Pharyngula

Posted by: Michelle | July 22, 2008 10:47 AM

It's pretty obvious that they are being very christian with their harassment, threats and hatred.

Thankfully they will now stop spewing bullshit about loving your neighbor and realize that is what their religion is all about: hatred.

Bill Donohue, you're a crazy freak and so is everyone following your little sect within the bigger sect.

Posted by: CS | July 22, 2008 10:49 AM

"Much has been written about the moral vacuity that marks the Darwinian vision of society that Myers embraces."

Why this, when the Vatican has accepted evolution?

Posted by: Paul Lamb | July 22, 2008 10:51 AM

Doesn't this constitute harrassment? I mean legally?

Posted by: PixelFish | July 22, 2008 10:53 AM

My new goal in life is to write something that will cause Bill Donahue to have a mini-aneurism and issue edicts calling for bans of my work. (Surely, if he has to call his minions in every few days for something some person said on Teh Interwebs, his minions will eventually get fatwa fatigue.)

Posted by: Louis Irving | July 22, 2008 10:53 AM

PZ, do you have an email address for Mr Donohue?

I know you don't like us sending emails en mass to his followers, but I see no reason why we should send a couple thousand emails to Mr Donohue personally, see how he likes it. Even better, everyone send him a movie or similar - nothing like a few hundred 700MB emails to kill your connection!

Posted by: Matt Penfold | July 22, 2008 10:54 AM

"Why this, when the Vatican has accepted evolution?"

The Vatican does, although it has been flirting with ID of late. Donohue doesn'. I suspect he thinks the Vatican is too liberal on stuff like that.

Posted by: Strange Forces | July 22, 2008 10:55 AM

Jesus Christ, these guys really don't know how to turn the other cheek.

Posted by: Matt Penfold | July 22, 2008 10:57 AM

"Jesus Christ, these guys really don't know how to turn the other cheek."

That depends on which cheek, and if there is an alterboy around.

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | July 22, 2008 10:58 AM

Bill Donohue et al...

This is what Jesus would do? You sure about that?

You are evil. Pure, uncontaminated evil.

Posted by: AJ Milne | July 22, 2008 11:02 AM

Ah, it doth warm the heart, so. So nice to see impressionable, unhinged Catholics in a murderous rage, trying to find some nice impressionable, unhinged Moslems to whip into a similar murderous rage...

Ecumenism. It's so beautiful. The great faiths of the world, reaching out to one another, finding that treasured common ground... (Wipes sentimental tear...)

Posted by: Michelle | July 22, 2008 11:05 AM

@#21 Louis Irving: ... you live in japan? can you buy me a Kotatsu heater? I wanna build one and all the ones I find online are such a rip-off! (Just kidding, I'll just keep working on saving cash for building mine. And give my money to them thieves. :P)

And well, if you connection is so great, have lots of fun! May I suggest sending him the South Park movie? He seems to love them a lot.

@#18: Yes, I don't think there is any ground for charges. And the muslims are surprisingly quiet! Could it be that they are teaching the christians a behavior lesson?

Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | July 22, 2008 11:06 AM

The new eucharist: Spam.

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | July 22, 2008 11:08 AM

I don't think I can make a case for legal harassment -- I've always made my email address public.

I'm not sure that's the only factor to be considered, in this case. My house address is public, but if someone goes out of his way to encourage people to knock on my door at all hours of the night, and does so with malicious intent, I certainly have a case for harrassment. I think this falls into the same category: malicious intent. Donohue is publicly and intentionally asking people to harass you. Just because your email is public doesn't preclude you from having the expectation of not being abused and harassed. I think this is illegal, and I really think you should pursue it.

Posted by: mothra | July 22, 2008 11:09 AM

I have stayed out of the cracker crusades. . .until now. When is a poe not a Poe?

The Craven

In weathered building, weary.
On a wooden bench, I merely,
nodded (in sleep) to the timeless drone of one, a known and repulsive bore.
At podium with wooden railing,
old man attends, arms now out flailing,
and hails that which never was and never has been ought than endlessly repeated lore.
'Twas confabulation, nothing more.

Presently a carafe he hoisted,
To assembled multitude he foisted,
purple liquid (a jigger) to each and every one he poured.
With words from past medieval sages,
pontificated down through ages,
asserted he that enologic liquid swill of polysaccharides, and acids, peptides, proteins, yeast and ethyl alcohol made haemoglobin red as gore.
'Twas fermented grape juice, nothing more.

In flesh toned hands white wafers cradled,
and before every supplicant he prattled,
formulaic statements that (if true) a biologist would sure adore.
With practiced motion and voice uplifted,
in palm, a wafer, to each he gifted:
bone and guts, muscle, sinew, brain and butt, synaptic tissue, through chant and genuflection,
a transubstantiation of materials did he adjure.
'Twas just a cracker, nothing more.

One who left alone, unbidden,
with said wafer held, some say hidden,
is causa belli to (a hysteric) proselyte who with angry mob hammers loud at reason's door.
In his world, superstition thrives,
he cares not about the lives,
in Darfur, East Timor, the Middle East, of torture, corruption, the pedophile priests, accumulated list so tragic, none can fail but see the blinders on a worsted, wizened withered soul.
'Twas just a fool and nothing more.

Posted by: Louis Irving | July 22, 2008 11:11 AM

@24, Michelle,

The website benippon.com sells kotatsu for export (about $130). Also, there are a few websites where you can just get the heater itself... I don't have one though - not that I'd need one at this time of year... too hot!!

Good thought on the South Park movie, but probably we should send him something non-copyrighted - don't want to give them any more ammunition.....

Posted by: raven | July 22, 2008 11:13 AM

Donohue is harrassing PZ. This is pure, if minor, terrorism. It is called mail bombing. Just clog someone's email address with junk mail. Happened to me once and I had to delete that email address forever.

Just set the spam filters to screen out annoying email addresses and key words such as Catholic or cracker. Or just ignore the addresses for a week and delete everything or close them. Life is too short to read pure spam by the hundreds of thousands.

And forget the crackers and koran. The point has been made and no crackers were killed in the making of it. You aren't on a schedule and they will keep for years. Don't play the game of religious fanatics with brains the size of walnuts.

Posted by: ctenotrish | July 22, 2008 11:16 AM

mothra @ #30 - very very nice!

Posted by: Paul Burnett | July 22, 2008 11:16 AM

Doesn't this constitute harrassment? I mean legally?

Seriously, PZ - you should check with the police on this. If nothing else, this smells like a violation of RICO.

Posted by: Norman Doering | July 22, 2008 11:17 AM

Talk to a lawyer, PZ.

If Bill Donohue has called for people to harass you by email he may have committed a cybercrime.

Posted by: Jason Failes | July 22, 2008 11:18 AM

"Much has been written about the moral vacuity that marks the Darwinian vision of society that Myers embraces."

....by people who don't understand either the science of evolution nor how to avoid the naturalistic fallacy.

I heard some preacher spewing on about evolution lately talking about how we should hold those people accountable who teach our kids that the strong survive by murdering the weak.

I agree with him: we should hold such people accountable, somehow. Of course, there wouldn't be a scientist in the bunch, and we would wind up charging a bunch of religious pundits and priests.

Every few years, there's a school shooting where the kid cites "natural selection" amongst his disturbed writings. I always wish I could have taught him what evolution really is (along with an introductory lesson in logic) before said priests and pundits warped his mind on the issue.

...and then when said pundits go on TV and blame "evilution" for the tragedy, ignoring that the young person only acted on the very misconceptions that they have worked so hard to foster in the first place (and continue to foster) well, honestly, few things make me angrier.

Posted by: Joe Fredette | July 22, 2008 11:19 AM

Given that most of these emails will have similar content- and thereby be similarly worded- you could perhaps use a Bayesian filter- as found in your average spam filtering system in something like Outlook/Thunderbird, train it on a few hundred of the messages, and the rest should get auto-pwnd.

Math to the rescue of everyone's favorite cracker-descratin' blogger?

Posted by: Ibid | July 22, 2008 11:21 AM

I have a slew of e-mail addresses for this very reason. One my friends have, one I distribute to the public, one for work, and I create a new one every time I start job hunting again.

Posted by: sil-chan | July 22, 2008 11:22 AM

@26:

And here, take this, this bread, for this bread is my body.
And here, take this, this wine, for this wine is my blood.
And here, take this, this email, for this email is my bigotry.

Posted by: khedrin | July 22, 2008 11:25 AM

So seriously, can we get this Donohue guy's email address?
turn about IS fair play

Posted by: Michelle | July 22, 2008 11:26 AM

@#32 Louis Irving: Great site, they seem to have a heater at a fair price (but everything else seems sold out...)! I don't want to buy a full kotatsu. I'm just trying to salvage up on the customs and shipping costs by just buying the heater and making the rest myself with a cheap table bought off a local shop! And yes, wrong time of the year, but perfect time to plan on making my kotatsu and having it ready for the winter. :)

...Wow totally off topic right there, isn't it.

As for the movie I can't quite figure out what could be uncopyrighted that would make him go crazey...

Posted by: Screechy Monkey | July 22, 2008 11:29 AM

I really don't get how some of you think this is harassment. If each person is sending 50 emails in an effort to try to crash PZ's email accounts or something, perhaps. But Donahue asking every Catholic (or even every Christian) to send PZ an email objecting to his posts seems perfectly legitimate to me. You can't inject yourself into a public debate in a way that riles a lot of people, provide your email address publicly, and then cry foul when lots of people write you to disagree with you.

Obviously, threats are a different story, as is writing to someone's employer to try to get them fired for a non-work-related offense. And PZ is under no obligation to read emails, and he can change his email accounts, etc. if he wants. But I fail to see how simply telling one's "minions" to "write this guy and tell him what you think" can be harassment.

Posted by: Norman Doering | July 22, 2008 11:30 AM

Celtic_Evolution wrote:

At this point in the silliness, there's really only one way to settle this:

THUNDER DOME!

Two thumbs enter, one thumb leaves.

Posted by: BaldySlaphead | July 22, 2008 11:31 AM

To be honest, until any Muslims threaten you, this simply makes Catholics (by association with the fuckwits who keep mailbombing you) look completely retarded.

If this CAIR bunch have any sense, they'll have a look here and see how they can score a massive PR victory by shrugging their shoulders and saying, 'Well, we don't agree with this guy, but it's a free country. Only a religious extremist would get upset about it.'

Posted by: Bob O'H | July 22, 2008 11:33 AM

Even better, let's "Rickroll" him by email!!

Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | July 22, 2008 11:35 AM

Celtic_Evolution-

Thumb war would work, but I recommend-

10 paces and... dueling water pistols.

Of course, Donohue has the option of using holy water, but I doubt that it would give him much of an advantage.

Argh, it burns!

Posted by: Skepoet | July 22, 2008 11:37 AM

You know what's sad, P.Z., is that Bill Donahue hadn't said anything to get this much attention until this blog incident. Donahue may be be guilty of harassment, but he comes awfully close to hate speech (funny, for a person in a "Anti-Defamation" league) in several of his statements as Alonzo Fyfe has pointed out.

I hate the idea WILL get listened to the more anyone counter-attacks him.

Posted by: BaldySlaphead | July 22, 2008 11:40 AM

Addendum: What does Bill Donafuckwit conceivably think it would demonstrate if his actions did successfully convince someone to blow up your house?

That Catholicism had a point?
That you 'reaped the whirlwind'?
That Muslims are more prepared to carry out God's will than wimpoid Cathlicks?

This campaign is soooo intellectually retarded it's untrue.

Posted by: Steverino | July 22, 2008 11:43 AM

From the Catholic League site:

"...Motivated by the letter and the spirit of the First Amendment, the Catholic League works to safeguard both the religious freedom rights and the free speech rights of Catholics whenever and wherever they are threatened."

mmmm...I guess the First Amendments Right of others can be discarded to protect theirs????

Posted by: Midwest Doc | July 22, 2008 11:44 AM

All of this fuss over crackers and cannibalism.

Posted by: Phineas | July 22, 2008 11:44 AM

Well, Prof. Myers, hope you don't lose any worthwhile e-mails, whatever you do.

Glen D @ #51, I'm sorry but how could PZ have shut this down sooner?

Should he have ignored the Cook situation to begin with, instead of drawing attention to it? Should he have not posted some of the death threats he received? Unlike Donohue, Prof. Myers didn't ask anyone to e-mail 1-800 Flowers or do anything with the information.

The only way PZ could have shut this down sooner would have been not to call bullshit on the reaction to Cook in the first place.

But we've got to push back against this kind of stupidity on the part of the Catholic League and the xians in Florida, not ignore it. They're going to act like crazed idiots regardless; silence only condones their behavior as somehow normal (ok, they may think their behavior is normal and this is pretty standard for them, but I mean we as a larger society should recognize it as abnormal and treat it as such).

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 22, 2008 11:45 AM

I've not seen this sort of heartwarming, Catholic-Muslim buddy-buddy thing since... well... Does anyone remember that Robin Hood movie with Kevin Costner and Morgan Freeman?

Yeah. It was about that time.

All we need now is a sappy song sung by Canadian pop-music superstar, Bryan Adams.

Posted by: chgo_liz | July 22, 2008 11:46 AM

Yeah, the racism and outright bigotry inherent in the assumption that Muslims as a group would *want* to blow up PZ's house is a real mind fuck.

Why do they assume that other religious people are as violent and crazy as they are?

Posted by: Midwest Doc | July 22, 2008 11:47 AM

All of this fuss over crackers and cannibalism!

Posted by: The Science Pundit | July 22, 2008 11:48 AM

I can't say that I'm terribly surprised. My Catholic relatives have all been warning me to be careful about what I post on my blog and on YouTube because Muslims might track me down and kill me. The irony is, of course, that the only death threat I've ever received was from a Catholic back when I posted the Belgian commercial of the "hippie, playboy Jesus" on my blog.

Posted by: El Herring | July 22, 2008 11:51 AM

Endor #33: Small point but it needs to be made. Muslims aren't necessarily "brown" people. Don't confuse religion with race.

Posted by: Christopher Waldrop | July 22, 2008 11:52 AM

Turdus @31 said, Friggin crazy Catholics. They scream at us, judge us, condemn us as evil atheists, perverts, sodomites, immoral etc. etc. etc.... yet when we point and laugh at their childish beliefs they cry foul and act as if we mortally wounded them! Apparently, they are the only ones that can criticize others with a different point of view!
And I, resisting the temptation to impersonate Edward G. Robinson in The Ten Commandments can only ask, Where are the Catholics now? Where are the ones who've been here screaming at us that they're better people, that they have not only the right but the responsibility to make death threats when their religion is mocked? Where are the people who claim to have the moral high ground because they believe in the power of a cracker? Obviously they're all e-mailing PZ, but they're also too afraid to come back here and spew their venom publicly. Well, good riddance.

Posted by: Joe Cracker | July 22, 2008 11:53 AM

Just two words for mr. bill donahue:

Fuck you!

Posted by: Moggie | July 22, 2008 11:56 AM

Outsourcing is all the rage these days, it seems: the Catholics are even outsourcing their violence to the Muslims. They're keeping the child molesting in-house, though.

Posted by: Endor | July 22, 2008 11:59 AM

"Muslims aren't necessarily "brown" people. Don't confuse religion with race."

*I* don't. but, what do you think the bigots who hope the Muslims will come after Prof. Myers are picturing? That was my point about their being racists.

