality, which is that we all share the same planet and need to come up with rules to make that possible. It's *your* mentality that leads to people flying planes into buildings and sending death threats over cookies.

What's the 'ultimate source' of morality? Well, personally, I think it's a nonsense question, basically one of the prime creationist fallacies, albeit it one that's asked by people with better GPAs than most creationists. It evolved. Like every other animal, we've ended up with a system that adopts a variety of strategies to allow us to thrive.

Posted by: Feynmaniac | July 11, 2008 2:22 PM

Civil to Others @135 blathered,
No, they are calling for a censure because he attacks their religion with foul mouthed mean spirited regularity and they pay his salary.

So when someone becomes a professor they are suppose to refrain from expressing views that may upset any taxpayer? Even if those views were made on their private blog and had nothing whatsoever to do with his position at the university?

Posted by: Moderate | July 11, 2008 2:23 PM

I've always considered PZ to be a credible voice of reason in the ridiculous evolution/creationism battle. As a Minnesota resident, Physics major, and Catholic, I view the ID/Creationist argument to be...well...silly at best.

Additionally, in my opinion Bill Donohue and his never-ending presidency of the so-called "Catholic League" is a joke.

However, I must admit to being disappointed and offended at Myers' pointless attack on a matter that Catholics feel strongly about. We don't knock on doors, hand out pamphlets, or conduct grand tv money-grabbing specials to promote our views on faith.

The Catholic church has, to the best of my knowledge, been supportive of the sciences, including Biology and the study of evolution.

On the part of Catholics, this is a matter of faith. It is not, nor does it pretend to be, a matter of science. But it doesn't need to be.

Although I have been a supporter of the Democrats in general, and Obama in particular, after reading so many hateful comments about my Church and my faith in these statements, it does cause me to wonder.

The right wing courts the Catholic vote though they want to convert us: The left courts the Catholic vote though they hate our beliefs.

Go figure...and then please explain why this event rises to the level that requires a Biology professor from a small state college to become involved at all. I'm annoyed.

Posted by: raven | July 11, 2008 2:23 PM

Another Lying Death Cultist:

Oh, BTW, there are some things I don't take on faith. Dr Myers says he has received death threats. I don't believe him. (I'm odd, though. A skeptic where others are credulous, and credulous perhaps where others are skeptical.)

Have a good day, all of you.

Posted by: dylan tenelux

Dylan is the type that can watch a Catholic priest rape a little boy and say it didn't happen.

Myers certainly did receive some death threats. They have been posted on these threads in public sporadically for two days. All you have to do is read them. Try looking for "ted" who was short and to the point.

Do magic crackers make you a stupid liar? Seems like they do.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 11, 2008 2:26 PM

By the way... You can laugh at me all you want.. I think it is humorus... But, Christians laugh at you clueless clowns all the time... When you spout your "disbeliefs" and a Christians just walks away shaking their head.. they are laughing at you... Maybe thats why athiests are so angry.... They KNOW they are but clueless clowns and everyone laughs at them..

Was that the modified "I know you are but what am I" retort?

Please don't stop Starbuck, you brandishing your stupidity like the gun "he gave you" is giving me a good chuckle and giving others a good window into the mind of a mildly functioning idiot.

You have yet to mae a coherent point with any support. Lots of

WELL I HEARD ATHEISTS SAY THEY FUCK PUPPIES.

Please. You're a hoot.

Posted by: BGT | July 11, 2008 2:28 PM

To Starbuck @83 & 131:

I am an atheist raised in MS, and living in TN. I firmly believe and practice the right to keep and bear arms, regardless of what my other compatriots here may think.

I also know this as well, only fools start wars. (Tell me again, what are jihads and crusades all about?)

Posted by: dylan tenelux | July 11, 2008 2:29 PM

#161 Alex:

Empathy? Ah! There's some rational, scientific language for you!

And why should we listen to this empathy thing, whatever it is? Because Oprah says so?

Taking someone's life without proper warrant is also wrong.

OK. Peter Singer might disagree. Or he might have an odd idea as to what constitutes a "proper warrant."

