…and this is a 
World Youth Day had some effect
Category: Godlessness
Posted on: July 23, 2008 7:46 AM, by PZ Myers
This is a nicely done essay prompted by the papal poltroonery that has been going on in Sydney recently. Here are a few bits:
I don't give a stuff what people believe in, but it won't stop me poking at it or prodding it. Why should religion be any exemption? Telling me I'm going to hell won't bother me because I have the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Invisible Pink Unicorn and Bertrand Russell's Teapot in my heart. Google them if you are in the market for some red hot enlightenment.
And this is really true — throwing off the foolishness is liberating.
It's been a revelation to me a year since my "epiphany". I feel as if I'm walking through life with the blinkers off. Suddenly all the religious mumbo-jumbo jumps out as so bonkers. Wearing certain things, eating certain things, mumbling certain things at certain times so some imaginary friend will let you into a club in the sky when you die. I want to do my living now, thanks. I'm not afraid of dying. I'm afraid of never having lived.
I don't care what people believe in, but I do care that religion impacts on political discourse, public policy and that it stunts the ability of people to think for themselves and question. And that it kills people and causes suffering. But most of all I care that the invisible electric fences that are wired in the minds of children brainwashed by religion are difficult to remove. And impossible if you don't even know they're there.
Comments
Sydney.
Posted by: Ashley Moore | July 23, 2008 7:50 AM
Just a heads up PZ, but it's spelled "Sydney".
Posted by: Conor Burke | July 23, 2008 7:51 AM
There's a pretty funny parody collage inre pz vs. Catholicism, with a striking likeness of pz, from paximperium at the james randi forum. It's at http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=12976
Posted by: oriole | July 23, 2008 7:54 AM
This is one of the many things we should mention when people claim 'atheism doesn't have any positive values'. Freedom is among the results of atheism, and that is a positive value.
Posted by: llewelly | July 23, 2008 7:56 AM
Freedom is among the results of atheism, and that is a positive value.
But, but, but...I thought freedom was obedience, of women to men, of humans to gods, of laity to priests, of battered spouses to their abusers, and molested children to their rapists.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 23, 2008 8:02 AM
@llewelly
Ah, but you have to remember that for the people running religions, freedom is not a positive value. They look to place restrictions on every aspect of life; liberation doesn't look so good from the perspective of the person passing the collection plate.
Posted by: Ranson | July 23, 2008 8:03 AM
That was the saddest thing for me, seeing the film of the young people enraptured by the man with the hat. I got the feeling that here were kids on the wrong track, and I wondered if they'd snap out of it someday, and I felt like things weren't getting better.
But then I think of myself and my deconversion, and I realise that it is possible. We just need to point out the electric fence.
Posted by: Daniel | July 23, 2008 8:04 AM
Very well put, PZ.
Religious indoctrination should be treated as child abuse.
Posted by: Richard Harris | July 23, 2008 8:08 AM
It has been many years since I purged my brain of all religion and related insanities, and it was amazing that I can still do all those things when I was so afflicted with that cancerous pox. I find it truly amazing and incredible that so many people have still not dropped that insane crap and start living a saner and more fulfilling life. It just has to be a form of mental weakness that compels these people to hold onto something that has proven to be illogical and deleterious to their health and well-being. They can do it, but will not, so how else to diagnose this condition? They are mentally deprived but do not know it.
Posted by: Holbach | July 23, 2008 8:20 AM
But most of all I care that the invisible electric fences that are wired in the minds of children brainwashed by religion are difficult to remove. And impossible if you don't even know they're there.
This is why I think all religious people, no matter how moderate they think they are, deserve nothing but contempt. What could be more disgusting than lying to small gullible children, and ruining their lives, maybe permanently ruining their lives.
There is a school of thought that suggests atheists should not call themselves atheists but just say we apply rational thought to everything and religion is no exception.
As Sam Harris, author of The End Of Faith, puts it, "I think that 'atheist' is a term that we do not need, in the same way that we don't need a word for someone who rejects astrology.