Posted by: Kseniya | July 22, 2008 11:59 AM

I'm sorry for your troubles, PZ, but this is oddly gratifying. D'oh-Ho' is shooting himself in the foot, IMO. He's showing the world what an ass he is, and his followers are vacuously braying along in unison. I wonder if there are "concerned" posters on his site, saying, "No, no, don't spam Meyer [sic] or incite violence against him, it makes Catholics look bad."

Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | July 22, 2008 12:03 PM

Norman Doering-

Wouldn't that be Thumber Dome?

Posted by: Sastra | July 22, 2008 12:05 PM

Screechy Monkey #54 wrote:

But I fail to see how simply telling one's "minions" to "write this guy and tell him what you think" can be harassment.

On the whole I agree -- it's certainly not the kind of harassment which should involve the law. To the extent that it's intended to annoy rather than persuade, it's social harassment. But that's not necessarily a bad or unfair tactic -- atheists have flooded organizations or people with protest letters as well.

The disturbing thing here is that this seems to be personally targeted towards one person. They're trying to cause PZ concrete personal distress to mimic the abstract "distress" they feel when they contemplate someone desecrating a sacred cracker. As if it were the same thing, and they can't tell the difference, and think we shouldn't make a distinction either. Which makes it annoying on several levels.

If it bothers us, though, then that may be all the more reason NOT to "do the same" to them. As PZ has pointed out, we're supposed to be better than that, since we hold the moral high ground to begin with, and don't build up ethics from the Divine-Command quicksand.

Nelson M. #73 wrote:

Dear sir, I hope this letter finds you in good health.... (snip)

That was brilliant.

Posted by: Michelle | July 22, 2008 12:08 PM

@Moggie #88: "They're keeping the child molesting in-house, though."

Don't tempt them. Next thing you know they'll whip out the muslim child brides...

But well, it IS an horrifying thing some muslims do...

http://www.stophonourkillings.com/?name=News&file=article&sid=2788

Posted by: Aaron | July 22, 2008 12:10 PM

Isn't there some kind of legal recourse you can file against him for citing a riot or harassing you personally?

What an idiot.

The South Park guys were dead-on with their Easter show.

Posted by: unicow | July 22, 2008 12:14 PM

Did people learn nothing from the whole kerfuffle with mkroll?

Launching a DOS attack on Donahue's email (or more likely, some intern who actually gets that email) through sending big files is just not a good idea. It's not likely to be effective either.

Seriously, what's the best-case scenario there? You annoy whatever IT guy runs his mail server? I don't see the point.

Now if you're the mastermind behind a big botnet, maybe you could have some fun. But email-based DOS attacks? Pfft.

Posted by: Margaret | July 22, 2008 12:18 PM

Capital Dan (74): I've not seen this sort of heartwarming, Catholic-Muslim buddy-buddy thing since... well...

John Allen, the Vatican Correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter (on NPR's Morning Edition, November 29, 2006): "On the other hand, Benedict clearly does want good working relations with Islam because, at the end of the day, the fundamental clash of civilizations that he sees in the world does not run between Islam and the West, it runs between belief and unbelief, that is, between cultures that prize religion, prize the supernatural, and those that don't. And in that regard he thinks of Muslims as his natural allies."

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 22, 2008 12:19 PM

Yes wòót. Exactly.

Posted by: St. Michael the Archangel | July 22, 2008 12:21 PM

"It's that bad.

I don't feel sorry for you.
You brought it all on yourself.

Posted by: Sam | July 22, 2008 12:23 PM

I think we need to remember that most Muslims and Catholics are very peaceful. Donohue's group is making Catholics look extremely bad and bringing ugliness out in the Catholics. They are trying to incite Muslims to look bad as well. I think it is time for the Catholic church to take a stand and make it clear that it doesn't support Donohue. Donohue has and continues to make the Catholic church and "average" peaceful Catholics look bad.

The thing is that Donohue's hate tactics against freedom of expression work when people are too scared or apathetic to take a stand against him. Remember the Chocolate Jesus exhibit getting cancelled?

Posted by: Steve_C | July 22, 2008 12:25 PM

St. Micheal is a wuss.

Posted by: Kim | July 22, 2008 12:28 PM

Well, no surprise here PZ. Bill Donahue cannot back down any more, just like you cannot back down any more, because either of you would loose face. I think you would be very reasonable if this could be brought into the realm of rational arguments, but Bill Donahue has already set the stakes so high that he only can loose, because he would have to say that he was wrong in the first place about trying to get you fired. Anyway, I am watching with amusement to this episode of the 'Culture War' (tm) series.

Posted by: Neural T | July 22, 2008 12:29 PM

Does anyone else speak for the Catholic League or is it just Bill Donohue?

Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | July 22, 2008 12:31 PM

Kseniya-

Donahue is a worthless media hound manufacturing arguments. His press releases remind me of Berlinski's magazine interview with himself, in the way the press releases refer to Donahue in the third person, when it is obvious that Donohue is the author.

"As a Christian, a Catholic priest, I stand in opposition to any and all hateful speech used by anyone, especially when they do so in the name of Jesus. I do not believe that one can claim to be a disciple of Jesus and at the same time deride, mock, insult, or threaten violence against another person... One cannot proclaim the love of Jesus while cursing one's neighbor...To continually use hateful, crude, violent language is indicative of what dwells within one's heart. Mr. Donohue speaks only for himself and not the Catholic church." --Father Jeff Gatlain (John Amato, "A Catholic priest stands tall against Bill Donohue," Crooks and Liars.com, April 5, 2007).

Posted by: AJ Milne | July 22, 2008 12:32 PM

Does anyone else speak for the Catholic League or is it just Bill Donohue?

I always sorta assumed the Catholic 'League' was Bill Donohue. Y'know that famous quip about the one guy with the typewriter? Well, he's the guy...

So he's in a league of his own. So to speak.

Posted by: Dutch Delight | July 22, 2008 12:32 PM

At this point this is all just free publicity for rational thinking.

The worst thing that could possibly happen for the religionists is an actual physical attack on PZ. Anyone with actual morals, and in a position of power inside this particular sect of christianity would have taken responsibility and offered PZ protection a long time ago.

Instead, they are letting it fester. Not a "serious" person is saying a word, they are obviously happy letting the idiots speak for them. Maybe, a rally among lapsed catholics to break their ties to this bigoted and depraved cult once and for all is in order while the fire is still hot.

Posted by: MicroZealous | July 22, 2008 12:34 PM

Most honorede friend please to give me your new email adress and bank account numbers please for transferring millions $ 10,00,000 to your safekkeping, for your kindness you may keep 30%. God Blessing you.
PS Also your credit card numbres.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 12:34 PM

I don't feel sorry for you.
You brought it all on yourself.

Ah, the cry of the wife beater and the Christian God.

Posted by: Qwerty | July 22, 2008 12:37 PM

From the Catholic League's website:
"Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals."

The use of the word "liberal" just about says it all. Of course, PZ is worse in that he is a "godless liberal."

I suppose one could paraphrase and say: Muslim baiting is the anti-atheism of the conservative.

It makes about as much sense.

William Donohue has written about you and your opinion of Catholic crackers four times! This must be some kind of
Catholic League record. PZ, you're in the big time now!

I am becoming a cracker skeptic. I think it does have power. The power to piss off the mindless.

Especially, PZ, when you have not followed up on your threat to show it doesn't have any power. They are literally peeing their pants in anticipation. (Or is that alliteratively?)

Personally, I counsel patience on dealing with the cracker.
Let them pee their pants.

Posted by: LisaJ | July 22, 2008 12:39 PM

Wow. I can't believe that this is still going on and has gotten so bad for you, PZ. Thanks for really taking one for the team!

Oh, and Matt at #16. That was hilarious. Almost made me spit up my lunch.

Posted by: Michelle | July 22, 2008 12:40 PM

"Posted by: St. Michael the Archangel "

...Shouldn't you go straight to hell for impersonating a very saint angel? God will kick your ass on the spot.

Posted by: Moses | July 22, 2008 12:42 PM

I'd collect them, plus the death threats, plus Donahue's press-release and send them to the FBI. You can't harass over the telephone lines, which includes e-mail.

That'll shut him up pretty quick.

Posted by: Monado | July 22, 2008 12:43 PM

Any chance of getting your ISP to issue a cease-and-desist order or insert a filter for you?

Posted by: Kim | July 22, 2008 12:44 PM

Matt Penfold,

Yes, I am aware that PZ has offered a way out (maybe he should post the details in a post so that there is no confusion about what the way out would be). My guess is that the Catholic church will not do that because they would have to publicly state they disagree with the use of violence to get the Eucharist back, something they mandated themselves!

Do you really think that a church that actively still protects paedophiles will back of from something small like this?

Posted by: Vic Chimp | July 22, 2008 12:47 PM

I'm reminded of a Greek saying: Empty vessels make the most noise

Posted by: Moses | July 22, 2008 12:48 PM

I don't think I can make a case for legal harrassment -- I've always made my email address public.

That's irrelevant. Even if, for example, your telephone number is listed, nobody has the right to call you to harass you.

This latest round of email is particularly revolting, though. These Catholics are chortling with glee -- they don't have to make death threats anymore, they're just overjoyed that now the Muslims, terrorists all, will give me my comeuppance, and they're all urging them on.

So far, though, the score in number of email tirades is Catholics: 5 digit number, Muslims: 0. Maybe I'll get some islamic hate mail soon, but I suspect that CAIR is more interested in defusing any prejudice that they are all mad bombers...a prejudice Donohue is more interested in promoting.

Posted by: PZ Myers | July 22, 2008 10:58 AM

You're dealing with pin-heads.

Posted by: Holbach | July 22, 2008 12:50 PM

MicroZealous @ 124 Good stuff there! Sort of like the e-mail I received yesterday from a cretin in India who probably just stepped out of the Ghanges covered with human shit! Verbatim:
"Please reply me now,

Your funds has been slated to be paid to you in India. Let me know if you are in India so that I can keep you posted with more informations.
Duke Kwame"

Sure would love to send this to moron Donahue with a few choice comments if I only had his e-mail address!

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 22, 2008 12:53 PM

Get a good virus scanner, they are probably sending viri and trojans as well.

Probably virii, but God won't let them send Trojans, Sheiks, Durex, Lifestyles, or any other brand of condoms.

Posted by: Helioprogenus | July 22, 2008 12:54 PM

They're all just credulous sheep. Then again, it's the nature of the times for such things to occur. Don't get me wrong, I hate the whole Donohue deal, but PZ, you have your minions too. It's time for a war. What's Donohue's email? Let's all just dump as much crap as we can on it. Just as you tease us into crashing those stupid online polls and skewing the figures, it's time to do something more substantial. We should skewer Donohue with loads of e-mail and spam bombs, and lets give him a taste of his own medicine. It reminds me of that Holy Wars song by Megadeth, but we're on the side of rational justice. Not blind credulous bullshit.

Posted by: watercat | July 22, 2008 12:59 PM

HOW ABOUT everybody who has a blog simply posts a copy of PZ's "threat" on their site?
Wouldn't it dilute this, like the Blashphemy challenge, or the Mohammed catoons. Why let PZ take all the heat?

Posted by: foxfire | July 22, 2008 12:59 PM

@ Theodore # 65 - why thank you! Here is the text of the e-mail I just sent to Donohue at cl@catholicleague.org:

Mr. Donohue,

You really do need to get a grip and knock off the we-are- victims-of-science hysteria. Or is this just your little way of making a scene to grab attention and a slot on O'Reilly?

If you are so concerned about "the moral vacuity that marks the Darwinian vision of society", try prayer instead of medical science the next time you are ill.

Enough is enough.

Posted by: DaveH | July 22, 2008 1:01 PM

@SteveC, #143.

I'm sure everyone's seen it before, but

.
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=macs_cant

;-)

Posted by: Steve_C | July 22, 2008 1:07 PM

haha! Yeah I've seen it.

I have a new iPhone too. Hysterical.

Posted by: Willo the Wisp | July 22, 2008 1:11 PM

For goodness sake, PZ, publish their email addresses. I demand a pointless war of attrition.

Posted by: Rob | July 22, 2008 1:14 PM

PZ,

Legally, I believe you retain the rights to all emails sent to you. I am not sure if you need a disclaimer specifically stating so. You should change the present disclaimer to read:

Any email sent to me either via my University of Minnesota email account, which does not pertain to official UM business, or via any other email account I own, is subject to being posted online, including all headers, return addresses, IP addresses, etc., totally at my discretion. You hold no rights to your words and information sent from your computer once submitted electronically. I am not responsible for any comment you make that might offend other people, and I am not responsible for any actions such people take on their own behalf. By sending email to pertaining to my blog Pharyngula or any topic posted thereon, you are agreeing to this disclaimer.

Posted by: negentropyeater | July 22, 2008 1:15 PM

Bill Donohue writes :

"Much has been written about the moral vacuity that marks the Darwinian vision of society that Myers embraces. He now has a grand opportunity to rebut those critics. Or sustain the perception. So which will it be, Professor Myers?

Interesting how profound dishonesty can distort someone's writings. As if Donohue were not one of those most preeminent critics who has always maintained that the "Darwinian vision of society that Myers embraces" is morally vacuous. As if he cares that Myers has an opportunity to rebute those critics, as if that's really what this is about.
Strange how Donohue's moral prinicples do not include any sign of honesty.

What about the grand opportunity that's given to you, Mr Donohue, to go and fuck yourself ? Wouldn't that be nice ?

Posted by: Z | July 22, 2008 1:17 PM

It's truly sad when the compassion espoused by theists is the last thought in their heads. Apparently that 'do unto others..' meme didn't get around to everyone yet. I can think of no better reason to NOT want to be Christian than the type of behavior coming from some of it's more ardent supporters. Perhaps this is what happens when you follow the money-changers instead of the prophet? It sooths my existentialist angst to see that all those who claim to know the right way can't even follow their own rules to get there. They, for want of all they claim to have, are more lost than they claim me to be.

Posted by: Dutch Delight | July 22, 2008 1:18 PM

Helioprogenus:

What's Donohue's email? Let's all just dump as much crap as we can on it.

Why pay any attention to Bill? His role is to whip up the theists to show their true character, and he's doing a great job. Meanwhile, there's tons and tons of evidence arriving in PZ's mailbox showing how insane these people really are.

Where is the press asking the catholic church for comments? Why haven't they said a word? Why have they not taken care of Bill? Do they condone physical violence against PZ? Do they want PZ to lose his job? Thats what it looks like when they do nothing while their flock is harassing people with all kinds of threats. Did the catholic church write their own message to PZ's boss?

Given the authority that the catholic church likes to claim, it's easy for them to ask their followers to tone it down with the death threats and all while they handle the matter. Is it ethical at all to let something like this continue when they have the power to make it stop?

Bill is letting it rain manna from heaven so to speak. As long as PZ doesn't actually get hurt this is all going great.

Posted by: arensb | July 22, 2008 1:19 PM

raven @ #85:

There must be some reason why we shouldn't answer some ads and put this email address in.

"I'm better than that" (or "How, then, are we better than they?", if you're an X-Men fan) works for me.

Posted by: JStein | July 22, 2008 1:21 PM

I hope that Bill Donohue, being the ignorant, fat, slobbering pig that he is, will, at some point in the near future, lead his lemmings off of a cliff.