I'm tempted to ask about your views on prenatal life -- oops! I meant to say, fetal blobs of tissue -- but I won't.

I do reserve the right to wonder aloud when the blob of tissue becomes this wonderful "human being" that "empathy" demands we must cherish and care for and not violate.

Posted by: raven | July 11, 2008 2:31 PM

Routine, another Boston priest who got caught. There were many in that Diocese.

Defrocked priest sentenced to 12 to 15 years for child rape By Denise Lavoie, AP Legal Affairs Writer | February 15, 2005

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- A judge sentenced Paul Shanley on Tuesday to 12 to 15 years in prison for child rape, condemning the defrocked priest for using his revered status to prey on a vulnerable little boy.

Shanley, one of the most notorious figures in the Boston Archdiocese's clergy sex abuse scandal, was convicted last week of repeatedly raping and fondling the boy at suburban parish in the 1980s, beginning when he was 6 years old.

The sentencing was seen as an important milestone by victims who packed the courtroom to watch the once-popular priest receive his punishment. As a wobbly Shanley was led from the courtroom in handcuffs, many in the audience burst into applause and one man called out "Goodbye."

Judge Stephen Neel said Shanley used his position as a priest to gain the trust of his victim.

"It is difficult to imagine a more egregious misuse of trust and authority," he said.

Shanley, 74, once known for a being a hip "street priest" who reached out to troubled children and homosexuals, will be eligible for parole after eight years. He was also sentenced to 10 years' probation.

Posted by: andyo | July 11, 2008 2:31 PM

phantomreader42, #177

The "desecration remark"'s point was to point out what exactly happened, and has you so shocked. Of course PZ anticipated the "outrage" at this seemingly "stupid" and "childish" remark orders of magnitude out of proportion. To any sane person like you it'd seem preposterous.

Posted by: Realist | July 11, 2008 2:33 PM

why don't you start a war against Christians and get it over with!

Wouldn't be a fair fight. I see it going something like this:

Christian: "All right, you godless atheist - I've got you in my sights and I'm going to blow your head off!"

Atheist: "Look!" (pointing over Christian's shoulder) "Isn't that Jesus?"

Christian: (turns to look)

Atheist: (BANG!)

Posted by: mayhempix | July 11, 2008 2:34 PM

This is a joke!
This is not about "free speech" it is about HATE speech and anti Catholic bigotry on the part of PZ Myers.
For a professor of science to act so outlandishly and ignorantly is amazing.
It is more amazing that so many little Stalins on here agree with his sick bigotry.
You people look like fools and bigots to the rest of the world!!!
Posted by: k8 | July 11, 2008 2:16 PM

Hate speech? Oh please! Christians love to play the victim, even when they are the world's single largest fantasy religion.

What fanatics like k8 doesn't comprehend is that it is not about Catholics... or even Christians. Ultimately it is about all supernatural beliefs and religions that are perpetuated by indoctrination, fear, ignorance and power.

I just love how people like k8 express their beliefs that atheists are damned to hell for eternal suffering, which isn't hate speech, but if anyone dare point out the ridiculous absurdity of their rituals, it is.

Also k8 wouldn't know what a "Stalin" is if it bit him on his god created ass.

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 2:35 PM

k8, yesterday and now today you have been using several different names here. Why? Is it because you're a stupid asshole?

k8, or whatever you're calling yourself right now, said "You people look like fools and bigots to the rest of the world!!!"

Three exclamation points. You must really mean it.

I work with Christians (when I'm not unemployed like I am now) and usually I like them. However the things they believe make me think they're nuts. This cracker incident is a good example. There are Catholics who are willing to murder people who don't want to eat crackers. Other Catholics want to ruin their lives. Many more Catholics believe anyone who doesn't eat a cracker goes to hell to be tortured for eternity, which is much longer than several trillion years.

The only possible conclusion is these people are insane and dangerous. And of course they're assholes. If you want to call me bigoted against assholes, I don't have a problem with that.

By the way k8, you're a world class asshole, and one of the most stupid Christians in the world.