"We simply do not call people 'non-astrologers'. All we need are words like 'reason' and 'evidence' and 'common sense' and 'bullshit' to put astrologers in their place, and so it could be with religion."
I have no problem with calling myself an atheist, but Sam Harris makes a good point. Perhaps it would be more accurate to call atheists "normal people". Instead of saying "I'm an atheist", maybe it's better to say "god is bullshit".
Posted by: BobC | July 23, 2008 8:20 AM
Rat own!
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | July 23, 2008 8:22 AM
Yes, that would be "Real Freedom" of which the religious speak.
Real Freedom = submission to authoritarianism
Real Science = mysticism and the search for supernatural forces hiding behind the "apparent" material world
Real Reason = purely abstract logic beginning from unquestioned premises and proceeding via blind faith
Real Ethics = fear and selfish hope
Real Joy = suffering, denial of physical pleasure
Real Religion = [whatever definition is convenient in context]
Posted by: SC | July 23, 2008 8:27 AM
So glad to see our Ms. Deveny getting some international recognition.
She really is awesome.
Posted by: Matt | July 23, 2008 8:30 AM
Beautiful! That sums it up perfectly. I have also had the feeling of having the 'blinders' removed, and it's a glorious feeling. It's amazing how you feel that your potential in life just skyrockets once you've recovered from indoctrination.
Posted by: LisaJ | July 23, 2008 8:32 AM
Speak it, sister!
Holbach, I'd say it's mostly nurture, not nature. And those who deconvert are somehow picking up enough of the rationalist mindset to see through the bullshit.
Posted by: wazza | July 23, 2008 8:34 AM
My exit from the fantasyland called Mormonism came when I was 14. During one sunday school class, the lay teacher (Mormonism has no professional clergy), by way of affirming the special niche Salt Lake City (aka Zion) occupies in God's mighty plan, revealed that the Jordan River in the Holy Land and the Jordan River that dribbles through the Salt Lake valley are the only two rivers in the world that flow from south to north. I boldly suggested that he consult an atlas and turn to the page dealing with Egypt. He gazed some venom at me and said "No, only the two Jordan Rivers flow south to north. And who are you to question the General Authorities?"
I got up and left. But a dozen other boys stayed to continue having their invisible electric fence installed.
Posted by: writzer | July 23, 2008 8:43 AM
Matt - yes. Catherine is a hoot, but I fear some (most) of the humour would be lost outside of Australia. I mean, who else understands a Chocolate Warnie (Melts in your mouth then sends you eight text messages the next day)?
Posted by: Andrew | July 23, 2008 8:46 AM
Am I the only one who thinks that calling it "World Youth Day" in relation to the Catholic Church is kind of... bad taste? I mean, come on. A bunch of old guys in funny dresses partying with a LOT of teenagers? *cough*
I suggest, next time they call it "World Cracker Day" ... just in case.
Posted by: Chris | July 23, 2008 8:47 AM
Still puzzled with this double repetition :
I don't get it, probably caus I'm a frog, can someone enlighten me ?
Posted by: negentropyeater | July 23, 2008 8:48 AM
Thanks for sharing that Paul. It always does my heart good to see another young mind raise it's head out of the warm comfy rabit fur and see the real world.
Those types of stories should be a mainstay in our blogs, inspiration isnt just for religious folk, let's show them how it's done atheist style.
Posted by: RarusVir | July 23, 2008 8:49 AM
Holbach #9,
It is truly rare to encounter this kind novel insight! To find the root cause of religion all figgered out and explained in a blog comment! Why don't you publish, Holbach?
Ms. Deveny, it seems to me, groups Russell's Teapot with naive arguments against or mockeries of theism. It is not an argument for atheism or against theism, and wasn't intended to be. This is a disservice to Russell who was a intellectual giant, compared to whom today's high profile atheists are unworthy.
Posted by: heddle | July 23, 2008 8:52 AM
"I am not afraid of dying. I am afraid of never having lived."
That's the whole thing right there.