We're all here in solidarity with you, PZ. And I hope all of these idiots realize that they're wasting everybodies time when they could be helping AIDS research or something.

Idiots.

Posted by: Kirk | July 22, 2008 1:24 PM

In my opinion, you should post all of the best ones with all the header information intact. If someone has the balls to send ridiculous emails to someone they don't know, they deserve to be shamed on the internet.

Posted by: Name withheld | July 22, 2008 1:29 PM

I emailed this to Prof. Meyers this morning, BEFORE I read that the Catholic league had published his email address. I do not agree with or condone that. Sorry Paul...

**************
Dear Prof. Meyers,

I'm writing with a few comments about "crackers" and Catholics. I should say at the outset that I am a serious and practicing Catholic after a long time as non-believer. I'm also a university professor and a scientist (I'll leave it to you decide if you want to include Biology and Cognitive Psychology as equally scientific). But I thought I'd share a few points.

This is not hate mail, by the way.

1. Many of your critics (and supporters on your blog) may not realize that the Catholic Church has long ago officially endorsed evolution and natural selection. The late Pope John Paul II made this clear. The church does not endorse "Intelligent Design" or a literal interpretation of genesis and Adam and Eve, etc.

2. A dogmatic point: The priest does not turn the host into the body of Christ. It is considered a "Mystery" by the Church. We don't know how it happens. Even during the Mass, the priest says "Lord, let you spirit come upon these gifts and make them Holy". We hope that God does and we believe that God does. The best interpretation is that it is our Faith that does it. That is, we believe that the host is the body of Christ, and it is. Jesus said many times "your faith has healed you". The scriptures make it clear that none of this is magic, Faith. Since you do not believe that is is the Body of Christ, then I suppose it is not.

3. I also suppose that the host, once taken with ill-intent and "held hostage" or mailed to some one who promised to destroy it, might already have been desecrated.

4. A personal though: This whole issue does not offend me but rather, I feel unhappy about it. Like you, I'm a University professor. Well-published, grant-supported, and coming up for tenure this fall. I like what I do. But I can't image taking anything that some group holds dear (possibly a large proportion of my students) and promising to destroy it and post a video. No matter how insignificant it seems to me, there are people who might really care. Be it a consecrated host, a Koran, or the bones of an ancestor, etc, promising to destroy it is mean and petty. I am saddened that there are people sending consecrated hosts to you. I am more upset that people have threatened to send you poisoned hosts. That just saddens me more.

Once, when discussing academic careers, contributions, life, etc. with my wife. She asked "what do you want to me remembered for". My answer was that I wanted to be remembered for being a kind person. Scientific contribution might come and go, but I really want my kids, my family, friends, ands strangers to recall kindness and kind acts. I do not always act and behave with kindness, but I keep trying and that is one of the things that my faith in God helps with.

I guess what I am saying is that your promise to desecrate a host is not a kind act and is not inspiring kindness in others. I'm asking you to post a retraction and maybe just say that you decided to not do it because it it not worth it.

Best,

"Name withheld"

Posted by: S.Scott | July 22, 2008 1:29 PM

I'm no longer Catholic but I was raised that way. I've never heard of the "Catholic League" until recently.

Is it new? Is this going to be a "split" in the Catholic church - like Baptist/Southern Baptist?

That split happened around 1970 if I am remembering correctly.

It's just a fucking business move. They are trying to carve their own "niche" out of the religious population.

Stacy

Posted by: puzzled | July 22, 2008 1:30 PM

Classic. Paul Zachary stamps his foot and throws a tantrum and when he gets tired of the fuss he has created, he tries to storm away (vis a vis his "taking a break" from his own creation) in a huff.

Now he is surprised, after deliberately provoking a good portion of the catholic, and now probably muslim, communities with his intentionally inciteful threats, that people are reacting to his intent?

Amazing. What a drama queen. Thought this was a "science blog", not a "cult-of-personality" (as stated aptly on another science blog).

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 22, 2008 1:30 PM

They consider themselves the RCC ideological equivalent of the Jewish Antidefamation League, but without the sense of humor.

Or reason to exist.

Posted by: Quidam | July 22, 2008 1:31 PM

The best cracker response is NOT TO TELL THEM what has been done or when (if anything), to the cracker/Koran.

Such a momentus act of desecration should surely have immediate material repurcussions. If they can't tell, then obviously it has no power. A squadron of Islamic and Catholic pilots hijacking planes and flying the into the University of Minnesota doesn't count. Neither does a tsunami in Indonesia.

A large hand descending from the clouds and squishing PZ like a bug, would.

Posted by: Bob Kowalski | July 22, 2008 1:33 PM

Long time admirer, first time poster...

I really liked one of your first posts about what quickly came to be called Cracker-Gate. Bill Donohue's actions and the actions that he encourages show conclusively that violence is very much a part of even mainstream religion.

Pointing out ad nauseaum that Bill Donohue proves with very little doubt how very irrational Catholicism really is. He employs the tactics and methods of bully's everywhere: fear, intimidation, and violence. He illustrates in the flesh that Appeals to Authority = Demand for Unquestioning Obedience. Reason and Empirical-mindedness cease when limits are imposed by external authorities.

Anyway, I think you should stick it out as best as you can. And remember, if it was easy, everybody would be doing it.

Posted by: Norman Doering | July 22, 2008 1:33 PM

I couldn't find an email address, but I found this:
http://www.catholicleague.org/feedback.php

Should I tell them I have crackers and will abuse them?

What do you think?

Posted by: Danon | July 22, 2008 1:34 PM

You should not even blog about it. Waste of time.

Posted by: Martin | July 22, 2008 1:37 PM

If he really said in the press release to overload your inbox couldn't that be considered as essentially a denial of service attack, or even a public order offence of some kind?

Admittedly throwing the cops at him is probably what he wants.

Posted by: Longtime Lurker | July 22, 2008 1:44 PM

I thought of this too late to post on any of the earlier threads, with regard to the King of the Catholic Loonies, Chuck Kroll:

PASHUN, UR DOIN' IT RONG!!!

That movie really warped their perception of passion.

Posted by: Reynold Hall | July 22, 2008 1:44 PM

How's about this? Someone with artistic skills should make a t-shirt design with Bill and the eucharist on it in some insulting manner, maybe we could have a contest to see who can come up with the picture that'll best piss that idiot off, then set up a cafepress account for it. Then post the link here.

We can buy the damned things and tell Bill Donohue to go pike himself that way.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 1:45 PM

The Vatican over the course of it's history have adopted many doctrines some of which are contrary to the Bible such as evolution.

Shit, the Bible is contrary to the Bible.

Posted by: Hap | July 22, 2008 1:48 PM

How does Mr. Donahue and cohorts make their livings? If it's anything other than occupying space in a fishtank at a Chinese buffet (with the consequent pay scale), they're obviously being handed too much responsibility and being overpaid as well.

If you think contradicting all that you claim to believe in order to reinforce the importance of symbolic ritual is a good idea, you 1) can't really believe what you claim, which should negate the relevance of anything else you say and 2) you need to look up "Pyrrhic victory" and read it over and over until you understand its relevance. Oh, and 3) you're advertising the growing impotence of the people you are "standing up" for. I didn't think that injured animals normally tried to attract predators, but I guess they just aren't as smart as Bill Donahue.

Posted by: drpmeade | July 22, 2008 1:50 PM

#30 Mothra, excellent bit of poetry.

I'll add my vote that Bill Donohue's actions represent harassment.

Slightly off topic: two articles referenced in the latest edition of The Edge:

http://www.axess.se/english/2008/01/theme_scruton.php.htm

http://judson.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/lets-get-rid-of-darwinism/index.html?
scp=1&sq=olivia%20judson%20darwinism&st=cse

Just for everyone's enjoyment and edification.

Hope the links work, however they can be accessed via The Edge website:http://www.edge.org/

Posted by: chgo_liz | July 22, 2008 1:51 PM

Watercat @150:

I am Spartacus...great idea!

Also, if each of us sends a short, civil email to one chosen contact at the Catholic church (which one?) asking quite simply if the church condones the harassment that is being waged in its name, cc'ing a local media contact and of course the Catholic League, we won't be stooping to their level. It's a reasonable request. From thousands of people.

Posted by: Interrobang | July 22, 2008 1:52 PM

So, uh, why are you guys who are self-identifying as Catholic going after PZ here? Victim-blaming much? If you actually bothered to go back to the beginning of the story, this didn't come out of nowhere; PZ was standing up for Webster Cook -- a devout Catholic -- who was physically assaulted because he wanted to show his friend a Communion wafer. People were sending Webster Cook death threats, insisting that he'd "desecrated" the Communion wafer.

All PZ said was that if he could get his hands on a Communion wafer, he'd demonstrate real desecration. However, he said it in an extremely hyperbolic way, and it's still hard to tell whether he's actually planning anything.

Now, if you think death threats because of stupid mistakes (in Webster Cook's case, and may I add that Mr. Cook is 19 or so, which is the golden age of stupid mistakes) or hyperbolic language are okay, well, you've got a problem. If you somehow think that people deserve death threats because of their behaviour, you've also got a problem. If you've completely ignored the entire story in order to heap opprobrium onto PZ, you're using the exact same logic as rape apologists, and you also have a problem.

So what's your problem?

Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | July 22, 2008 1:53 PM

#125 FTW

I reckon Donahue is just pissed at PZ saying that the Catholic League was "Bill Donahue and his fax machine" on the Catholic radio show the other day and, with very little prompting, the Catholic host and priest (other guest) saying that Bill "The Catholic League " Donahue didn't represent Catholics or the RCC.

I'd be surprised and disappointed if CAIR took the bait and didn't see through Donohue's blatant bigotry and fatwa envy. It all goes to show that there really is little or no difference between Islam and Catholicism: Islam has its radical Imams, Catholicism has its Bill Donohues, and they both have their extremist loons who'll send death threats to anyone who doesn't cowtow to their beliefs.

Posted by: Norman Doering | July 22, 2008 1:56 PM

Danon wrote:

You should not even blog about it. Waste of time.

Say's you. I think it works -- if you have my sense of humor:
http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/07/harass-me-bill-im-gonna-desecrate.html

Posted by: Timothy Wood | July 22, 2008 1:59 PM

I'm totally moving to Norway. I wonder if a degree in Social Work from an American university would be worth anything over there.

Posted by: Chad | July 22, 2008 1:59 PM

Dump those email addresses!

Posted by: E.V. | July 22, 2008 2:00 PM

Oh Puzzle:
How superior you are! Smug and pompous and so full of original and unique ideas (rolls eyes). I can just picture your little porcine features, gloating as you clasp your pudgy hands together in the delight of envisioning an unbeliever writhing in your little twisted vision of eternal punishent. How you chortle, that's what pious pigs do. But you're just a deluded godbot, who gets half a chubbie everytime a Grand Inquisitor gets his flail on.

I'll be sure to wipe my ass with a wafer just for you. Give me your address and I'll send it to you.

Posted by: Spinoza | July 22, 2008 2:01 PM

4. A personal though: This whole issue does not offend me but rather, I feel unhappy about it. Like you, I'm a University professor. Well-published, grant-supported, and coming up for tenure this fall. I like what I do. But I can't image taking anything that some group holds dear (possibly a large proportion of my students) and promising to destroy it and post a video. No matter how insignificant it seems to me, there are people who might really care. Be it a consecrated host, a Koran, or the bones of an ancestor, etc, promising to destroy it is mean and petty. I am saddened that there are people sending consecrated hosts to you. I am more upset that people have threatened to send you poisoned hosts. That just saddens me more.

Sir, if PZ had just randomly decided to desecrate something people care about, that WOULD INDEED be cause for ALL of us (atheists and theists alike) to stand up and say "That's uncalled for, PZ."

But in this case, that would be to take things out of context.

PZ's decision to desecrate the Eucharist is a DIRECT response to the downright sickening response Catholics gave a STUDENT, threatening him with expulsion, for what was a rather innocuous action, even if it was a social faux-pas to Catholics.

It is an action meant to make a POINT... that no SYMBOL, however fervently believed in, is worth the ruining of a person's life. Period.

Posted by: Eamon Knight | July 22, 2008 2:05 PM

Fegh, and that wanker priest on the CRI interview tries to wash the Church's hands of the situation by calling the Catholic League a "secular organization". Meaning "not an official part of the Church", OK; but usually that word means "dealing with the bits of life and society that aren't religion", and the CL is definitely *not* secular in that sense. The PTB in American Catholicism *could* help deal with this by telling their followers that death threats and mail-bombing are against Catholic teaching. Of course, they say that about contraception, too, get widely ignored -- but at least they'd *look* like they were doing something.

Posted by: E.V. | July 22, 2008 2:06 PM

Fuck!... Puzzled is Ron in Houston.
The drama queen reference - should'a known. Same stupid argument, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Posted by: John | July 22, 2008 2:07 PM

Does anybody know of any way to get a hold of ole wild Bill D's e-mail address?

Posted by: Timothy Wood | July 22, 2008 1:55 PM

Open an account at a social networking site. Be sure to call yourself Timmy. Post a picture of a 13 year old from some catalog or other online source. Talk about how you feel so much more mature than other guys your age, and how you wish you knew some older guys who you could maybe hang out with some day.

You'll not only have Bill Donahue's e-mail address within five minutes, you'll have LOTS of e-mail addresses from religious conservatives to have fun with.

Posted by: Sully | July 22, 2008 2:12 PM

If you have sirius radio flip over to 159. if you subscribe you can listen online as well. It's all being discussed right now with the comm director for the Catholic League.

Posted by: Patricia | July 22, 2008 2:13 PM

OT - Did Kobra get banned last night?

Posted by: Masklinn | July 22, 2008 2:14 PM

You know PZ, I think he loves you and just wants your attention. He's found a way to get it (send loons your way, they're like roses but last longer) so he's going to ride it for a while, before having to find another way to reach you (chocolates, maybe?)

Posted by: Fr. J | July 22, 2008 2:15 PM

PZ, so you are shocked that desecrating a sacred symbol annoys lot's of people? So much so that they write you about it? Who would have thunk it? If you desecrate something that people absolutely love with their whole hearts what kind of response do you think you would get? It's like attacking Darwin. Fundamentalist atheists go nuts when you do that. They love their god lol. Imagine someone destroying the thing or person that you love most in the whole world. That's how they feel. You may not agree with it, but that doesn't matter. That's how they feel. So spare us the pity party. You knew what you were getting into.

Posted by: negentropyeater | July 22, 2008 2:17 PM

#174

The priest does not turn the host into the body of Christ. It is considered a "Mystery" by the Church. We don't know how it happens.

There is actually no big "Mystery" here. I can tell you exactly how it works.

It starts with telling a child in his young age that this cracker into Jesus miracle thing happens, and forcing him to believe it. Also, telling him that he should never, ever put in question this belief and to never ask himself wether it makes any sense at all, adding all kinds of threats to it.
Then repeating the same thing over and over again, week after week, until they die.
And surprise, surprise, it works !

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 2:17 PM

It's like attacking Darwin. Fundamentalist atheists go nuts when you do that. They love their god lol.

blah blah blah blah

Not the brightest bulb.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 2:18 PM

cracker =/= person

in either reality or value.

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | July 22, 2008 2:20 PM

Ah... Fr. J. returns to regail us with more bits of wisdom.

Imagine someone destroying the thing or person that you love most in the whole world.

Now imagine that person or thing lives in your morning muffin!

EEEEEK!