Posted by: Dahan | July 11, 2008 2:35 PM

Alright! dylen enelux has finally brought abortion into this thread! We can keep this thing going on for ever now! Ten threads, a thousand posts each! Weeks and weeks! Whoopee!!!

Really, as long as the trolls keep coming and idiots like myself keep feeding them, we probably could. With that. I'm outa here.

Posted by: Richard | July 11, 2008 2:36 PM

ROTFLMAO*10

Thank you for that great imagery Realist. I will have a smile for the rest of the day.

Posted by: Kemist | July 11, 2008 2:36 PM

You know, I'm a severely lapsed catholic, and my family and friends still attend mass. Attended catholic school (those were the public french school in my place, so you basically had no choice, it was that or english-protestant), did all my sacraments. Hell, catholicism was our state's religion in the recent past.

And you know what was the reaction when I brought this into a discussion ? Laughter. Then "americans are so crazy !" So, religious commenters, that's what you succeed in doing. Make us abroad slap our thighs at american nuttiness. Again.

I've been in a mosque. I've been in a Hindu temple. I've made a few mistakes in respecting the exact customs of these places. And you know what happenned ? Nothing. Just the person accompanying me telling me it was wrong with a little smile.

I understand the sacredness of the host for the believer. That's why I would not do such a thing, out of respect for my parents, which are believers. But you know what ? This is supposed to be a personal thing, a thing that's meaningful to you only. That's why none of us have been outraged at somebody failing to eat the host, or bringing it home to do whatever (s)he wants with it. It means nothing to them. It's only a cracker. For them. So who cares ?

Posted by: k8 | July 11, 2008 2:38 PM

Dog, you idiot -

Calling for the public stealing and desecration of religious objects is HATE SPEECH. I.e. the incitment of violence and hate against a particular group.

Enough with all of this talk of death threats - they are examples of 2-3 extreme individuals NOT the entire Catholic population and are the RESULT of the call for the stealing of a important part of the faith.

Are you people blind? Or just idiots who cannot understand the basics of human civility?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It is like calling for the stealing of the sacred scrolls from a Jewish temple and then burning them in public.

IS THAT HATE SPEECH???

It is! and it is the same principle of what PZ has suggested for Catholics.

You people need to get a grip.

Posted by: bigjohn756 | July 11, 2008 2:40 PM

An "object of faith" does not exist. Faith is, by definition, believing in something without evidence. But, if there is no evidence, how do you know it exists? If you can't touch, feel, smell or otherwise detect something it is not there, or, if it is it doesn't matter.

Posted by: Ugly In Pink | July 11, 2008 2:41 PM

Dylan - I note that you did not respond to my comment. As to your abortion nonsequitor, whether it is a human life or not is irrelevant: Morally I can no more force a woman to use her body to support a fetus, with the risks that entails, than I can force a father to donate a kidney to his ailing child.

Morally the the body, and by that token the uterus, is invitation-only. By the same token, you are not forced to donate bone marrow to cancer ridden children, whose lives are similarly valuable to the fetuses you profess to care so much about.

Posted by: andyo | July 11, 2008 2:42 PM

OK, this is the very first time I'm gonna insult someone since I've been posting in Pharyngula for a looong time. It's the first time I feel justified.

Johnnyjoe, #110

I'm not sure his fairly public position as a professor - paid with tax dollars - gives him the right to ridicule the faith of 1.5 billion people. Or that his self-important cynicism really propels the discourse intelligently in this cultural debate about the origins of man.

Does the University sponsor attacks on religion? Is this man's actions to ridicule and vilify the faith of over a BILLION people really something the University can watch with bemusement?

OK you slimy lying fuckers with the "1 BILLION" line. It's not true. I am in that billion, as millions of others who were forcibly baptized as babies and never excommunicated. catholics keep books, and they don't excommunicate almost anyone. I calculate catholics who actually believe in catholicism are in the high tens of millions probably.

And yes, PZ has every fucking right to ridicule in this blog you or me or anyone. Get the fuck over it.