JC
Posted by: JackC | July 23, 2008 8:52 AM
negentropyeater: There was a huge gap in content between the first and last occurrence of that sentiment (in your quote)
To sum it up: First time she says she is blase about what people believe in and is going to make fun of it ("Why should religion be any exemption?"). Second time (many paragraphs later) she is reaffirming that people can believe whatever they want but "but I do care that religion impacts on political discourse, public policy and that it stunts the ability of people to think for themselves and question."
Posted by: Andrew | July 23, 2008 8:55 AM
P.Z., If secularism has made you such a liberated and happy person, why are you always looking for somebody to attack?
Posted by: Julie | July 23, 2008 8:57 AM
I had to suffer the visit of Ratzinger to Valencia a couple of years ago and it was a total flop. Millions of euros were spent by the city council to welcome the 1,200,000 pilgrims that were expected at that time. The police turned the city upside down for 5 days and after the visit non-official numbers mention less than 200,000 people attending the ceremonies.
Now in Australia he announces ANOTHER visit to Spain. Why doesn't he go somewhere else? Or stay at home, for all I care?
I guess he hasn't quite got it that the Spanish prime minister isn't very fond of him...
Posted by: João | July 23, 2008 8:58 AM
P.Z., If secularism has made you such a liberated and happy person, why are you always looking for somebody to attack?
blah blah blah blah blah
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 23, 2008 8:59 AM
"...GOD ROCKS! graffiti I saw on an old stone church yesterday."
So, those aren't just any old rocks, eh?
Posted by: SteveC | July 23, 2008 9:02 AM
Writzer @16, thanks for that story. Simple as it may seem, it sort of sums up beautifully what religion is about. I suppose many of us have a similar tale of liberation.
Posted by: amph | July 23, 2008 9:02 AM
nice essay.
on the "we don't need a word" issue, i agree that we SHOULDN'T need a special word for reasonable (at least w/ respect to religion) people but PZ has made valid points about it being necessary given the current context. so, i'm kind of torn on this one.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/10/letter_to_a_nonatheist_new_ath.php
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/10/sam_harris_seems_like_a_nice_f.php
Posted by: sdg | July 23, 2008 9:07 AM
For you Squiddy Pharyngulites here is a hug for you.
http://www.snorgtees.com/freehugs-p-458.html
Posted by: Barklikeadog | July 23, 2008 9:10 AM
This part was really funny.
> I can't help wondering how the teenage pilgrims coped with their
> hormones and no condoms and what the consequences will be in a few
> weeks' time.
Well, there *is* a solution: they all went gay for a few days... ;-)
Posted by: Jérôme ^ | July 23, 2008 9:14 AM
That was a lovely essay. I like the description of religion as putting up "invisible electric fences" in peoples' minds. I too have pressed self-described Catholics on virgin birth, resurrection, transubstantiation etc. and find they either dance away from the questions or admit they don't believe in that stuff literally.
I think many people are still religious because they just haven't thought about it all that much.
Posted by: Lana | July 23, 2008 9:15 AM
"We are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
Ooh, that's nice.
Posted by: MrSquid | July 23, 2008 9:18 AM
P.Z well said, hail to all Cephlepods, I have been free for the last 40 years. Being free from religion means your mind is yours and not being manipulated by some one else, who wants you to do what they think you should
Posted by: Ex Partiot | July 23, 2008 9:18 AM
Wazza @ 15 Yes, the old nature versus nature debate which I have never subscribed to in various applications. It is nature that compels us to respond to those natural stimulations such as pain, the sexual urge, food and the whole panoply of inborn evolution. But it is nurture that we are exposed to by other humans, circumstances, and all manner of ideaologies throughout our lives and which we can direct as is our wont with nature playing no part unless we are physically or mentally handicapped. It is nurture that humans are indoctrinated into religious insensibilities either when young and immature, or as adults influenced by all manner of nonsense which can be either accepted or dejected depending upon how they choose to rationalize those needless mindsets. It was nurture and not nature that seized the human mind into a religious bent. There was no idea of religions or gods when our brains formed through the evolutionary process which is nature. True, early humans thought about where it all came from, as is a natural thing to do, but the idea of a god is the product of nurture influence, not the need as is food which is definitely most natural. We can live without religion but not without food; nature triumphs here as it has since we appeared on earth. We were born with brains that think and reason, that is nature. We gave birth to religion, and that is nurture, and whether we embrace religion or reject it, it is nurture at it's best and is most demonstrated as when we slough it off as irrational, but others continue to be enslaved by it through their own choice. We have proved that nurture is malleable and are the better for it. And nurture has proved that others are ossified by this nonsense and are the worst for it and are to be regarded with contempt. In this example nurture is the best decider and should be logically adhered to.