Posted by: E.V. | July 22, 2008 2:23 PM

" "Catholic-based, insane wingnuttery""
Let's not forget "Rudy" who went into hissy-fits to shut down a museum over a painting consisting of elephant dung in conjunction with the worst rendering of a madonna titled figure I've ever seen. Shite + Saints = deep doodoo. Evidently, the blessed virgin never defecated in life, either.

Posted by: AJ Milne | July 22, 2008 2:26 PM

Now imagine that person or thing lives in your morning muffin!

'My dear, sweet, horribly mistreated muffin... Love of my life, all that I am or ever will be... I swear by this grapefruit... And by this bit of fried egg... Your desecration will be avenged!'

Posted by: Dustin | July 22, 2008 2:29 PM

Evidently, the blessed virgin never defecated in life, either.

Posted by: E.V. | July 22, 2008 2:32 PM

Since I can't let a good post go to waste, I'll just dedicate this to you, Fr. J., since I pictured you from the very beginning.

My, my, my -how superior you are. Smug and pompous and so full of shit. I can just picture your little porcine features, gloating as you clasp your pudgy hands together in the delight of envisioning an unbeliever writhing in your little twisted vision of eternal punishent. How you chortle, that's what pious pigs do. But you're just a deluded godbot, who gets half a chubbie everytime a Grand Inquisitor gets his flail on.

I'll be sure to wipe my ass with a wafer just for you. Give me your address and I'll send it to you.

There! I didn't waste it on Ron in Houston trying to be all anonymous and shit.
Remember to wipe the smegma off your lips, Father J...

Posted by: Canuck | July 22, 2008 2:36 PM

@ #22. Aint it the truth. One big happy family under god.

Posted by: AJ Milne | July 22, 2008 2:38 PM

If Bad Horse writes to you, then you can worry.

The Stallion of Sin?

Posted by: llewelly | July 22, 2008 2:38 PM

Remain strong, PZ. This is only the beginning.

Posted by: Name Withheld | July 22, 2008 2:39 PM

H.H said: "Why can't you join the grownups, stop pretending, and still be a kind person? Why is pointing out that it's all pretend considered by you to be an act of unkindness?"

I felt that the unkindness is the intention to do it publicly in a manner that is sure to cause hurt to others. I had no issue with the first part of the original post. I have no issue with Prof. Meyers pointing out that he does not believe the host to be the Body of Christ. Protestant Christians feel the same way. I suppose Jews and Muslims, Atheists, etc. all feel the same way. I suppose many other Catholics, when pressed, would admit that they don't really believe it either. It is not easy for me to believe. I'm not always sure that I do. But I do. Sometimes. My understanding of faith in God is that it can never be proven. A fact requires no faith. I have doubts.

But I admire the honest faith of many of the older people in my church. Do they leave mass and go speeding out of the parking lot in their Buick and cut two people off on the way to Tim Hortons? Probably. But at mass, their faith is genuine and beautiful. I admire the honest faith of the family of 7 from Uganda that we donated strollers and cribs to and found a ride to Mass for. They came to Canada and needed a spiritual home. I admire the faith of those in my town who wear the hijab, knowing it singles them out. I do not have that kind of faith. But I have a little and it gives me something worthwhile.

We can all be kind people. Humanism is about kindness. But so is Christianity. Buddhism. Kindness is not correlated with religiosity.

Posted by: MCP | July 22, 2008 2:40 PM

Jerks!

Posted by: Matt Heath | July 22, 2008 2:41 PM

#225: Hmmm "Bill" seems kind of US-specific though.

Actually, WTF kind of a name is "Bill" for an "Irish" devout Catholic? Doesn't "William" have kind of a proddy connotation for the Irish? Yet another good reason why Americans shouldn't claim their ancestors nationality as their own.

Posted by: ndt | July 22, 2008 2:43 PM

If you desecrate something that people absolutely love with their whole hearts what kind of response do you think you would get?

Anyone who loves a cracker with their whole heart needs their head examined.

Posted by: Rey Fox | July 22, 2008 2:47 PM

"It's like attacking Darwin. Fundamentalist atheists go nuts when you do that. They love their god lol."

Hur hur, those atheists are just as stupid as we are, hur hur!

Well, no. We won't threaten to kill you, or outsource that threat to the people we consider beneath us. We won't even try to get you expelled from college. You'd like to think that we bruise as easily as your ilk does, but no, we don't.

"Imagine someone destroying the thing or person that you love most in the whole world. That's how they feel."

Then consider this episode a little tough love. A cracker is NOT a person. You should NOT love a cracker most in the whole world, because crackers are fragile and also completely incapable of reciprocating that love. You'll thank us some day.

Posted by: Canuck | July 22, 2008 2:49 PM

@ #45 Ironically, some of the strongest adherents to Social Darwinism I have known have been the most devoutly religious.

Posted by: hje | July 22, 2008 2:51 PM

Send them all to /dev/null. They can all bite the bit bucket.

Posted by: True Bob | July 22, 2008 2:58 PM

They came to Canada and needed a spiritual home.

No, they needed a home. "Spiritual" has nothing to do with it. If you need your religion to not be sociopathic, this world is hurting.

Posted by: Longtime Lurker | July 22, 2008 3:00 PM

Dear Name Withheld, why admire their faith, when it is really their WORKS that count (THIS pegs me as a former Catholic, not a former Prod).

Wow, Paul Zachary Benedicto Pacifico Maria Myers (known as the Squid) has really called down the god-posse with this one. This is how I picture his final meeting with Fr. J.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttBXmqDtZJ0&feature=related

Actually, I have always doubted that Fr. J. is a Roman Catholic priest. I think Fr. J. really stands for "Freeper Jerkoff".

Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | July 22, 2008 3:01 PM

The way to "desecrate" these crackers is to do it the way millions of Catholics do every Sunday. Just eat the damn thing.

The only sane thing to do is to treat these things as if they were nothing special. What do you do with a spare copy of a book? Donate it to a library or a charity store. That takes care of the Qur'an. What do you do with old crackers that someone sends you in the mail? Throw them out with the rest of the kitchen waste. That takes care of the crackers.

To do otherwise, any elaborate "desecration", would be to treat these objects as being more than they really are -- a book and a musty old cracker -- and thereby, in some sense, legitimise the ravings of these demented fuckwits.

Posted by: deadman_932 | July 22, 2008 3:05 PM

"Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, OK? And I'm not afraid to say it."

- Bill Donohue on opposition to Mel Gibson's "The Passion" movie, MSNBC's "Scarborough Country," 12/08/04

Posted by: Norman Doering | July 22, 2008 3:06 PM

gex wrote:

The way to "desecrate" these crackers is to do it the way millions of Catholics do every Sunday. Just eat the damn thing.

Are you nuts! Who knows where that damn think has been? I'm not touching it without tongs and surgical gloves -- and a surgical mask too... must get them before I open the bag. And get me some of the Dr. Horrible eye-ware too...

Then watch out Bill Donohue -- the cracker will get it and it will be all your fault for not harassing me.

Posted by: AgnoAtheist | July 22, 2008 3:09 PM

Won't Someone Think of the God-Flesh??!!!!

The first time my father came in and tried to cast demons out of me while I sat there working on the computer I became livid and remained so for months. Eventually I realized that I was the one making me angry. The next time he pulled the stunt I remained calm and what I saw was how scared he was.

If Jesus could haul himself out from three days of decomposition I think he could take care of his Extend-A-Fleshes. The real question about the hurt feelings is why do they exist? Why aren't you instead glorying in His Healing Power?

"Thou dost protestest too much."

Posted by: Jonathan | July 22, 2008 3:11 PM

So, it turns out they have create a 'PZ Myers Should Be Fired' group on facebook (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=28500391342). It currently has 9 members, watch out! There are also some Catholic League groups up there in case anyone wants to give them feedback though I think you would have to join to be able to comment.

Posted by: Holbach | July 22, 2008 3:14 PM

Longtime Lurker @ 270 Every time I see that movie with Eli Wallach smashing the freaking priest, with Clint Eastwood looking on, I always wished Clint, with that blatant smug look on his face, would say to the papist, "Where's your fucking god now, eh priest?" That would be a real hoot!

Posted by: Fr. J | July 22, 2008 3:17 PM

Scott, I don't have to imagine. I read about how atheists kill and torture Christians all the time. Take a look at the hatred toward me due to my vocation and faith. I guess that doesn't bother you? But it does show a propensity toward violence. I am not a creationist btw. Notice that atheists lump all Christians into that category. Just like they call all priests pedophiles. They are bigots, so do you really want to align yourself with them?

As of yet no one really gets the point. If you desecrate something, no matter what it is, that someone loves they will not thank you for it. Whether it is Darwin, the Eucharist, or Martin Luther King Jr. Go to a NAACP convention and hang Martin Luther King in effigy. It is just a "symbol." It isn't a real person blah blah. But I bet they won't be happy. Symbols have power, so don't pretend otherwise. Face it. You just want to hurt people. You want to cause pain. That makes you sick. Now, instead of dealing with what I have said go back to the insults. Show us your intellects in action.

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | July 22, 2008 3:20 PM

@ Capital Dan

I admire children who still believe in Santa Claus, but I'm also thankful when they outgrow that delusion and start living in reality.

Wait... what are you saying??????????

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 22, 2008 3:22 PM

I read about how atheists kill and torture Christians all the time.

No you don't, you fucking liar.

Posted by: deadman_932 | July 22, 2008 3:23 PM

" Gays were all of a sudden worrying if people would start aborting kids when they found out the DNA suggested the kid might be gay or God forbid, we'd run out of little gay kids, so all of a sudden, they became pro-life."

-- Wild Bill Donohue on MSNBC, "Scarborough Country," 12/14/04

Posted by: Erwin Blonk | July 22, 2008 3:24 PM

So, mister Donohue, that is how you defend your religion in a civilized intelligent manner. Well, if that is how it has to be, I will have nothing to do with your religion. Even more so, in the theoretical case there would be a god, I would not hold your silliness against him.

Sir, you can now flood my mailbox and I will be thankful for you giving me the oppotunity to practice equanimity (you should try it, once you get the hang of it, it absolutely rock - I'm not very good at it though) and test spam filters.

Love, Erwin.

Seriously, is this what they have got as an argument? Flooding a mailbox proves the infallibility of the Catholic faith? I hope mister Donohue can take a bit of time out of his busy schedule (9:00 condemning someone 9:10 some more condemning 9:20 incite hateful responses to a random target 9:30 eh, well, condemning someone/something 9:40 comdemnation round-up repeat ad nauseam).

Posted by: ridiculous | July 22, 2008 3:24 PM

PZ, do you or any of your disciples have any decency? I don't just mean about the wafer, but, in general, the capacity to show respect to anyone/thing other than yourselves?

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | July 22, 2008 3:25 PM

@ Fr. J.

I read about how atheists kill and torture Christians all the time.

BULLSHIT! Back that up, buddy.. citations, please.

Take a look at the hatred toward me due to my vocation and faith. I guess that doesn't bother you? But it does show a propensity toward violence.

You lying sack of crap... where have the actual threats and actions of physical harm come from in this inceident? WHERE? Answer the question. Then go away.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 22, 2008 3:26 PM

Actually, I have always doubted that Fr. J. is a Roman Catholic priest. I think Fr. J. really stands for "Freeper Jerkoff".

Posted by: Longtime Lurker

I was going to do with "Freely-raping Juveniles," which would not negate his being a Roman Catholic Rapist Priest, but Freeper Jerkoff works just as well.

Posted by: deadman_932 | July 22, 2008 3:30 PM

"Name for me a book publishing company in this country, particularly in New York, which would allow you to publish a book which would tell the truth about THE GAY DEATH STYLE.

There are certain things that the left won't tolerate. They are censorial at heart."

Creepy William Donohue on MSNBC's "Scarborough Country," 2/27/04

[ Damn those gays and their death style!

And Lord, bless our loving priests who guide our young men to a wholesome worship of human sacrifice, corpses on sticks and cannibalism ]

Posted by: John Phillips, FCD | July 22, 2008 3:31 PM

Ridiculous: Is that your Ron in Houston, you forgot drama queen. When the catholitards show some decency to the student perhaps we will reciprocate. Until then, dream on. As they say, you reap what you sow, for all the lack of decency we can see has come from catholitards threatening a student and putting a cracker over human lives and livelihood.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 22, 2008 3:32 PM

I read about how atheists kill and torture Christians all the time.

That is a big fat case of your pants being on fire lying.

Posted by: Brian W. | July 22, 2008 3:33 PM

"It's like attacking Darwin. Fundamentalist atheists go nuts when you do that."

Care to provide an example?

Posted by: OctoberMermaid | July 22, 2008 3:34 PM

"PZ, do you or any of your disciples have any decency? I don't just mean about the wafer, but, in general, the capacity to show respect to anyone/thing other than yourselves?"

Most people here are decent to folks who aren't assholes. The implication is that people who send death threats or justify them due to a cracker are assholes. And that's putting it politely.

If you want respect, perhaps you should work to earn it. This is common sense. If you feel you deserve respect and aren't receiving it, perhaps you should stop acting like a petulant child, rushing to defend their favorite bedtime stories. I'm not talking about you personally, I'm talking in general.

Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | July 22, 2008 3:34 PM

PZ, do you or any of your disciples have any decency? I don't just mean about the wafer, but, in general, the capacity to show respect to anyone/thing other than yourselves?

Posted by: Erwin Blonk | July 22, 2008 3:37 PM

@294

Let me try my much coveted hobby-horse called equanimity.
I think mister Donohue would be wiser and more effective by. as the saying goes, taking it easy.

From the page of his organisation:
"When slanderous assaults are made against the Catholic Church, the Catholic League hits the newspapers, television, and radio talk shows defending the right of the Church to promote its teachings with as much verve as any other institution in society."

Why? This is a negative-aggressive stance that can only be justified by the 'but they started' argument. It is only necessary when one attaches value to influence and power.

If you do, this is the correct thing to do. In the 12th century, buddhism was a large religion in India. From the west came an army dedicated to a different religion.
Buddhism was effectively wiped from India. That would have been a disaster if influence and power was deemed important.
Buddhism has also been all but wiped from the coastal region of Sri Lanka by the Portuguese. Again, not important. It lives not by size or influence.

Apparently, Catholicism does live on power, influence and numbers, so it's understandable it needs to defend by attack. In a way, I understand this. However, it is not good for a peaceful mind or live.

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 22, 2008 3:39 PM

PZ, do you or any of your disciples have any decency? I don't just mean about the wafer, but, in general, the capacity to show respect to anyone/thing other than yourselves?

Yeah, none of us suck off altarboys, threaten others with death, burn heretics, or supported Hitler's holocaust. Decency score: 4 Atheists; 0 Catholics.

So go fuck yourself, you indecent asshole.

Posted by: Glen Davidson | July 22, 2008 3:39 PM

OT: Allah performs food miracles for Muslims, too.

Unsurprisingly, he doesn't put his visage on toast or meat, since good Muslims don't do that kind of thing. He writes graffiti:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7520149.stm

Glen D

Posted by: NanuNanu | July 22, 2008 3:41 PM

"Scott, I don't have to imagine. I read about how atheists kill and torture Christians all the time."

And I read about Kirk sky-diving from orbit! IT MUST BE TRUE.
Seriously, with this comment you've embarrassed yourself past even most christians being willing to defend you.