Posted by: Doctor Spurt | July 11, 2008 2:42 PM

My mate Dave sent the following by email:

President Robert H. Bruininks,

The public campaign against Professor P.Z. Myers by one Bill Donohue has recently come to my attention. I understand that he is exhorting people to write directly to your office calling for action against Professor Myers. While I object to their methods, under the circumstances -- including my rejection of their intentions -- I feel that it is my responsibility to add to the flood of messages.
Myers is not only a fine scholar, but an important and energetic public intellectual defending science and learning against some of its most committed and often unprincipled enemies. He is famous and widely admired for this among scientists, just as he is disliked by many opponents of science. His proposal to publicly express his lack of belief in the supernatural status of a communion wafer was, I think, an entirely legitimate exercise of free speech. It strikes me, furthermore, as an important intervention in the ridiculous reaction to the action of Webster Cook, including suggestions that Cook was guilty of a hate crime, and that taking the wafer amounted to holding a hostage.
With respect to the specific suggestion that Myers' remarks violate a university requirement to be 'respectful, fair and civil', it seems to me that the following points are worth making:
(1) Myers' proposal was calibrated to respond to the outrageous response to the actions of Webster Cook, which have included death threats to Cook. (And now, I gather, to Myers himself.)
(2) Myers' proposal is in an important sense brave - he's offering to put himself on the line, in defence of the rights of those who do not hold the communion sacred.
(3) While admittedly expressed with a certain fire, I do not believe that his post is in fact disrespectful, or unfair. That is, unless asserting that one emphatically holds a belief incompatible with that held by another is disrespectful or unfair. If it is, and fairness holds trumps, it's hard to see the point of universities, or a future for science.
(4) Finally, I do not think Myers' public utterances are truly examples of a failure of civility. They are a vigorous assertion of the right of some to do things that others find objectionable falling short of infringing those of their freedoms that do deserve protecting. They are no different in principle from the act of any individual who allows it to be known that she or he eats pork, shaves, thinks women have a right to education, has a same-sex partner, etc. If universities do not hold the line against conflating disagreement with lapses of civility, I wonder who will.

Regards,
And apologies again for feeling duty bound to add to the deluge,

David Spurrett
Professor of Philosophy
Head of School of Philosophy and Ethics
University of KwaZulu-Natal,
Howard College Campus
Durban
South Africa

Posted by: SC | July 11, 2008 2:43 PM

http://allafrica.com/stories/200806300247.html

Posted by: «bønez_brigade» | July 11, 2008 2:44 PM

I just emailed my support for you PZ. The Catholic League are giving AIG a serious challenge for the title of "wackaloons".

A Penn & Teller 'Bullshit!' show on the bugnuttery of Catholic crackers/christ -- and their defilement of said bread -- would be a hit; and an inclusion of other religions' wacky "symbolic" beliefs wouldn't hurt.

Posted by: E.V. | July 11, 2008 2:44 PM

K8:
Cool, like your still here. 4reals. Like, shouldn't you be watching Hanna Montana or something?
Oh my gah! Have you, like, decided where you're going to college? It'll be so cool when you like rilly get to kiss a boy or if you ac'shully learn how to argue a valid point.
Like someday, you might ac'shully have something relevant to say...
But you're, like, a poser, so STFU and stuff.

Posted by: tsg | July 11, 2008 2:45 PM

However, I must admit to being disappointed and offended at Myers' pointless attack on a matter that Catholics feel strongly about. We don't knock on doors, hand out pamphlets, or conduct grand tv money-grabbing specials to promote our views on faith.

Death threats, physical assault, legal threats and trying to ruin another person's life for not following your faith. That is what this is about. Ignoring that won't make it go away.

Posted by: Feynmaniac | July 11, 2008 2:46 PM

Empathy? Ah! There's some rational, scientific language for you!

Empathy has been observed in apes, other mammals and of course humans. Several studies have shown human beings have a universal morality, alot like how humans have an innate ability for language. Empathy also plays a role in the evolution of groups. So yeah it's pretty "scientific".

Posted by: Gavel Down | July 11, 2008 2:47 PM

Dylan - Please respond to my comment at #169.

Posted by: Alex | July 11, 2008 2:47 PM

"Empathy? Ah! There's some rational, scientific language for you!"