Posted by: Holbach | July 23, 2008 9:18 AM
Re: #16
OT but I was taught that the Red River (which flows up through Manitoba from the Dakotas) was one of only 2 rivers in the world that flowed south-north. The other is the Rhine River in Germany. Later the same year we studied the Nile in geography class and somebody reminded the teacher what he had told us about the Red and Rhine rivers (I think it was grade 5 or 6). "Oh yeah, I guess you're right" was the teacher's response. Several of us started looking through our atlases to see how many south-north flowing rivers we could find. That was the first time I remember being aware of a "true fact" from an authority figure that turned out to be bullshit.
Posted by: Blondin | July 23, 2008 9:24 AM
Heddle,
Since I know this will be lost on you I shouldn't bother, but have you actually read Russell? Try it. Don't just mouth the words as they pass by your eyes, let them reach your brain and swish them around a bit. Russell's teapot IS an argument against theism. If you can see how silly the orbiting teapot is, you can see how silly gods are.
Reading comprehension: you're doing it wrong.
Posted by: Schmeer | July 23, 2008 9:25 AM
RAmen!
Posted by: pikaomega | July 23, 2008 9:25 AM
>P.Z., If secularism has made you such a liberated and
>happy person, why are you always looking for somebody to
>attack?
Let's see, would that be a "false dicotomy" fallacy, or a "straw man" falacy? Or is it a bit of both?
Posted by: GregB | July 23, 2008 9:29 AM
Off-topic
Whose Minnesota plates are these?
http://www.wherearethedogshumping.com/atheist-license-plate.jpg
Posted by: Chief | July 23, 2008 9:32 AM
Wasn't today supposed to be "D-Day" for the cracker? Or did the schedule change?
Posted by: Clay | July 23, 2008 9:34 AM
Posted by: freelunch | July 23, 2008 9:38 AM
GregB at #39: I vote for both.
Butbutbutbutbut you're going to DIE! DIE!!! DIE!!!!! Rot in the ground or suffocate in a coffin and never ever ever live or kiss or think again! DIE!!!!!
(Ahem. Sorry, my Inner Fearmonger slipped off its leash there for a sec.)
Posted by: Phoenix Woman | July 23, 2008 9:40 AM
Andrew,
I don't know, it seems to me that she does care a lot about the fact that these people still believe in all these ridiculous things, that she won't stop poking and prodding at it, that these ridiculous beliefs cause people to do violence, and suffering, and to endoctrinate and brainwash their own children with those same beliefs, that cause permanent mental handicap.
So, why does she say twice that she doesn't care about what people believe in ?
Still don't get it.
I do care a lot about what people believe in, when it is so evidently ridiculous and hurtful. As a homosexual, I care a lot about the fact that so many people believe all these ridiculous things about us. As a non religious man, I care a lot about the fact that so many people believe all these ridiculous things about us.
So, I would never be able to write an essay like this and be honest with myself and say "I don't care what people believe in, but...".
So, does she care or doesn't she ?
Posted by: negentropyeater | July 23, 2008 9:40 AM
It could be that she doesn't care what they believe but does care what actions they take based on those beliefs.
Posted by: freelunch | July 23, 2008 9:43 AM
Heckle,er, heddle @ 21 Your undiluted sarcasm is certainly not lost to interpretation as it is on many previous blogs on this site. I still have yet to brand you as a raving religionist or just genetically warped. Are you the product of nature or nurture? Inquiring minds are so fascinated to know. Not really.
Posted by: Holbach | July 23, 2008 9:46 AM
Wasn't today supposed to be "D-Day" for the cracker? Or did the schedule change?