Posted by: jimmiraybob | July 22, 2008 3:41 PM

If you want respect, perhaps you should work to earn it. -OctoberMermaid

Two.Way.Street.

Thank you in advance.

Posted by: Capital Dan | July 22, 2008 3:42 PM

"I would offer my life for the sake of the preservation of the Blessed Sacrament, but I do not believe you are interested in an offer like that."

Posted by: Cody

I love these liars for Jebus. But, I think we should express our interest in this person's offer, Cody. If they kill themselves, the cracker lives. If not, the wafer will meet the custodial trinity of broom, dustpan and garbage can.

Posted by: Longtime Lurker | July 22, 2008 3:44 PM

Re Brian W.@319:

Yeah right, click your name... do I seem like I want to be Rick Rolled into the Stone Age?

Posted by: OctoberMermaid | July 22, 2008 3:45 PM

"Two.Way.Street.

Thank you in advance."

Guess you got me there. Except, oh, nevermind. I don't worry about getting respect from people who think a cracker is literally the flesh of an undead diety. They clearly aren't firing on all cylinders, anyway.

Posted by: Name Withheld | July 22, 2008 3:45 PM

John Phillps wrote "you are another who seems to have missed the whole point of PZ's original post. I.e. the defence of a student who was threatened and received death threats for at worst a mistake. "

I don;t think I did. I did not read the original post as a defense of that student. I read it as a post pointing out the hypocrisy of Catholics. Not hard to do: the Simpsons do it better. But I don't see much in the way of definding anyone.

BTW, # 270 and #282. Tuco says "You chose your way. I chose mine. Mine was harder" But Tuco was the only one in the movie with free will. Not Angel Eyes. Not Blondie. Only Tuco could choose.

Posted by: anon | July 22, 2008 3:46 PM

Does anyone have any theories as to why no country/civilization/society in all of history has been areligious?

Posted by: Brian W. | July 22, 2008 3:47 PM

ok then just type it in

www.myspace.com/deadjerusalem

Posted by: H.H. | July 22, 2008 3:48 PM

Furthermore, name withheld, I should add that the fact that these faithful people you admire can "leave mass and go speeding out of the parking lot in their Buick and cut two people off on the way to Tim Hortons" should tell you how unspecial and unuplifting faith is. It is not pure, it is crass. It is not divine, it is debasing. It is petty escapism that appeals the the dimmest elements of society. There is nothing admirable about voluntarily relinquishing our human capacity for reason.

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 22, 2008 3:48 PM

Funny or scary! That is almost exactly what the unbelieving crowd told Jesus when he was on the cross. They thought is was a "real hoot" then too.

And is your point to reiterate that no one's seen or heard from either since then?

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 3:49 PM

But he was a Catholic priest so you hate him and consider him a pedophile.

blah blah blah blah

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | July 22, 2008 3:50 PM

Does anyone have any theories as to why no country/civilization/society in all of history has been areligious?

Wow... did you just invent that statement right there on the spot? How cute.

Here's one along the same lines... does anyone have any theories on why it has never, ever rained in Phoenix?

Posted by: Paul | July 22, 2008 3:52 PM

Also, block those people who engage in asserting wide, sweeping generalities. They're usually morons from what I've seen.

**cough**ChrisD**cough**

Posted by: Rey Fox | July 22, 2008 3:53 PM

"I would offer my life for the sake of the preservation of the Blessed Sacrament, but I do not believe you are interested in an offer like that."

Another quote from the Book of Ennis seems appropriate: "WANKERRRRRS!"

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | July 22, 2008 3:55 PM

@ Fr. J. #337

All you've done is further display your ignorance. What does anything in your story have to do with atheism?

Hint: NOTHING. Fail.

Also, you still haven't answered my question from #295... the second one. Answer it.

Posted by: Patricia | July 22, 2008 3:56 PM

Chimpy, Show me that head striking desk thing one more time?

Posted by: Holbach | July 22, 2008 3:57 PM

Patricia @ 287 The only library that has it is quite a few miles from me, and anyway it is checked out, no doubt by a bible thumper who is figuring he can learn something new from that shit book, much to his surprise! I get the catalog from Prometheus Books and occasionally buy from them; it's listed in the 2008 catalog for $32.00! Damn, they have always been expensive, even their paperback editions. I have "The Encyclopedia Of Unbelief" from 1985 which cost almost $100.00! "The New Encyclopedia Of Belief" costs $199.00! Yeow!

Posted by: Erwin Blonk | July 22, 2008 3:58 PM

@339

I will not do this and would advise others not to either. In this matter it is not about Donohue supporters against PZ supporters but responders against non-repsonders. My guess is the non-repsonders are the majority, which is a good thing.

Posted by: Brian W. | July 22, 2008 3:59 PM

"Brian, you won't be receiving the hate. I already have. Just read the posts."

Atheists aren't the ones that believe that other people can take punishment for someone's actions.

Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | July 22, 2008 4:00 PM

I read about how atheists kill and torture Christians all the time.

Even if it were true, atheists are not an organised group; if you don't believe in god(s), you are an atheist; there's no club you join; we are not affiliated with each other in any way. Thus, no atheist is in any sense associated with the misdeeds of any other any more than a person who lacks a moustache shares the guilt of a criminal similarly devoid of an hirsute upper lip.

The Catholic Church, OTOH, is an organised group, and it's you who boiled people in oil and burned them at the stake for heresy and, even today, coordinate an international conspiracy to protect child-rapists from prosecution.

That Catholics chide us for failure to demonstrate the appropriate deference to a cracker while being members of your disgusting child-rape support club is beneath contempt.

So, a hearty "fuck you" to you and anyone else who demands respect for their preposterous beliefs while being in such an abject state of moral turpitude.

Posted by: Lowell | July 22, 2008 4:03 PM

@ #296:

That is almost exactly what the unbelieving crowd told Jesus when he was on the cross. They thought is was a "real hoot" then too.

Prove it.

Posted by: Longtime Lurker | July 22, 2008 4:06 PM

Re Name Withheld @328:

How would you infer that Blondie and Angel Eyes lacked free will? It is true that Tuco is the only one of the three who has any real back story or clearly defined identity, but I wouldn't assume a lack of free will on the part of the other two. Would you suggest that "the Good" and "the Bad" are supernatural agents, much like Clint's characters in "High Plains Drifter" and "Pale Rider" seem to be?

Posted by: Patricia | July 22, 2008 4:06 PM

JefferyD - Ask & ye shall recieve. With one wave of my magical, witchy wand *ting*, you are now a Myrmidon.
Oh what the hell, more grog & swill too. ;)

Posted by: Canuck | July 22, 2008 4:07 PM

#140 Get a good virus scanner, they are probably sending viri and trojans as well.

Trojans?!?! But they don't have condoms?!?!?!

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 4:11 PM

Posted by: Fr. J | July 22, 2008 4:09 PM

blah blah blah blah

the insults are tearing at jesus's flesh...and Fr J is getting hot!

Posted by: Jonathan | July 22, 2008 4:11 PM

@365 I don't quite get it, what does that story have to do with anything? He was killed in captivity during the war right? Was he the only one to be killed or something?

Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | July 22, 2008 4:12 PM

But he was a Catholic priest so you hate him

and consider him a pedophile.

Posted by: Brian W. | July 22, 2008 4:13 PM

So you make this claim that we're all completely shameless and then get confused when we don't live up to it? Genius.

Posted by: weez | July 22, 2008 4:14 PM

No one cares to comment on or insult the priest who died caring for others during the Korean war? You guys are slipping. What are you afraid of? Or could it be that there is a level of shame you won't stoop too?

Posted by: Fr. J | July 22, 2008 4:09 PM

You don't have to be a priest to care for an injured person, in fact it'd be quite a hindrance. If I get shot on the battlefield, I want a medic, not a shaman, thanks.

Posted by: Name Withheld | July 22, 2008 4:16 PM

Its the shootout at the end. Angel Eyes HAS to shoot Blondie. Blondie HAS to shoot Angel Eyes. They are the good/evil (or Yin and Yang). But Tuco? He's not sure. He has to choose. He eyes are all over the place. In the end, it does not matter. Sort of like us (humans).

I think Crackergate may already have run its course. For me, at least. I said what I meant to say. I'm a struggling believer and Catholic. But I'd rather watch the Good the Bad and the Ugly tonight after my kids go to bed.

Posted by: Omar Ali | July 22, 2008 4:17 PM

I believe most Muslims will leave PZ alone. Not because they are OK with blasphemy (they are not) but because Muslims are more politically aware than most Christians these days and they calculate a bit more about who they attack. You will see that they dont really go after Dawkins too much..or any other atheist. In their world view, they are currently at war with Crusaders and Jews. Anyone who hates/attacks crusaders or jews is likely to get a bit of a pass. At the other extreme, any Muslim who deviates is much more likely to get it in the neck because traitors within are more dangerous than critics without. If you were a right wing fascist and decided to do something nasty to the Quran, you are more likely to get flamed (literally).

Posted by: CJO | July 22, 2008 4:18 PM

Symbols have power, so don't pretend otherwise.

Wait, this is someone claiming the title "Fr." and he says it's just a symbol. What happened to the consecrated host literally embodying the flesh and blood of the lord? That doesn't sound like a symbol for something, it sounds like it's supposed to be one and the same thing.

Which is it, Father?

Furthermore, nobody denied that symbols have power. Where you and your bullying flock go wrong is attempting to invest your symbols with more power than is allowed in a secular society ruled by law. I guess it makes you nostalgic for the good ol' days of the Inquisition, when your kind inspired terror rather than ridicule and child-molestation charges.

Posted by: Michael | July 22, 2008 4:22 PM

Where was the Lord during the Korean War? Right in the middle of it: http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/encounter_with_stmichael.html

Posted by: Bart Mitchell | July 22, 2008 4:29 PM

St. Michael the Archangel quote
"That would be M.I.C.H.A.E.L"

Thanks for clearing that up. I never new the angels name was an acronym. What do the letters stand for, My Ignorance Can Harm Adolescents, Even the Lords?

Anyone else have a guess on what M.I.C.H.A.E.L stands for?

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead | July 22, 2008 4:30 PM

Max Verret,

You are a bald faced liar. PZ responded to the unchristian like phyisical attack and persecution of Webster Cook. Yes, PZ did ask that crackers be sent to him, but only after he posted the facts of the case. If you want PZ not to desecrate the cracker, then have the Catholic group at UCF drop all charges against Mr. Cook and his friend. That would be the christian thing to do.

Posted by: AgnoAtheist | July 22, 2008 4:31 PM

Max Verret (381)
"A little prudence in the beginning saves a lot of trouble later on."

And a little rolling over keeps things quiet.

Posted by: Sidheag | July 22, 2008 4:31 PM

PZ: have you considered using whitelisting for your mail? That is, set it up so that mail doesn't get through to your ordinary inbox unless it comes from an address which is on your list of people you expect to get mail from (which can, if you wish, include patterns, e.g., that would match any of your students posting from a university address - of course, if you did that, it's easy for people to forge their hatemail to look as though it came from an address, but I bet most of the hoards are too ignorant to do that). You still have the problem of how someone you want to hear from but have never heard from before gets to mail you, but that's pretty much inevitable: the usual way is to have an autoreply that says "mail again with [string] in the title and expect some delay", direct those to a separate box, and scan for wanted mail every so often. Your university computer support people should be able to help you set this up pretty easily. It might solve your problem on its own, or it might just be a good adjunct to choosing new email addresses, just in case one of them gets loose.

Posted by: negentropyeater | July 22, 2008 4:33 PM

If you desecrate something that people absolutely love with their whole hearts what kind of response do you think you would get?

Making people love symbols more than humans might have worked in those days when you wanted to have ferocious agressive folks who defended the tribe well, in today's pluralistic society it's preferable they drop the symbols and love more humans.

If they can't understand that they need to abandon their love of worthless symbols, because they were endoctrinated since their young age and were also victims of child abuse, that doesn't mean that those who love humans, and not symbols, should just sit there quietly, and let this love of worthless symbols continue to exert its negative influence on society.
We have to alert and convince the generations to come with the only tool that we may use, expression, of the tremendous cost to society that is caused by this love of worthless symbols and the consequences of religious endoctrination and child abuse of all sorts.

And that's what we are doing now.

Actually, you're helping us to expose it even more clearly.
Every day it becomes clearer.

Posted by: KM | July 22, 2008 4:37 PM

... And we have a winner: "Nubile Old Ho".

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 22, 2008 4:42 PM

Maxi Priest says:

Also, once you stick an icepick into a rotted board you can expect all sorts of termites to come crawling out.

While Fried J says:

Religion is not the main cause of violence in the world.

Well, which is it? Either religion makes you a better person or it doesn't. Stop trying to have your god and eat him too.

Posted by: Kseniya | July 22, 2008 4:45 PM

Emil Kapaun

One data point.

Impressive.

LOL.

So you read about the death of Emil Kapaun "all the time"?

You need to get out more.

By the way, it was a political, not religious, war. How do you know he was killed by atheists? North Korea is only about 70% atheist, by the way. It's even possible that he was killed by a Christian. Do you know the religious leanings of those who killed him?

Oh, I forgot. A secular/areligious state is necessarily atheistic, eh? Therefore the entire population of that state is atheistic. And you lump ALL atheists into one, big, monstrously amoral bucket, no? How sophisticated!

Furthermore, nobody denied that symbols have power

Actually, IIRC, someone named Sharon did on the "rolls eyes" thread. She said that object that lacked utility only had value if they were blessed, therefore things like photographs of loved ones and other keepsakes had only utilitatian value if they "helped with the memories", but were otherwise worthless and only served to perpetuatate material attachments. In a word: batty.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 4:47 PM

So you read about the death of Emil Kapaun "all the time"?

Well, for the tortured martyr fetishist, it makes good "bed time" reading.

Posted by: anagramed | July 22, 2008 4:49 PM

drop the Z and you get:

Lame Syrup
Real Spumy
Palmy User (was there ever any doubt)
Asylum Rep (heyyy-ohh)

Posted by: Holbach | July 22, 2008 4:51 PM

Freaking jeebus @ 337 I see you are back here for more curettage of your religion sapped brain. When will you realize that it is you and not your imaginary god that is doing all the insane ranting? We can incessantly demand you to show us your god and let it aid you in your trial of demented puking, but it never seems to make an appearance. Why is that? You recount the story of the "father" administering to the wounded during the Korean War with a healthy slathering of useless prayers to the dead and dying. Why didn't he just stay in one place and ask your god to administer to those intelligently designed creatures? Just sit still and pray that your god will not only succor them, but also smite the enemy that is killing those christian souls with those godly bombs and bullets. By doing what he did, he only confirmed that there is no imaginary god, because it was nowhere to be seen. Good grief, can't you fathom the blatant insanity of this pathetic and irrational belief in a god? Are you so demented as to not see and comprehend the utter futility of all that insane bullshit? Are you in need of a lobotomy to excise that part of your brain that imagines such a mindless and imaginary make believe entity? Isn't it obvious to you that if you were to undergo such an operation to remove the afflicted part of your brain, that all ideas and thoughts of such imaginations will have no more basis of being? Where else but in the brain is the very thought and creation of a god, and to have that part of the brain that is the seat of this insanity removed, no thought of this nonsense will prevail. I love music, and if the right side of my brain were surgically or accidently altered, my propensity for music will be gone. So if you were to submit to the appropriate lobotomy you will be ensured of total freedom from the prevailing insanity you now suffer with. You may still have a taste for crackers, but we will deal with that at the appropriate time at the first sign of the need for further curettage. The operation will be performed by a doctor and not your hopeful imaginary god. The cracker thing is perhaps beyond the doctor's pervue to insinuate, but the cracker you will enjoy from now on will be unable to alter it's shape or taste. May the cracker be with you!