Actually, it is you moron. Your lack of exposure to these concepts shines through. LOL!

You are a complete knuckle-dragging mouth-breather.

Posted by: BobC | July 11, 2008 2:48 PM

I applaud the comments in #197 by Logicel. I agree completely. Moderate Christians are part of the problem. Actually, there's really no such thing as a moderate religious person. There's nothing moderate about believing in a magic man who hides in the clouds. It's pure insanity to believe that.

The Christian extremists, the wackos who believe the entire universe is 6,000 years old, need the moderate Christians. If the moderate Christians became atheists, the wackos would be isolated and very likely to go extinct sooner rather than later. It's the same for Muslims. The terrorists need the moderate Muslims, and the moderate Muslims need the Christians.

This is why I think every Christian in America, no matter how moderate they think they are, is partly responsible for the 9/11 religious attacks. Anyone who believes in heaven, the belief which made 9/11 possible, is indirectly supporting the terrorists. The terrorists think they're normal because even Americans believe in heaven. But there's nothing normal about the heaven belief. To believe in life after death, a person has to be stupid, gullible, insane, and a coward.

Posted by: sinmantyx | July 11, 2008 2:49 PM

"Surely a man of such hate and bitterness does not compartmentalize these views and feelings when he enters a classroom or has interaction with students. Is this representative of the open-minded pursuit-of-truth-and-conflicting-ideas environment that the University wishes to cultivate?

All the Best
Darren Libscomb"

This angers me. I have heard nobody accuse Myer of treating students with disrespect. Implying that he does because of his strong opinions about religion - without any evidence what-so-ever - is simply awful.

Teachers are not asked to never voice an opinion, especially outside of the classroom, that could offend a student. If that is what is asked of me - I'll quit today.

I've had racists in my classroom. Should I avoid talking bad about forced sterilization or race purity?

Holding a material object as sacred offends me. It offends me within the religion of my youth, which was decidedly iconoclast. It offends me as a humanist. Comparing treating an object with disrespect with kidnapping and hate crime, is obscene and repugnant.

I'm sure there are Catholics in my classroom. Why don't you try to get me fired? Go ahead. Write a letter.

Name: Marian Aanerud
Department: Computer Science, Engineering Science and Physics
Institution: University of Michigan - Flint

Posted by: Flex | July 11, 2008 2:50 PM

K8 wrote, "YOU ARE A LOW LIFE BIGOT.....understand? "

Hmm. And I thought I was rather respectful in pointing out to the moderate Catholics that suggesting a consecrated host has more value that a human life is in direct opposition to my, and many others, personal beliefs.

However, should the inane troll want to resort to name calling rather than actually considering opposing points of view, I suppose a brief bout of playground insults could help the slow Friday afternoon pass.

K8, you are a callow blatherskite, whom I curse to taste the sluggish, acrid flavor of real blood when drinking the sacrimental wine and to taste the spongy, sweetish taste of human flesh when eating the consecrated host.

Posted by: Te metatroll | July 11, 2008 2:50 PM

I am offended by this post! Take it down right now! Or... Or... I'll get you fired!

Okay... maybe not so much. But boy, will I ever stamp my feet! And just watch this pout!

(Pouts, shakes fist angrily...)

Also: boy, aren't you a sad, angry little man! I'm so gonna kick yer butt!

Oh, also: bigot! You're a bigot! You made fun of me for believing something really silly. Ergo: bigot! It's just the same as if you called me names because I'm black. Or lynched me or somethin'. It's exactly like that. Ergo: bigot! (I'm told whoever shouts this the most wins...) Anyway, it's not allowed! You're not allowed to ridicule me! It's in the constitution or somethin'. Making fun of what I believe is illegal, now... Should be, at least! If I want to believe AIDS is a magical sky man's revenge on the gays, or condoms make you explode, or Bozo the clown flies around the skies throwing pies at all the bad little boys and girls, that's my right! And you're not even allowed to laugh! Stop! Stop that right now! I saw you smiling! NO SMIRKING! That's blasphemy! Bigot! Bigot!

(Takes deep breath... Whew... This whole being really, really outraged thing, it's tiring...)