Well, if garbage pick-up is tomorrow morning, why would you expect anything until this evening, when the trash is more likely to be taken outside?
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 23, 2008 9:50 AM
"It could be that she doesn't care what they believe but does care what actions they take based on those beliefs."
That was my reading of it as well. If religious people did all just want to be left to believe what they want there would not be a problem. However too many also think they can tell the rest of us how to live based on their religiously based morality.
Posted by: Matt Penfold | July 23, 2008 9:54 AM
Posted by: negentropyeater | July 23, 2008 10:00 AM
I know that license plate! That belongs to August Berkshire, of Minnesota Atheists.
Posted by: PZ Myers | July 23, 2008 10:03 AM
Well, if garbage pick-up is tomorrow morning, why would you expect anything until this evening, when the trash is more likely to be taken outside?
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 23, 2008 9:50 AM
Thanks, MAJeff. Just wanted to be sure I had my dates straight.
Posted by: Clay | July 23, 2008 10:04 AM
Most religious zealots, no matter how misguided, don't actually attack their family for not meeting their standard. The foolishness of their belief is not what we test. The behavior that arises from it is what matters.
Posted by: freelunch | July 23, 2008 10:06 AM
Apparently the fundies are up in arms again about PBS telling the world they believe in fairy tales. From the American "Family" Association:
The Public Broadcasting System (PBS), probably the most liberal network in America, will present a program this fall that says the Old Testament is a bunch of made-up stories that never happened. "The Bible's Buried Secrets" says the Bible is not true. It is scheduled to air on November 18.
Producer Paula Apsell said: "...It's (The Bible's Buried Secrets) designed for intelligent people who are willing to change their mind. ...it will give intelligent people who want to read the Bible in a modern way a chance. If we insist on reading the Bible literally, in 25 years, nobody will read it any longer."
Among highlights of "The Bible's Buried Secrets":
• The Old Testament was written in the sixth century BC and hundreds of authors contributed.
• Abraham, Sarah and their offspring didn't exist.
• There is no archaeological evidence of the Exodus.
• Monotheism was a process that took hundreds of years.
• The Israelites were actually Canaanites.
• The Israelites believed that God had a wife.
I have often said that PBS should not receive tax dollars. "The Bible's Buried Secrets" is simply one more reason Congress should stop supporting PBS with our tax dollars. Congress gives PBS hundreds of millions of tax dollars to help support the network.
Posted by: Randomfactor | July 23, 2008 10:06 AM
Greg B, #39 - I think it has a little Ad Hominem stuck to its chin.
Posted by: Michael Barrett | July 23, 2008 10:07 AM
On the off-topic matter of rivers that flow northward, I've heard that most of the world's large peninsulas dangle southward. But there are exceptions, and I suppose we'll have to ignore antarctic peninsulas.
Posted by: PatrickHenry | July 23, 2008 10:08 AM
>But most of all I care that the invisible electric fences that are wired in the minds of children brainwashed by religion are difficult to remove. And impossible if you don't even know they're there.
I love this quote. It sums up the main problem to a tee. I've been writing/thinking a lot lately about how whehter or not there can be a difference between having no choice and having no information with which to make a choice. If I don't know I have options, then I can't say I have any real choice. When children are indoctrinated, they are taught two things that affect this:
1. Have faith even if something fails to make sense. You probably are just lack the capacity to understand it (god). This is a convoluted way to say, "don't question, just believe."
2. There really is nothing to question. Anything we really NEED to understand about scripture has been fully addressed. If something doesn't make sense, and you really want to know, then we've got a tap-dancing, hoop-jumping apologetic that will pacify you. If it fails to, though, you can always fall back on #1.
If someone offers you an explanation, from the time you're three, for how X and Y don't really contradict, it doesn't even have to be a good explanation. Children believe just about anything a parent tells them. As they mature, and are insulated by the greater religious structure--when exactly are they supposed to know there (1) is anything to even question, and (2) that answers to questions should be provided (it's not just that you can't understand god--it's that it isn't making sense).