Posted by: BobC | July 22, 2008 4:52 PM

I am not a creationist btw. Posted by: Fr. J

If you're not a creationist then you agree Jebus is a cousin of chimps. Why do you worship a cousin of chimps? Or are you just in the priest business for the money?

By the way did you see this quote somebody put in the other thread?

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest. -- Diderot

I agree with that completely. The freedom of the human race requires the complete eradication of priests, including you Fr. J.

Posted by: John Phillips, FCD | July 22, 2008 4:57 PM

puzzled, but PZ isn't our 'self appointed "spokesman", he only speaks for himself, whatever others might think. On some things I agree with both what he says and the way he says it, on others, not so much. That is the difference between us and the religious, we generally speak for ourselves and even disagree, sometimes passionately. I know, a difficult concept for those of faith but it works for us and makes life much more interesting.
However, it sounds as if you want something that mimics the religious with their popes and archbishops who are the only ones authorised to speak for those who share their world view, thankfully it ain't gonna happen.

Posted by: NanuNanu | July 22, 2008 5:03 PM

As an autistic I find all the constant condescending talk of "social autism" by 'yay social autism' and their sock puppets to be extremely.... actually I don't care much but it's pretty annoying.

Posted by: the strangest brew | July 22, 2008 5:07 PM

#406

"Civilization will not attain perfection until the last stone from the last church falls on the last priest." -Emile Zola

Posted by: Abner Doubleday | July 22, 2008 5:12 PM

http://www.SneakEmail.com

PZ,

Sneak Email is an e-mail forwarding service designed to fight spam. It would be useful for your situation.

You can create an e-mail address, then, if it begins attracting spam, or cranks, in your case, you simply delete the address and create another. You can have a large number of addresses.

SneakEmail has a features such as allowing you to create directories to organize your addresses, add notes to each address, have a suffix appear on the subject line, and other conveniences.

There is a free service, but being gainfully employed, and having a lot of mail, you should probably opt for the $24 per year pay service, which has more bandwidth and some other benefits.

If someone has an inside connection to PZ, would you please forward this to him? I'm afraid that buried here in the comments he'll never see it.

AB

Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | July 22, 2008 5:12 PM

America's got some dummies, but we're still the smartest

In reality, the closest such thing is the OECD educational attainment statistics where the US is 11th or 12th in tertiary education (depending on which exact table you look at, 2007 figures) and, interestingly, well below the OECD and EU averages in secondary educated students progressing to tertiary.

we've still got the best hospitals,

the best social services

Posted by: yay social autism | July 22, 2008 5:15 PM

#409
my bad: http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdateNarrow&BarnaUpdateID=303

#410
if condescending talk isn't for you, you're at the wrong blog.

Posted by: Kagehi | July 22, 2008 5:16 PM

Someone want to clue me in one what social autism is exactly? I mean, is there some sort of blog for these people, where, whenever they are confronted by something new or some person they don't know talks to them they can whine and hide under a pillow until the people go away? Oh, wait.. I think I just described every single right wing blog on the internet which either doesn't allow posts, or deletes the ones they find uncomfortable or challenging to them... lol

Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip | July 22, 2008 5:18 PM

@403: Maybe if i make a giant naked Darwin out of chocolate.

I'll bet Ben Stein now wishes he'd waited to visit your soft, moist, chocolate Darwin instead of that hard, cold statue.

Posted by: Jonathan | July 22, 2008 5:21 PM

@415 Are we looking at the same press release? The one that clearly says "Contact Myers at..."?

Posted by: hillbilly78 | July 22, 2008 5:24 PM

Comment #281 by Patricia:

Didn't someone post a link to an interview with Webster Cook somewhere?...

The interview can be found at

http://www.americanfreethought.com/wordpress/2008/07/22/webster-cook-speaks/

Posted by: negentropyeater | July 22, 2008 5:27 PM

FrJ,

Albania was areligious under Hoxha. Also North Korea is areligious under Kim Jong Il. Fine examples of non-religious societies. Religion is not the main cause of violence in the world.>/blockquote>

Albania areligious ? North Korea areligious ? You gotta be kidding me. They were/are some of the most religious countries in the world. Their religion was Hoxhaism and Kim Jong Ilism. Religions don't always require bearded sky daddys you know, they manage to create fairy tales about live people very fast, it's just a question of endoctrination.

I mean it's like you, the only reason you believe in this cracker transformable into a Jesus thingy is that you were forced to believe in this since your young age, forced to never ask yourself if it made any sense, forced to repeat this several times a week for the rest of your life and now you're doing the same to others without any regret whatsoever, and completely incapable of realizing by yourself how angry you should be towards those who have abused you and endoctrinated you in a such a way in your youth.

Yes, you are a victim of child abuse.

In Albania and North Korea they did exactly the same, they had their own legends and fairy tales about their living Gods, and instead of threatening you with eternal damnation if you refused to believe, they just threatened you with putting you in Jail for the rest of your life or worse.

If religion is not the main cause of violence in the world, then I don't know what is.

As Steven Weinberg said :

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion."

Posted by: Erwin Blonk | July 22, 2008 5:35 PM

"Symbols have power, so don't pretend otherwise"

By themselves? I argue that they don't. Only if people believe they have power, they hold that power over those people for as long as they believe in that power. And only insofar such people are able to excercise the said power.

I can be hurt by the consequences of other peoples believe in the power of a certain symbol. If a sufficient number of people believe that, because of a symbol I should be hurt, or be treated differently because I do not underwrite such powers, I will be affected. Not by the symbol but ny those believing in the power of it. Symbols, like religions are neutral. The acts people base upon them are not.

Posted by: Sastra | July 22, 2008 5:39 PM

Name Withheld #254 wrote:

But I admire the honest faith of many of the older people in my church. Do they leave mass and go speeding out of the parking lot in their Buick and cut two people off on the way to Tim Hortons? Probably. But at mass, their faith is genuine and beautiful.

One of the most frustrating things religion does is co-opt perfectly fine concepts, distort them, and then claim equivalence. "Faith" as a secular word can mean hope, confidence, trust, loyalty, and commitment. Depending on context, those can be fine qualities -- if they are tempered with reason, and caution.

But when used in religion, faith signifies a desire to believe in something so hard that reason can't get in the way. That is not intellectually honest. It is not genuine and beautiful. It is arrogance masquerading as humility, and thoughtless dogma parading itself as sensitivity to nuance.

The Catholics pushed too far when they harassed a kid for violating a "sacred" taboo and brought their anger out of the church and into the public square, expecting that their sense of tortured outrage would be treated as a fine and noble thing -- because their Faith in sacred taboos is a fine and noble thing.

No it is not. Failing to point this out is not "kind." It is pandering, and enabling, and degrading to the spirit of human progress. The problem is not the Catholics. It's what Catholicism -- and religion in general -- does to ordinary people. It does not ennoble.

And we should not play along with the charade that it does.

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 22, 2008 5:48 PM

Rather they'll wait until Muslim assassins have tried to kill you; in the lucky event that the assassins fail and you point out on your blog that they were motivated by Islam, they'll call you a racist and an Islamophobe, and they'll spread the word that the assassins weren't real Muslims and that they were distorting 'true' Islam, which is a religion of peace, freedom, and tolerance.

Funny, that's exactly the strategy the Catholic apologists here used when PZ got death threats.

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 22, 2008 5:54 PM

MYERS STILL WANTS TO ABUSE EUCHARIST; SHOWS DEFERENCE TO ISLAM

We've always been at war with Eastasia.

MYERS TO DESECRATE EUCHARIST AND KORAN

We've always been at war with Eurasia.

What was it again that Sastra was telling you about faith being "a desire to believe in something so hard that reason can't get in the way," Name Withheld?

Posted by: Norman Doering | July 22, 2008 5:57 PM

Feynmaniac, both your links go to the "MYERS TO DESECRATE EUCHARIST AND KORAN" release.

Posted by: Erwin Blonk | July 22, 2008 6:08 PM

#435
"However, I don't believe for a minute that religions like Islam and Christianity grow as powerful and dangerous as they do because they are neutral and peaceful."

I see your point. What I meant is that a book, a set of rules or an object can't do anything. It is the actions of people. In that sense even an existing god can be inconsequential, he can say whatever he likes, the responsibility of my actions are mine, unless I am forced through divine intervention, in which case my actions are not mine, as those of a puppet are not of the puppet but of the puppetmaster).). If, for example, am ordered to kill my own son, the right response would be 'no'.

Posted by: H.H. | July 22, 2008 6:15 PM

Janus said:

The difference is that Catholics can't use scare-words like 'islamophobe' and 'racist', which automatically gather support among spineless liberals.

Posted by: Norman Doering | July 22, 2008 6:17 PM

Erwin Blonk wrote:

If, for example, am ordered to kill my own son, the right response would be 'no'.

The "right" response depends on what you believe and value and that's why religion isn't neutral or peaceful.

Think about what you have to believe to kill your son because you think God ordered it... but that's what you were getting at, wasn't it?

Posted by: Mick | July 22, 2008 6:18 PM

"PZ reportedly got a "death threat" which while not specific could reasonably be interpreted as implying an intent to inflict harm."

"you can quit your job for the good of the children. Or you can get your brains beat in" seems pretty specific to me.

Posted by: Brownian, OM | July 22, 2008 6:24 PM

Also, the ideology that Catholics defend, while pretty bad, isn't nearly as evil as Islam.

The Skeptic's Annotated Bible lists 885 biblical quotes under the heading 'Cruelty and Violence', while the Q'uran only has 514.

So unless you've invented some kind of Religiometer that measures the 'goodness' and 'badness' of religious doctrines (let alone exactly what each doctrine entails, in which case please use it to determine once and for all which is the truest and bestest religion and save the rest of us a lot of bullshit), I must say in response, What the fuck are you talking about?

Posted by: Ichthyic | July 22, 2008 6:27 PM

The difference is that Catholics can't use scare-words like 'islamophobe' and 'racist', which automatically gather support among spineless liberals.

you must not have been paying much attention to the comments in the previous threads.

the words "bigot" and "bigotry" have been very commonly applied by catholic apologists to PZ. You can search the threads yourself to verify.

so, while you might not think it logical, they do indeed commonly attempt to use that angle.

whether it would "appeal to spineless liberals" is rather irrelevant.

so, did you actually have a worthwhile point to make?

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | July 22, 2008 6:30 PM

@ MAJeff #451

*ear to ear grin*

Posted by: Phillip IV | July 22, 2008 6:31 PM

# 445:

It's reverse transubstantiation! They've taken a bit of the body of our lord Cthulhu, and magically turned it into a snack!

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 6:33 PM

Celtic_Evolution,

I was soooooooooo pissed at McHale last summer (at heart, I will probably always be a Minnesotan). But I was also soooooooooooo happy for KG. Sure, the guy may be a little "off" from his intensity on the court from time to time, but he's also someone who gives back to his community and is a class act off the court.

Posted by: Ichthyic | July 22, 2008 6:36 PM

Moreover, what Janus doesn't seem to get is that any organized religion can be utilized easily to motivate adherents to acts of violence.

If he doesn't choose to look at the history of xianity in this regard, he can look at recent events and see it:

http://www.thehindu.com/2008/07/14/stories/2008071450360100.htm

The reason you don't see AMERICAN muslims, or catholics, destroying public property or following through (most times) on their various "fatwa" proclamations, is that this is a secular nation (excluding parts of the South, like Florida?), not ruled by any form of religious law, and so for a long time now we have considered destruction of public property and threats of physical violence to be jailable offenses under the law, regardless of whether the motivations were "religious" or not.

If one wants to see what would happen under a theocracy, it's not hard to look around the world and find out.

In short:

location
location
location

That said, religion is far too easy a tool to utilize to manipulate people, and it's simply time for it to go away.

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | July 22, 2008 6:37 PM

MAJeff

I was born and raised in Boston... my first job was hawking peanuts at the old Garden during the mid-80's Laker / Celtics rivalry. It's been too long, and I loved every minute of it. But we're getting OT...

Posted by: JM Inc. | July 22, 2008 6:47 PM

[obligatory Bill Donohue abuse]
That is all.

Posted by: Patricia | July 22, 2008 6:52 PM

#426 - Hey thanks for that link!

So I step out to desecrete some swine, and now we have Father Jackass, J, AND Salt? Ok, the Fraud, the Fool, and the Fundament. Our own personal three stooges. Sweet!

Posted by: SC | July 22, 2008 6:57 PM

I'm not sure who J is (is it the priest guy in this thread?), but I'm myself and nobody else.

Amazing, then. You two must have been separated at birth. Do you get all swoony over Sam Harris, too?

And while I'm certainly no expert, I apparently know a lot more about Islam (and CAIR) than either you or Brownian.

On what are you basing that claim?

Posted by: the3rick | July 22, 2008 7:03 PM

When you call the Catholic League's number (found on their web page), there is a message that gives Bill Donohue's cell number (917-838-1051). I don't know if it's legit, but I don't know why it wouldn't be.

Posted by: SC | July 22, 2008 7:09 PM

Janus,

You may be interested in this thread

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/i_generally_favor_the_idea_of.php

particularly the comments by Nullifidian.

Posted by: Scott Hatfield, OM | July 22, 2008 7:25 PM

Scott, I don't have to imagine. I read about how atheists kill and torture Christians all the time.

You are so full of it. Torture? Where do you read about that? Certainly not on Pharyngula. It's well-known that I'm a theist here. Look, see: they know me, and I know them, and the above is just false.

See, your problem is that you think you're entitled to a certain minimum level of respect for your vocation and your beliefs. But you're not, and neither am I. You have to earn respect by honest engagement, and so far you've failed to engage honestly. To say that you read about atheists torturing Christians all the time is just a lame, over-the-top excuse to justify your previous rhetorical excesses. It certainly rings false to me.

Sure, I get grief here from time to time for being a believer. I also get good, thoughtful observations and dialogue. No one has ever threatened me with any sort of mayhem. I've had many meals with non-believers, including PZ, and I never once saw the voodoo dolls come out, or be treated anything other than a fellow human being. I think you are just projecting your own insecurities on others. I really hope that you are not a priest, frankly, because the more you write, the deeper and more despicable your attempts to justify yourself become.

Posted by: Ichthyic | July 22, 2008 7:34 PM

that you accused me of being a religious nut's sockpuppet

that's your assumption about who "J" is.

there was no implication in associating you with J that you were a religious nutbagger.

rather, that you use similarly poor logic, and your words resemble "J"'s quite a bit.

I don't recall that J has used the "spineless liberal" jibe as much as yourself, however.

I'm satisfied you have equal, but separate, levels of inanity.

Posted by: Patricia | July 22, 2008 7:49 PM

#350 - Holbach - Yeah, that book is pretty steep in price, but with all the fluff I've ead this summer, I figure what the heck, a treat. The reviews I've read say Avalos really slaughters the bible. One of PZ's other commenters recommended the book too.
I've spent so much time here on PZ's blog that a class I was taking has finished without me. Sheesh!

Posted by: DingoDave | July 22, 2008 8:06 PM

Fr. J wrote #230:
"PZ, so you are shocked that desecrating a sacred symbol annoys lot's of people?...If you desecrate something that people absolutely love with their whole hearts what kind of response do you think you would get? It's like attacking Darwin. Fundamentalist atheists go nuts when you do that."

You Catholics are nothing more than a bunch of idolatorous crackerphiles. You literally worship crackers??? What does the Bible say about idolatory J?
First your church turned the man Joshua ben Joseph into a kind of pagan demi-god, and now you are doing the same with inanimate objects such as crackers. Do you not realise how perverse this appears to someone who has not been not brainwashed into believing it from childhood? If Catholics can deny that they practice idolatory, then Garth Brooks is entitled to tell his fans that he doesn't really play country music! You people should be feel humiliated and embarrassed to be defending such gross idolatory in this day and age.

By the way, how do you feel about your followers disobeying Jesus' stern command to call no man on earth 'Father'?

Matt.23
[9] And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.

Flaming Hypocrite!

Speaking of hypocrites;

Bill Donohue's e-mail address.
Ref post #65:
Bill Donohue, Catholic League, cl@catholicleague.org
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Is-the-Vatican-A-Safe-Have-by-Debby-Bodkin-080712-390.html
http://maxblumenthal.com/2006_02_01_maxblumenthal_archive.html

Posted by: Margaret | July 22, 2008 8:11 PM

The link in #117 (http://www.nbc10.com/family/16947935/detail.html) has one of those stupid polls that needs to be pharyngulated -- right now 79% say they believe in god.

Posted by: DingoDave | July 22, 2008 8:31 PM

Ref. #300:
"And Lord, bless our loving priests who guide our young men to a wholesome worship of human sacrifice, corpses on sticks and cannibalism"

"I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a dead guy nailed to two pieces of wood."
- George Carlin

Posted by: Patricia | July 22, 2008 8:43 PM

Well, that and the time zones. Sometimes I get up in the morning and all hell has cut loose while I was asleep. Loads of fun though! Actually it's rather ironic that I've neglected my school work to read a professors blog. :)

Posted by: DingoDave | July 22, 2008 8:58 PM

Fr. J wrote #230:
"If you desecrate something that people absolutely love with their whole hearts what kind of response do you think you would get?"

"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis.

Maybe Sinclair Lewis should have said;

"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a CRACKER."

Posted by: DingoDave | July 22, 2008 9:07 PM

Comment #281 by Patricia:
"Didn't someone post a link to an interview with Webster Cook somewhere?..."

There is a radio interview with Webster Cook here;

http://ffrf.org/radio/podcast/

Posted by: Sastra | July 22, 2008 9:25 PM

#330: "Does anyone have any theories as to why no country/civilization/society in all of history has been areligious?"

No country, civilization, or society has ever been without superstitions. The dividing line between superstition and religion is largely arbitrary, and a matter of culture.

Superstitions tell us a great deal about the way the human brain is put together, and how the mind works. They also give us insight into how social reinforcement works. There is no reason to go beyond that and believe that they must also tell us anything about how reality works. Take superstitions literally and seriously, and you miss the real insights.

Religion tells us a lot about human beings as a species. We don't need a real God in order to explain it.

Posted by: DingoDave | July 22, 2008 9:35 PM

Comment #465:
"Wishing violence or ill tidings fall on someone is a horrible thing. It's pretty much the opposite of the Christian message."

You need to read your Bible more carefully Kel.
Read the book of Revelation if you want to see yet another Christian wishing violence upon all non-believers.

"If a modern secular reader ... sat down and read it [Revelation] through for the first time, my guess would be they would find it to be extremely violent. Someone once tallied up the death count and projected it on a modern world such as ours, with five billion people, and it's absolutely a horrible kind of a statistic. You come up with maybe four billion dying of famine, war, earthquake, plagues.
Essentially it's a book about the wrath of God being poured out upon the world. People not repenting except for the small group of faithful followers of God, and this awful wicked beast power ruling the whole world, and defying God, shaking his fist at God. And finally Jesus coming, not as a Prince of Peace at all, not as a lamb, but at the end of the book, as a rider on a horse, a warrior with a sword, to smite the nations. In one of the quotes that comes to my mind it says, "He will rule the nations with a rod of iron, as a potter strikes a pot with iron and it just completely shatters." So I think that would be the dominant impression someone would get, maybe a book you'd want to close and put away and not even think about..." - James Tabor

And let's not forget the words of Jesus himself;

Luke.19
[27] "But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me."

Or how about this?

Rev.14
[10] he also shall drink the wine of God's wrath, poured unmixed into the cup of his anger, and he shall be tormented with fire and sulphur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
[11] And the smoke of their torment goes up for ever and ever; and they have no rest, day or night...

The 'Lamb' of course being none other than Jesus, the 'Prince of Peace' himself.
Jesus, the 'Torture Meister'! Now there's a lovely thought.
No wonder there are so many violent minded Christian nutjobs out there. When someone worships a violent and intolerant god, then some of it is bound to rub off.

Posted by: Fr. J | July 22, 2008 10:10 PM

Here is a story you won't hear in PZ's class:

More than a century ago a proud university student boarded a train in France and sat next to an older man who seemed to be a peasant of comfortable means. The brash student noticed that the older gentleman was slipping beads through his fingers. He was praying the rosary.

"Sir, do you still believe in such outdated things?", the student inquired.

"Yes, I do. Don't you?" the man responded. The student laughed and admitted, "I do not believe in such silly things. Take my advice. Throw the rosary out the window, and learn what science has to say about it."

"Science? I do not understand this science. Perhaps you can explain it to me," the man said humbly, tears welling in his eyes.

The university student noticed that the man was deeply moved. To avoid hurting further the older person's feelings, he said, "Please give me your address and I will send you some literature to explain the matter to you." The man fumbled in the inside pocket of his coat and pulled out his business card. On reading the card, the student lowered his head in shame and was speechless. The card read: "Louis Pasteur, Director of the Institute of Scientific Research, Paris." The deluded science student encountered his country's leading chemist and bacteriologist.

Posted by: Wowbagger | July 22, 2008 10:21 PM

That's a lovely story, Fr. J - is there a point in there somewhere?

Posted by: Fr. J | July 22, 2008 10:27 PM

Wow, I will spell it out for you then:

1. Not all religious people are stupid.
2. Some great scientists are and were religious.
3. The student sounds like many here...arrogant and rude.
4. Science and religion are not necessarily in opposition and you can be a good scientist and believe in God.
5. Religious people have contributed greatly in a positive way to our world.
6. It is best to avoid rash judgments.
7. Atheists can be just as dogmatic as anyone.

That should get you started freethinking.

Posted by: Jeff Knapp | July 22, 2008 10:28 PM

I just sent Bill Donahue a letter of my own via the only way they provide to contact them (other than by snail mail). Here is the text of my letter to him.
http://www.catholicleague.org/feedback.php

I realize I am a nobody, a private citizen with no public presence but, I do hope he responds anyway. I do hope he does sick his wachaloons on me. I rearing for a good fight.

To Mr. Donahue,

I find it interesting that, while you guys are quite happy to publish email addresses of those you sick your members on such as you recently did - three times - with Dr. P. Z. Myers, (which has resulted in extensive written/verbal abuse towards him and threats of physical harm), you provide no links whatsoever to contact you via email. What are you afraid of anyway?

Hypocrite. Coward.

I find it interesting that, despite the explicit threats of violence against Dr. Myers, you have done nothing to denounce or speak out against those that are attacking him verbally and threatening him with physical violence. What ever happened to "love thy neighbor" and "turn the other cheek?" What ever happened to common decency by such God-loving, decent Christian fold such as yourself?

Hypocrite.

I, too, plan to intentionally and publicly desecrate one of your precious crackers. I will video tape the event and publicly post it on my Web site as well as on U-Tube. This notion that a cracker magically becomes the body of Jesus Christ - a mythical fictional character - is every bit as silly as any other fantastical, mythical notion out there. Yours is no more special or better than any of the other fantasies man has created. I intend to demonstrate that, by treating your holy cracker as just a cracker (and not a very tasty one at that!), your myth is only that, a myth, no more true than all of the others we have since rejected as merely myths throughout history.

You demand that I show your religion respect. You demand that your religion be placed on a pedestal, immune to any criticism. I say, no way. Religion, just like any other thought or idea, is subject to critical investigation and criticism.

As you can see by my providing full contact information, I have no fear of you or your stupid, wachaloon minions.

Bring it on tough guy!

Your's truly.

Jeffrey J. Knapp

Posted by: JoJo | July 22, 2008 10:34 PM

You're late again, Fr.J. We've already been told, several times that Blaise Pascal and Louis Pasteur were observant Catholics. So what? Galileo was brought before the Inquisition. Copernicus' De Revolutionibus was placed on the Index of Forbidden books, as were all of Kepler's works.

BTW, you're still a patronizing, pompous prig.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 10:38 PM

Anyone here want to claim he was uneducated, ignorant, and stupid?

No one has made such a claim.

You, however, are far from impressive.

Posted by: Janine ID | July 22, 2008 10:41 PM

We are half way to 1000. Let's give PZ a migraine. Only 500 posts to go.

Posted by: Fr. J

It is not the amount of posts that brings on the migraine, it the sheer stupidity that brings it on.

So, you like to cause pain, I see. Damned sadist.

Posted by: Wowbagger | July 22, 2008 10:44 PM

Sorry, Fr. J, I should have been more specific. I'll try again:

Is there a valid or worthwhile point in there somewhere? Because pointing out that someone who is otherwise intelligent clings to an irrational belief is nothing new to anyone here.

1. Heck, many (if not most) of the posters here are former believers - and, considering how often (and easily) they're thrashing you on every pathetic, flimsy argument you post, they're obviously intelligent. I'm sure they can tell you why they clung to their beliefs better than I - and that it had little or nothing to do with intelligence.

2. Today, most great scientists are atheists. What's your point?

3. Since when does arrogant and rude stop someone from being right?

4. Cognitive dissonance is alive and well. This i do not deny.

5. Religious people have done negative things in the world - including the one your brother-in-faith, Hitler.

6. I'm sorry - you've made how many assumptions about posters here all being atheists? Do you remember what Scott Hatfield said?

7. Atheists may indeed be dogmatic - just not about atheism, since there's no dogma. There's just no god. Or do you tell bald men their non-hair is parted to the left and not the right?

Posted by: Fr. J | July 22, 2008 10:48 PM

Ever hear of Gregor Mendel? Father of genetics. Also Abbot of an Augustinian monastery.

Copernicus was a priest who died in the Church. His book was only placed on the index later and only in the original version. Remember at the time heliocentrism was one theory and not the only one. The Church was concerned when scientists began expounding theology, which was Galileo's problem. Oddly scientists don't like theologians commenting on science, but seem to feel that they have the right to do the opposite. All of that aside, you owe much of modern science to Catholics. You're welcome.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 10:50 PM

Posted by: Fr. J | July 22, 2008 10:48 PM

blah blah blah blah

Posted by: Janine ID | July 22, 2008 10:52 PM

1. Not all religious people are stupid.

Posted by: Fr. J

No shit. But Pasteur's faith in a catholic god is no more proof of the existence of said god than Feynmann lack of faith is a proof of no god.

Posted by: Fr. J | July 22, 2008 10:54 PM

Wow, I see you still don't understand the point of the story. Maybe if I drew you a picture that would help? It might also help if you actually thought about the points I posted before you answered.

As of yet no one seems inclined to even answer my "flimsy arguments." They are to busy insulting me and pretending that makes them clever. As to education, isn't that the point of the Pasteur story? The student thought Pasteur was dumb. He was quite wrong. There are many well-educated and intelligent religious people.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 10:55 PM

he can't even read.

Posted by: Janine ID | July 22, 2008 10:57 PM

All of that aside, you owe much of modern science to Catholics. You're welcome.

Posted by: Fr. J

No, you smug roaring ass. What this means is that scientific principles can can over come emerging from such a piss poor past.

You're welcome.

Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | July 22, 2008 10:59 PM

1. Not all religious people are stupid.

2. Some great scientists are and were religious.

3. The student sounds like many here...arrogant and rude.

4. Science and religion are not necessarily in opposition and you can be a good scientist and believe in God.

5. Religious people have contributed greatly in a positive way to our world.

6. It is best to avoid rash judgments.

7. Atheists can be just as dogmatic as anyone.

So, now, what was all that shit about?

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 11:00 PM

I think someone is working their nightly martyr-hard-on.

Posted by: Jonathan | July 22, 2008 11:04 PM

@521 Err... "The Templeton Prize honors a living person who has made an exceptional contribution to affirming life's spiritual dimension, whether through insight, discovery, or practical works." So, he won a prize given to religious scientists?

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 22, 2008 11:06 PM

Also note how dogmatic atheists are about religious people being stupid.

Just you.

Posted by: Janine ID | July 22, 2008 11:09 PM

7. Then you agree. Also note how dogmatic atheists are about religious people being stupid. That is simply prejudice.

Good night all.

Posted by: Fr. J

You are quite mistaken, my intelligence challenged fiend. We are treating you as if you are stupid. You are making the mistake of thinking you stand in for all religious people.

Now, please no not make a liar of yourself and respond again.

Posted by: Ichthyic | July 22, 2008 11:13 PM

seriously, you're going to cite an organization that all of us know is concerned with trying to find positive results for religious ideology, as somehow indicative that religion is the basis for the best of science?

what a tweaker.

while you're at it, you might want to review the many times that the Templeton Foundation has funded studies that failed to find any effect whatsoever for intercessionary prayer. The last one even found a significant NEGATIVE effect, (if the person who was being prayed for knew they were being prayed for - check the results from 2006). Now, why would the Templeton Foundation be so interested in finding a positive result for intercessionary prayer, I wonder...

I'll give TF one point, at least they didn't lie about the results of the 2.4 million dollar study.

so what could be more "important" than doing science and religion?

how about doing science WITHOUT religion.

Posted by: raven | July 22, 2008 11:20 PM

No one doubts that believers can be and are scientists. Today we have Ken Miller, prominent evolutionary biologist and Francis Collins, the former head of the human genome project. In fact, 40% of biologists describe themselves as religious.

But that is a strawman changing of the subject. The subject is Bill Donohue's fatwa and harrassment of PZ Myers. Plus his mob of psychotically insane followers who have been sending death threats daily. Myers refuses to make the number of death threats public but by my estimate it is around a hundred by now plus/minus twofold.

PZ has cleverly and at some risk to himself demonstrated that catholic terrorists are no different from moslem terrorists.

He has also offered to give the cracker collection to the church if they would disavow Donohue and his spooky zombies. Not stop them since we no longer allow the catholic church to torture, burn, or imprison heretics and irritating morons. Just distance themselves.

The result has been so far a refusal and dead silence. Shows that this is more about an excuse for hatred and threats of violence than anything to do with crackers or religion.

Oh well, after 2,000 years hypocrisy is the norm. About time to desecrate Darwin again. I'm too bored with crackergate, people will just have to scroll up and read my old ones.

Posted by: JoJo | July 22, 2008 11:25 PM

The Church was concerned when scientists began expounding theology, which was Galileo's problem.

Besides patronizing and pompous, you can add ignorant to your resume.