Bigot! Bigot! Bigot! Bigot... (Counts on fingers... Looks like I need one more for good measure...) Bigot! Oh, also, why don't you go pick on the blacks? Or the gays? Or, hey, why don't you pick on the Muslims, if you're so brave? Here, I've a Koran for you to pee on right here! Pee on it myself daily, I do... Oh, also: bigot! Also, you're just doing this because we Catholics are such nice people... Shut up, we are too! Much better than those terribly violent Muslims... those guys are crazy! And we're not bigoted at all! We're nice! Really! Say otherwise again, and I'll cut you, motherfucker! And I'll pray for you! You just watch!

(Stamps feet again...)

Okay. No, that wasn't a prayer. That was me stamping my feet. I'll get to the prayer bit in a bit. Anyway, you clearly don't understand Sophisticated Catholic Theology(TM), or you wouldn't mock us so! Don't you know this whole transubstantiated host thing is all deep and mystical and transcendental and theological and cosmological and other-thingsological 'n shit? Clearly, you plebeian atheists have no understanding of the finer points of our profoundly sophisticated theology! Only the truly jejune will be taken in by your silly incoherent, uncouth, unschooled, drooling ravings on subjects you clearly aren't qualified to discuss... on these our holy mysteries ! In which this bread becomes the body of a dead guy! See, that's deep. It's beyond me, beyond you (makes scary/wiggly fingers)... It's... erm... a mystery. Oh, also: Aquinas! I win. And see, watch me think deeply on it, all deep like...

(Chants, swings incense ball around a bit...)

You didn't eat some bread that was handed to you? You horrid, horrid people! That's so wrong, breaking into churches en masse, beating up priests, throwing over the altar, having your way with nuns! How can you live with yourselves? Clearly, that's against the law! Stop it! Stop it right now!

Oh, okay, actually, so you didn't do any of those things, and you're not proposing to do any of those things, and okay, it probably isn't actually illegal merely to make fun of us nor to palm a piece of bread... yet... But nice people don't go shoving our silliness in our faces anyway... Ever! Doesn't matter what led up to it, it's just asking for trouble, and clearly since it's asking for trouble It's All Your Fault I'm here bitching at you about it, so you should shut the hell up about the really, really silly things we believe. We're not hurting anyone if we happen to like mumbling in Latin now and then! That is too all there is to talk about here. Death threats? Expulsion demands? Kid? What's that? La la la, can't hear you...

Oh, okay, maybe I can, but just 'cause some kid got a few death threats, what business is it of yours? Shut yer trap, dammit! I was talking. You're just pouring fuel on the flames! Expelled? Who said anything about asking for some kid to be expelled? Or death threats? We were talking about you being a bigot... Millions dead. Milllllions! Really! Atheism kills! Murderers! Hitler! Stalin! Pol Pot! Aquinas! Erm... wait... no...

Anyway, okay, actually, I made all that up. Actually, I used to be an atheist, but I got better... Or, no, wait, I am an atheist, yeah, that's the ticket, yeah... and... and you and your extremism is making me look bad! Stop being so extremist... you... you... extremist, you! Making fun of mystical beliefs, flagrantly eating bread, what will be next? Pogroms, salt mines? Breaking into churches? I know your type!

Anyway, the point is: you're all so immature. I'm above all of this. Waaaay above it. Can't even see the tops of yer heads from the superior soapbox upon which I perch. The Catholics are kinda crazy and Donohoe's a nut but Myers is a such a potty-mouthed troublemaker. So tiresome, these things just aren't done in polite company. A plague on all of yer houses. Look... the line of my very jauntily upturned nose points to higher ground and higher things! Now, worship my Olympian objectivity.

Also, clearly you're just doing this to drive traffic to your blog. So... umm... I'm leaving!

(Flounces off...)

Posted by: WRMartin | July 11, 2008 2:53 PM

Hey cracker people! Fuck you. And your cracker.
Fuck your pope and his silly hat. Fuck your host.
Hey Bill Donohue! Fuck you.
If anyone has a problem with that then fuck you too!
Send your god(s) to get me. I won't be holding my breath waiting.