Getting people to ignore the red lights by building mental electric fences (I love that analogy--can I say that again?), is what keeps it all going. As long as religious indoctrination is employed on helpless children, getting many people to examine what they believe, critically, is giong to be a uphill battle.
Posted by: tracieh | July 23, 2008 10:11 AM
That would mean for instance, that when a father believes that his son is a demon for being a homosexual, one should wait until he hits his son with a baseball bat before we cared about his belief.
C'mon. Haven't you learned by now? faggots don't count.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | July 23, 2008 10:12 AM
Re: #55
Yep, it's a phenomenon called "continental drip."
Posted by: CortxVortx | July 23, 2008 10:14 AM
I don't really like the term "deconvert."
Seems too religious still. Like you converted from one religion to another, and then deconverted. Convert is in there and it's just too religiony.
I prefer "decontaminated."
Posted by: craig | July 23, 2008 10:16 AM
I heard about the chief author's threats to desecrate the Eucharist. These insults against the pilgrims of World Youth Day confirm people's suspicions about this site. I can never support this site.
Posted by: Brian | July 23, 2008 10:19 AM
"the only two rivers in the world that flow from south to north. "
Jesus. NIAGARA fucking FALLS anyone?
Posted by: craig | July 23, 2008 10:19 AM
Wow, that The Bible's Buried Secrets programme sounds awesome. Thank you, American Patriarchy Association!
A dab of Googling turned up this LA Times blag entry, which quotes William G. Dever, archaeologist.
Yowsa.
Incidentally, Dever is part of the "quasi-minimalist" school; he believes that everything up until the David and Solomon business is bunk. Other scholars, such as Hector Avalos, go a bit further, but in Alabama they'd all be up against the same wall.
(I grew up in Alabama. I get to make those jokes.)
Posted by: Blake Stacey | July 23, 2008 10:20 AM
Meh, it was alright, I suppose. The most important thing is that these kind of articles are appearing in a number of countries, and for the unthinking theist [which is the overwhelming majority, despite what some people say], it may be all that is needed to convince them that, yes, what they believe is largely very silly. At the very least it will normalize non-belief, and there is a lot to be said for achieving that alone.
It would be nice to see something about this subject that is a little more scholarly from time to time, but anything at all is certainly welcome.
Posted by: Damian | July 23, 2008 10:21 AM
Schmeer #37,
Yes I have read Russell. His teapot argument is not against theism, but against the absurd demands from theists, such as the demand that atheists prove God does not exist. I trust the distinction will not be lost on you.
He has arguments against theism, but the teapot is not one of them.
Posted by: heddle | July 23, 2008 10:21 AM
"I heard about the chief author's threats to desecrate the Eucharist. These insults against the pilgrims of World Youth Day confirm people's suspicions about this site. I can never support this site."
Aw shit - what are we gonna do now?!?!
Posted by: craig | July 23, 2008 10:23 AM
I met my fiancee at World Youth Day in Paris(1998). We both decided to forgo the Pope's Mass under the eifel tower to get drunk at the bars and make out in the streets, that was ten years ago--we are now both happy atheists!
Posted by: Mike D. | July 23, 2008 10:24 AM
Nice essay I could look at my own life history and see many parallels. Until I found this blog and read statements from "an atheist point of view" I never thought of of the word or concept of atheism much. My own contacts with "professed atheists" were with people who were focused on the unbelief in a "divine being" of some sort.
My own path I have taken to where I am today had two sides.
One was through logic and science which I learned the basics believe it or not in the Catholic High school I had to go to I am very grateful for that experience of biology class and the emphasis on the "scientific method" they stressed.
the other side of my path influenced by the reason and scientific approach was through eastern thought and philosophy which seemed to de-emphasize belief and stress experience of perception of living more. In my own limited experience of eastern religion I have not come across any parallel to the religious belief systems that came out of the middle east. At the root they describe symbols understood as symbols. One of the "funniest" answer I have heard was an answer to a question about the possibility that people would get confused between the "Idols" (symbols) and the meaning behind them seeing as they were described as pointing to the meaning and not the meaning it self, "God is not in a hurry"
I have not found any "gods" in the East that I would say sounded like the one I have the impression here would fit "the atheist unbelief" the words I know are just not enough for me to explain how I understand things in terms of "religion".
I had not thought in these kinds of categories in a long until I started reading this blog it just was not a priority.
I have the same reaction and suspicion of all the fundamentalist as a lot of the other people I read here.
I the problem I have is with the term Atheist which may have to do with my early indoctrination and my own feeling of distaste of the idea of being defined as being against. I am not an "anti-creationist" why should I accept a label foisted on me by anyone let alone anyone who does not agree with me or understand what I am trying to say or what I understand. It is just not a question I take very seriously.
Posted by: uncle frogy | July 23, 2008 10:25 AM
Good man, August Berkshire, running around with that rational license plate! I wonder how much verbal abuse he has endured, let alone small acts of violence! Message left on windshield: "Hey atheist, prove that my imaginary god does not exist." There you go; answered his own nonsense question. Moron.
Posted by: Holbach | July 23, 2008 10:27 AM
Brian said:
Brian,
Top marks for not tryin',
So kind of you to bless us with your effortlessness,
We're grateful and so strangely comforted,
And I wonder are you puttin' us under,
Cause we can't take our eyes off the t-shirt and ties combination,
Well see you later, innovator.
Posted by: Damian | July 23, 2008 10:27 AM
negentropyeater #44 wrote:
I suspect her use of the phrase "I don't care what people believe" is an unconscious nod to the privileged position cultures give to religious beliefs: respecting someone's right or freedom to "believe whatever they want about God" tends to deliberately confuse rational criticism with forceful suppression. Therefore, when you say someone's religion is wrong, you have to go out of your way to make it clear that this doesn't mean you want to put believers in jail or torture them in order to make them renounce God.
It's stupid. Imagine if every time you criticized American policy, or Democrat or Republican platforms, you had to go through a stylized ritual of expressing your appreciation for peace and democracy, so that people don't assume you're advocating a totalitarian military takeover.
Chief #40 wrote:
That particular "ATHEIST" plate probably belongs to August Berkshire, president of Minnesota Atheists. PZ occasionally links to some of his radio interviews.
Posted by: Sastra | July 23, 2008 10:28 AM
I caught a bus into the heart of the Nation's capital tonight. And there were two coaches sitting on the entrance ramp, one broken down. I thought it was so silly to have coaches parked there in peak hour traffic given that it was blocking the flow of traffic. Turns out the bus was full of WYD pilgrims. Seemed appropriate that after all the disruption they caused Sydney that they'd spread the love to other cities.
Anyway, that's my WYD story. Not a very good one, but still. Bastards!
Posted by: Kel | July 23, 2008 10:30 AM
writzer @ # 16: A double-fail on your former teacher: the Jordan River flows southwards from the Anti-Lebanon Mountains (on the Syria-Lebanon border) through the Sea of Galilee into the Dead Sea (on the de facto Israel-Jordan border).
Allow him one point for getting the direction correctly on Utah's Jordan River.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | July 23, 2008 10:33 AM
Heck, they don't always hit their son with a baseball bat ?
You tell me how to take care of that behaviour, meanwhile, I'll continue to care about the foolishness of these beliefs.
Posted by: negentropyeater | July 23, 2008 10:35 AM
Thank him for leaving.
Posted by: freelunch | July 23, 2008 10:37 AM
>>I boldly suggested that he consult an atlas and turn to the
>>page dealing with Egypt
He need only look as far as a map of North Dakota. The Red River flows north into Lake Winnipeg - a source of considerable grief for people who live along it since the melt water in the spring flows north to the frozen bits of the river in Manitoba causing flooding essentially every year.
Posted by: Evolving Squid | July 23, 2008 10:40 AM
I hate all this hooplah over the Pope. He's an old, intolerant peddler of superstition, not a rock star.
Nothing would please me more than for him to go somewhere and get totally ignored.
Posted by: The Adamant Atheist | July 23, 2008 10:41 AM
Can anyone provide pointers to reports on counter-WYD activities?
Beforehand, we heard talk of protests in defiance of the ad-hoc muzzle laws, proposals for witty t-shirt designs, speculation on the stunts to be carried out by daring TV clowns, and more.
Was all that just beer-boosted bravado and bluster?
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | July 23, 2008 10:48 AM
>>P.Z., If secularism has made you such a liberated and happy
>>person, why are you always looking for somebody to attack?
Julie, why is it that when someone gets on Christianity (or Islam, or Judaism), it's an "attack"... but when Christians (or Muslims, or Jews) get on about whatever pisses them off, it's "witnessing", "spreading the Good News", "saving the infidel", "God's work", etc. ? I've always wondered why followers of the Desert Trio have such a one-sided view of what constitutes an attack?
Don't think of what PZ does as an attack. Think of it as "spreading the Good News of Reason", "witnessing the truth" and "saving your soul from brainwashing and a lifetime of guilt".
You don't have to agree with him... It's not like he's a guy wearing a white robe and pointy hat, sitting on a magic chair that makes everything he says absolutely true.
Posted by: Evolving Squid | July 23, 2008 10:49 AM
tracieh (#56) wrote:
Parents and preachers start destroying the minds of children before they learn to walk. They are taught people were magically created before they learn to read. It seems like a hopeless problem. A possible solution would be if public schools taught evolution starting in the First Grade. Young children have the right to know how their species developed. They should know as soon as possible that they share an ancestor with chimpanzees. Perhaps Sesame Street could teach this fact to 4 year olds.
Posted by: BobC | July 23, 2008 10:51 AM
>>How can we separate religious beliefs, especially those
>>most ridiculous and potentially hurtful ones, from the
>>actions people take based on those beliefs ?
You can see people's actions. Until you can read their minds, actions are the only window into a person's beliefs.
Posted by: Evolving Squid | July 23, 2008 10:52 AM
While I whole-heartedly share the author's joy at giving up religion the problem with putting too much value on this emotion is that such feelings of 'it all makes sense now' are common to conversion experiences in general. The difference is probably that with a naturalist outlook, the harder you scratch at the surface of the beliefs the more sense they make. That would be called 'science'.
Posted by: Konrad Talmont-Kaminski | July 23, 2008 10:52 AM
@ #10: "This is why I think all religious people, no matter how moderate they think they are, deserve nothing but contempt."
Not quite. Suppose you'd compare religious people with nonbelievers by measuring just about any attribute that's not directly associated with their belief systems. I bet you'll find almost perfectly overlapping distributions with large variances.
The commonalities between believers and non-believers are huge, but they end when you encounter that impermeable membrane that enables the religious to simultaneously hold mutually exclusive beliefs(*). Then, it's like talking to a schizophrenic person with whom you can carry on a mundane conversation until, without missing a beat, his ideations go bizarre. Similar with ideations about prayer, god in wheat wafers, ensoulment, etc. Except that in most believers the insanity is optional.
So, it's not the religious people that deserve contempt, but their overt religious ideas and associated actions, especially when they make claims to being exempt from scrutiny and ridicule.
(*) (Where can we get these 'electric monks'? And where are you, Douglas Adams, when we need you ...)
Posted by: dubiquiabs | July 23, 2008 10:54 AM
I'm with negentropyeater. We should care about what others believe as well as how they act. Working to change the beliefs of fundies is difficult, but deconversion can permanently and globally improve a person's relationship to society. Merely trying to prevent them from acting on their various toxic beliefs is worthwhile too, but it's an losing battle. We need evangelical atheists and humanists.
Posted by: charley | July 23, 2008 10:54 AM
Sastra,
thx, that's also how I interpreted it, the usual cop out to that illusion that is the freedom to believe what you want.
I can see what that illusion of freedom has given us up till now. A society that is by and large caught in the chains of the religionists and the mass media manufacturers of consent.
Freedom ? What freedom ?
Posted by: negentropyeater | July 23, 2008 10:57 AM
Anyone who hangs out here and who hasn't read Jeff Sharlet's The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power should really do so. The religious right may be somewhat down, but it's definitely not out.
http://tinyurl.com/55x7af