Galileo wasn't put on trial for expounding theology. He did use some theological arguments, primarily Augustine's position on scripture, not to take every passage literally (see De Genesi ad Litteram "The Literal Interpretation of Genesis"). However, considering that Cardinal Bellermine ordered him not to "hold or defend" the idea that the Earth moves and the Sun stands still at the center, the objection was scientific, not theological.

While theological disputation may have been the de jure charge against Galileo, the de facto charge was scientific. There's also the point that Galileo was like you, a patronizing jerk. Pope Urban VIII had been friendly to Galileo, but was understandably annoyed when some of Urban's arguments in favor of geocentrism were mocked by Galileo. Urban could have kept Galileo out of the hands of the Inquisition, but didn't because of the mockery.

Galileo's two prosecutors at his trial were Fr. Orazio Grassi SJ and Fr. Christopher Scheiner SJ. Both Grassi and Scheiner were astronomers. Galileo had gone out of his way to insult both men. He held an erroneous opinion about comets being meteorological phenomena while Grassi said, correctly, that they were astronomical. Galileo quite purposely sneered at Grassi. Galileo claimed, again erroneously, that Scheiner was a plagiarist. Galileo's disputes with Grassi and Scheiner permanently alienated many of the Jesuits who had previously been sympathetic to his ideas.

As part of the trial sentence, Galileo was required to deny the opinion that the Sun lies motionless at the center of the universe, and that the Earth is not at its center and moves; the idea that the Sun is stationary was condemned as "formally heretical." So yes, in a very limited sense Galileo's argument with your church was theological. But in real life it was more political and scientific.

Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | July 22, 2008 11:32 PM

1. There is no such correlation.

2. I don't think anyone has actually taken a count.

3. Just take a look at the language of the atheists here.

4. So you can be religious and a good scientist.

5. I am not a creationist. And scientists have also contributed negatively to our world.

6. Cook and PZ have made rash judgments.

7. Then you agree. Also note how dogmatic atheists are about religious people being stupid. That is simply prejudice.

Most of the religious people who turn up here are, indeed, stupid and ignorant. You do little for your side. Frankly, I know many Catholic priests, most of whom are a great deal more intelligent and educated than you appear to be. The falloff in vocations must be taking its toll indeed.

Posted by: Patricia | July 22, 2008 11:44 PM

Oh right! I trudge off to find some soothing music for PZ and you ILK just keep making great posts.
#512 - MAJeff - That blah, blah, blah is getting to me. It might be love.
#515 - NanuNanu - seriously nice name calling!
#517 - Holbach - another of your classics, of course.
#525 - MAJeff - Thats just plain naughty.
#527 - Emmet, you are close to the kingdom. RUN Emmet, run!

Now to the music, Holbach you might enjoy the first half of the performance. From 2:26 on is especially for PZ, and everyone else stressed out by the cracker:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBVwz3yQeMQ&NR=1
I'm off to enjoy my favorite atheist doctor program, House. So good night sweethearts! :)

Posted by: Patricia | July 22, 2008 11:58 PM

Oh christ on a cracker! I refresh this thread before buzzing off to House land & Dingo Dave turns out to be a goddist?
Damn it! I'll see you in the morning buster.

On the other hand, Bride of Shrek might sashay through and fillet him.
House.
Good night sweethearts!

Posted by: Kseniya | July 23, 2008 12:15 AM

Here is a story you won't hear in PZ's class:

Oh, my. What's next? A Chick tract?

The sad thing here, Friar Jay, is that you seem like a decent fellah with good intentions, but you're way out of your depth here and don't have the sense to realize it.

Posted by: Ichthyic | July 23, 2008 12:32 AM

Today we have Ken Miller, prominent evolutionary biologist and Francis Collins, the former head of the human genome project. In fact, 40% of biologists describe themselves as religious.

I'd like to add that it's also quite possible that they are successful scientists in spite of also being religious.

compartmentalization is a wonderful thing, and when it breaks down, you get things like Collins' "Moral Law" argument.

Posted by: Rick T | July 23, 2008 1:18 AM

Oh christ on a cracker! I refresh this thread before buzzing off to House land & Dingo Dave turns out to be a goddist?

Patricia, I can assure you that DingoDave is not a "goddist". I run into him all the time at Debunking Christianity blog. He's one of the best at skewering.

It must be that you have grog overload and forgot to check for the quotation marks throughout dingo's comment.

Go to sleep now, those chickens wake up awfully early.

Posted by: Wowbagger | July 23, 2008 1:27 AM

I would've said July 23rd, 2008: countless Africans die every day of HIV/AIDS because of the genocidally stupid RCC attitude to condoms.

Don't forget the mothers who die from complications in childbirth - even though the doctor told them they're risking their lives if they have another child - because they were told they can't be 'good catholics' if they stop procreating.

Posted by: Ryan Cunningham | July 23, 2008 1:47 AM

I'm sure annoying the holy shit out of PZ will change his mind. Right? This is a very effective strategy. Everyone knows how persuasive spam can be. These people are so intelligent! How did they come up with such a clever idea? Maybe I've been wrong about their imaginary friend all along. I think I'm finding my way to Jesus at long last!

Oh, wait. There's an e-mail in my inbox from the Microsoft Lottery! I think I'm going to be rich! Maybe I'll donate Bill Gates' money to the Vatican. Then again, this poor guy in Nigera that keeps e-mailing me seems really hard up for cash...

Posted by: DingoDave | July 23, 2008 3:49 AM

Patricia wrote:
"Oh christ on a cracker! I refresh this thread before buzzing off to House land & Dingo Dave turns out to be a goddist?"

??? WTF : O

If I'm a goddist, then Bill Donahue is an atheist! : )

I suspect that I haven't made many friends over on that forum with the comment I posted there. Nothing rude or abusive mind you, but it doesn't take much to set them off.
Now that you mention it, after looking at my last post again, I suppose that putting bullet points in front of their comments would have make it clearer. Good lesson to learn.

Rick T wrote:
"Patricia, I can assure you that DingoDave is not a "goddist". I run into him all the time at Debunking Christianity blog. He's one of the best at skewering."

Thanks for the compliment Rick.
Good to see another 'Debunker' over here at Pharyngula.

Posted by: negentropyeater | July 23, 2008 5:53 AM

Nowadays, the Church doesn't burn people who deny the doctrine of transubstantation at the stake anymore.

No, they don't use the same methods as during the reign of queen Mary of England for instance :

Meet John Rogers. "On January 28 and January 29 1555, he came before the commission appointed by Cardinal Pole, and was sentenced to death by Gardiner for heretically denying the Christian character of the Church of Rome and the real presence in the sacrament. He awaited and met death cheerfully, though he was even denied a meeting with his wife. He was burned at the stake on February 4, 1555 at Smithfield." (source wikipedia)

Meet John Frith. "He was sentenced to death by fire and offered a pardon if he answered positively to two questions: Do you believe in purgatory, and do you believe in transubstantiation? He replied that neither purgatory nor transubstantiation could be proven by Holy Scriptures, and thus was condemned as a heretic and was transferred to the secular arm for his execution on June 23, 1533. He was burned at the stake on July 4, 1533 at Smithfield, London for, he was told, his soul's salvation." (source wikipedia)

No, they don't burn people at the stake, and they don't anathematize them either. They haven't issued yet a press release that says :

Wherefore in the name of God the All-powerful, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, of Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and of all the saints, in virtue of the power which has been given us of binding and loosing in Heaven and on earth, we deprive Paul Zachary Myers, himself and all his accomplices the Pharyngulites and all his abettors of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Our Lord, we separate him from the society of all Christians, we exclude him from the bosom of our Holy Mother the Church in Heaven and on earth, we declare him excommunicated and anathematized and we judge him condemned to eternal fire with Satan and his angels and all the reprobate, so long as he will not burst the fetters of the demon, do penance and satisfy the Church; we deliver him to Satan to mortify his body, that his soul may be saved on the day of judgment.

No, they don't do that anymore, we're in the 21st century, they have adapted to today's laws and technologies. So instead, they have the Catholic League and their press releases, and they wait, comfortably, and cowardly, in complete approbation, until all these Catholic fanatics have sent their anathematizing emails and maybe, maybe, one of them tries to burn PZ at the stake.

Nothing has really changed since the reign of queen Mary of England. The instruments have changed, but the effects are still the same, when they continue to endoctrinate people and make them love worthless symbols more than humans, and they continue to approve and stimulate their most lunatic and fanatical reactions.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 23, 2008 6:37 AM

Here is a story you won't hear in PZ's class:

Well, of course not. It would be bad teaching to introduce such an irrelevant story.

Then again...whoooooooooooooosh.

Posted by: Louis Irving | July 23, 2008 7:10 AM

Fr J. at 494 said

"Here is a story you won't hear in PZ's class:"

Probably because it is unlikely to have any truth to it, as with so many christian stories of this type.

Posted by: JeffreyD | July 23, 2008 7:25 AM

The card read: "Louis Pasteur, Director of the Institute of Scientific Research, Paris."

And hanging from the card, was....a HOOK!!!!!!

Anecdotes are anecdotes, they make us feel warm and fuzzy, but they should not stand in for reason.

Pox on your Nabisco

Posted by: SEF | July 23, 2008 7:34 AM

@ Sastra #432

The problem is not the Catholics. It's what Catholicism -- and religion in general -- does to ordinary people. It does not ennoble.

Posted by: True Bob | July 23, 2008 7:49 AM

Janus @ 463,

So by your logic, the last book of the NT would hold the most wieght, right? That would be Insane Ramblings Of A Madman Revelations, a singular piece of work.

Personally, I assign no value to religions, so IMO cheesesology is no better than mohammedology. They both get twisted to suit the purposes of individuals, which has nothing to do with their relative philosophical merits.

Posted by: SEF | July 23, 2008 8:25 AM

@ #330:

Does anyone have any theories as to why no country/civilization/society in all of history has been areligious?

More recently various nations have been becoming relatively secular. However, the official areligiosity of the state doesn't mean that no theist is allowed to set foot in the country and live, assuming that's going to be your excuse for disqualifying various countries. It's theists who traditionally (or even habitually) kill, torture and imprison atheists (and rival theists!), not the other way round.

Meanwhile, I'd suggest ant (and bee) civilisation / society as a likely candidate for being areligious. They're not big enough (either sense!) to claim whole country though.

@ #485

Because traditionally, the priests would kill you if you were.

Let him have the cracker. It's not wise to upset a theist.
But nobody worries about upsetting an atheist.
That's 'cause an atheist don't pull people's arms out of their sockets when they lose. Theists are known to do that.
I see your point. I suggest a new strategy. Let the theist win.

Posted by: Louis Irving | July 23, 2008 8:53 AM

SEF @ 568,

Nice quote. I wonder how many get it....

Posted by: Christopher Letzelter | July 23, 2008 9:11 AM

btw, I just visited CAIR's website. A search for "Myers" comes up with zero hits. Methinks CAIR just - doesn't - cair about this.
Good work Donowho - may your name be forgotten in history.

Posted by: MartinM | July 23, 2008 10:51 AM

The man's name is DONOHUE not DONAHUE. Do you think he's going to pay attention to a letter from a guy who can't even spell his name correctly?

From Max's only other post on this thread:

The President of the U. of Minnesota, Brinkinks, wrote a letter disassociated the University from PZ's remarks.

That would be Bruininks.

Posted by: Kseniya | July 23, 2008 11:02 AM

Let the wookie win.

Posted by: Bryan | July 23, 2008 11:48 AM

As a quick follow up to the links I posted above, it should be noted that not all of those cases are cases of Christians being persecuted by atheists. Some are, others are Christians being persecuted by non-Christian non-atheists of some sort.

Posted by: Max Verret | July 23, 2008 12:01 PM

Martin @574

You're right, its Bruininks, but you can just call him Paulie (his real name is Paul). Nice old fellow, he'll do the right thing.

Posted by: AgnoAtheist | July 23, 2008 12:32 PM

Bryan (581)

Ok, good. I find tribalist arguements from any side to be weak sauce. In group/out group reasoning can't even begin to address whether wheat paste becomes God.

Posted by: James Stephenson | July 23, 2008 1:22 PM

Here are the facts about Atheists killing Christians from your favorite Vox Day.

Link here:

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2008/07/atheists-in-denial.html

It is a little more up to date that the inquisitions and crusades that you love to rant on about. Now continue with the insults - I won't be back to look at you try and twist the facts. Whenever atheists get power they have propensity to kill their own subjects - full stop.

There are four atheist countries in which atheists are presently jailing, torturing, and murdering Christians. These countries are China, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam. (Cuba was doing the same in the past, but has shown some respect for religious freedom for nearly a decade now.) While American atheists customarily try to fall back on a spurious No True Atheist defense, government documents prove this defense to not only be illogical, but incontrovertibly false. For example, the motivation for China's most recent wave of anti-Christian persecution was laid out in a government document entitled "Notice on Further Strengthening Marxist Atheism Research, Propaganda and Education". This proves that the motivation underlying the persecution is atheism; specifically the Marxist variant which is the heart of a godless worldview that correctly sees Christianity as a serious threat.

A subsequent document laid out the case against the Christian church: "We have dealt with the Falun-gong. We have arrested and put their leaders on the run. Now we must resolutely and strongly deal with the unregistered house churches. They are too numerous -- too many. We must deal with them strongly."

Given that at least 1,600 Falun Gong practitioners have been tortured to death and a number of recent Christian deaths have also been confirmed, such as the beating death of Ms. Jiang Zongxiu in prison on June 18, 2004 and the death of Bishop John Han Dingxian on September 12, 2007, there is absolutely no question that Chinese atheists are murdering Christians today and intend to continue doing so.

The situation is much worse in North Korea. In TIA, I quoted a 2004 article published by The Guardian: "The number of prisoners held in the North Korean gulag is not known: one estimate is 200,000, held in 12 or more centres. Camp 22 is thought to hold 50,000. Most are imprisoned because their relatives are believed to be critical of the regime. Many are Christians, a religion believed by Kim Jong-il to be one of the greatest threats to his power." These North Koreans are not "Kim Jong-ilists"; they are atheists and correctly identify themselves as such. Their atheist self-identification is less dubious than that of the American atheist who makes a fetish of science and/or Darwinism and believes in the ever-ineffable "progress" towards a shiny, secular, material paradise.

In Vietnam, the atheist regime is currently persecuting the Montagnards, a predominantly Christian minority. This is probably done as much for ethnic reasons as anti-religious ones, but the persecution has been purely religious and directed against ethnic Vietnamese Christians in the recent past. Persecution is most intense for the ethnic minorities, especially the Montagnards from the hill country. Many of these people have attempted to flee to neighbouring Cambodia. However, under an agreement with the Vietnamese government, the authorities there have been returning the refugees to Vietnam to collect a bounty. Those who are returned are imprisoned, tortured or killed. Despite the persecution, instead of being destroyed, the church in Vietnam is growing and becoming stronger. Christians now make up almost ten percent of the population.

In Laos, Christians are considered to be enemies of the state and have been viciously persecuted since 1975. Although the persecution has not been as intense in the last three years, it still continues: "At least thirteen Christian villagers who were falsely accused of stirring rebel dissent have been killed by authorities in Laos over the past month, according to an August 7, [2007] report from Compass Direct. The report also states that approximately 200 Christians in the village of Sai Jerern have been arrested and imprisoned."

Atheists have been murdering Christians almost non-stop around the world for the last 91 years and they have done so with predictable regularity in the majority of countries where they have obtained politica