Thanks PZ. I feel better now.

POETS!

Posted by: Abel Pharmboy | July 11, 2008 2:54 PM

jeez, you people are commenting at lighting speed! This is a response to Chiroptera at #13 on the previous thread regarding the Webster Cook's UCF being a proxy for the Catholic League. I think that is unlikely, although UCF has been pretty wishy-washy on the whole subject.

When I first read the story I was taken aback because I never thought UCF was a religious school. In fact, you have to look long and hard on their website to find the campus ministries page. UCF has made some big investments in their basic science research programs, including recruiting a fairly well-known person in my field to head their Biochem dept, and are building a new medical school to meet Florida's always-growing need for docs. My guess is that the scientific stakeholders there are holding their collective breath and hoping that this episode doesn't bring adverse attention to the state's investment in the biomedical enterprise.

FWIW, I think this all started b/c Webster Cook was using the opportunity to draw attention to the fact that state monies are used to support religious activities in a university system with explicit prohibition of such use of funds. In fact, the "church" where Webster snagged the heavenly host was in room 316 of the Student Union, not even in the Catholic Campus Ministries center.

Posted by: scooter | July 11, 2008 2:55 PM

Perhaps it's time for

A YOU TUBE EUCHARIST CHALLENGE !!!

I'm workin on mine right now.

Posted by: dylan tenelux | July 11, 2008 2:55 PM

#169 Gavel Down:

Okay. I'll give it a try.

We are all sinners, and in the case of the Church, I guess one could say, corruptio optimorum pessima. There have been scandalous views held and vile deeds done by churchmen as well as by the unchurched. I do know that in the 20th century, the societies that were most diligent in their attempts to eject God from the public square and from the popular mind were also the most cruel, bloodthirsty, degrading of human dignity, etc. Neither Hitler's, nor Stalin's, nor Mao's misdeeds can be laid at the feet of any priest or bishop.

That's the best I can do! Apologies if it doesn't meet with your approval.

Posted by: cicely | July 11, 2008 2:57 PM

Starbuck @ #83:

For cryin' out loud, with all this hate, why don't you start a war against Christians and get it over with!

I think you must be projecting, dude.

What you're seeing here isn't (IMO, of course) hatred of Christians, but ridicule for an idea some of them hold sacred. Get a grip.
___________________________________________________

I can't help but thinking that there would be an easy way out of this whole mess if Jesus, having instilled his essence into the ordinarily-mortal cracker, simply reserved the right to vacate it at any time, if he (being omnipresent) perceived that it was about to be used inappropriately. The crackers would then be useless for profane and/or magical purposes not sanctioned by the Church underwriting this belief in transubstantiation.

And, on the repeated insistence that everyone else must respect the Catholic belief in the divine presence in the consecrated cracker....I trust that they will now respect the beliefs of people holding other (or no) religious beliefs, and recall all of their missionaries whose job is to "convert the heathen"?

Somehow, I am skeptical.

Posted by: raven | July 11, 2008 2:59 PM

All these cracker threads have shown is that Xian terrorists are the same as moslem terrorists.

The moslem terrorists are ahead on body counts lately but the xians have a deep bench and a lot of points ahead from the last 2,000 years.

There is no reasoning with psychotic killers who think god gave them permission to kill. Best I can say is we have an armed forces, police, and prisons to keep them in line. Paul Hill murdered two MDs and the state of Florida executed him for it.

I keep saying the fundies want to destroy our society and set up a theocracy on a pile of bodies and an ocean of blood. It wasn't hard to figure out, look at the people involved and they say exactly that often.

PZ Myers is the new Salman Rushdie, complete with a Catholic fatwa on his head.

Posted by: Odie | July 11, 2008 3:00 PM

Ok, so this is off topic but...

Abel Pharmboy@241:

jeez, you people are commenting at lighting speed! This is a response to Chiroptera at #13 on the previous thread regarding the Webster Cook's UCF being a proxy for the Catholic League.

I totally sympathize. I can't tell you how many times I started to write a response, then updated the page and decided not to post it because of how many new comments appeared (with some already making my point).

Posted by: