Pharyngula

Posted by: Krystalline Apostate | May 24, 2009 5:39 PM

Now my husband refuses to let her in the house and is threatening to turn her in to the FBI.

Posted by: Penguin_Factory | May 24, 2009 5:41 PM

Turn her in to the FBI? WTF?

Are you sure this isn't a poe?

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | May 24, 2009 5:43 PM

She's in deep shit if her parents are *that* stupid.

Posted by: Matt | May 24, 2009 5:43 PM

How could the father justify turning her into the FBI for being a...*gasp...* freethinking atheist! He would be the one receiving a condemnation for abusing the system. These parents sound like utter fanatics, but they strike me as the fundamentalists that oppose any and all conflicting viewpoints. If someone questions them, the inquiry must be Satanic in nature. What a load of rubbish.

Posted by: Glen Davidson | May 24, 2009 5:45 PM

How can we control her with religion when she's learned that religion is a sham?

That's why we need ID, of course, because control is no problem if people are taught not to think for themselves (well, it is, but less so).

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/6mb592

Posted by: BigCity | May 24, 2009 5:45 PM

Dear Margo,
My daughter keeps saying "facepalm" and "fail" every time I bring up the Lord. What should I do?

Posted by: Matt | May 24, 2009 5:47 PM

How could the father justify turning her into the FBI for being a...*gasp...* freethinking atheist! He would be the one receiving a condemnation for abusing the system. These parents sound like utter fanatics, but they strike me as the fundamentalists that oppose any and all conflicting viewpoints. If someone questions them, the inquiry must be Satanic in nature. What a load of rubbish.

Posted by: bastion of sass | May 24, 2009 5:52 PM

PZ wrote:

We really ought to send little information packets to the parents of our students, carefully explaining that there will be little shocks like this, because their kids will come back as smart, independent human beings.

The problem I see with this idea is that parents like the mom who wrote the letter would end up sending their kids to bible colleges that do nothing but confirm their beliefs and biases. So, maybe it's best not to give them advance warning.

Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble | May 24, 2009 5:54 PM

Dear God-fearing,

I write to you as a concerned brother in Christ, praying earnestly for your daughter, that she will turn from her godless ways and return to the Lord. I too was a victim of a Godless academic system, for I did attend an agricultural college in Noo Zillund where I was inveigled into all the foulness of academic farming practices, and in particular dids't discover the evil enticements of the ovine sisterhood. I confess that I sank so low in iniquity that I betrayed my flock by authoring: "The Joy of Sheep, The Insider’s Guide to Seductive Shearing and Gently Erotic Farming Practices" (which to my shame is still available on Amazon.com, for $9.95, or $10.95 for a signed author copy).

But praise God He redeemed me and brought me back into His (ahem) fold. Now I want to witness for Jesus, and save others from a like-fate. Tell your sulphur-spewing husband not to waste time with the FIBBIES (did they really find out who killed Laura Palmer?) I, Smoggy Batzrubble, am a specialist in rescuing godly Christian children from the cult of atheism. I can guarantee to unbrainwash your daughter for $257.75 per day (plus expenses), and can begin the deconversion the moment I am granted day release.

Yours in the war against Satan and Atheotards,

S. Batzrubble.

Posted by: Mike | May 24, 2009 5:57 PM

Arr all of you highly educated people too gullible to see that the "letter" is a joke? (Not even a hoax, I think: that would attempt some level of plausibility.) If "turn her into the FBI" doesn't clue you in, I'm not sure what would.

Anyway, even if not intended as a hoax, it's become one, by finding an audience that assumes that anyone religious is ipso facto batsh*t insane.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | May 24, 2009 5:59 PM

Leander, chill out. We are just having some fun. Try it. You might lose that stick up your butt.

Posted by: Marc Abian | May 24, 2009 6:03 PM

Dear Leander,

Poe's law gets us off the hook every time. Also, have you ever stopped on by at www.fstdt.com?

Posted by: Terry Small | May 24, 2009 6:08 PM

This is off topic, PZ, but I've been watching old Original Series Star Trek episodes for the last three weeks, and now I'm reading your posts in William Shatner's voice.

It's very surreal.

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 24, 2009 6:09 PM

I don;t agree that it's an obvious spoof. It's not funny, for one thing.
Poe's Law in action.

Posted by: amphiox | May 24, 2009 6:11 PM

Leander, have you ever considered that playing along with a joke and imagining that it is real and serious is part of the fun of the joke? Lighten up.

And the fact is, there are enough documented, absolutely true cases that are almost identical to this one in pretty much all facets of tone and detail that one can't ever be sure that it is or is not a joke. Religious parents have murdered their children for less than this. Such cases are documented.

Posted by: Liveliest Crib | May 24, 2009 6:16 PM

FBI: Federal Bureau of Investigation, how may I help you.

God Fearing: Hi. I'd like to report a crime.

FBI: A federal crime?

GF: What?

FBI: We only have jurisdictions over federal crimes. You might have to call your local police.

GF: Huh?

FBI: Never mind. What's the crime?

GF: My daughter became an atheist.

FBI: Hold on.

A few minutes later . . .

FBI: Hello, sir?

GF: Yes?

FBI: Yeah, I'm sorry, but now that President Bush is out of office, I'm told that we're not arresting people for that anymore.

GF: WHAT?!

FBI: Yes, it appears that the new guy wants us to abide by the First Amendment.

GF: Well, if you're abiding by it, you should arrest her!

FBI: I'm not sure I follow you, sir.

GF: The First Amendment. You know, "I am the lord. Ain't no gods but me."

FBI: That's the First Commandment, sir.

GF: Oh. What's the First Amendment?

FBI: No laws against the free exercise of religion.

GF: Oh. Well, she's not freely exercising religion at all.

FBI: Hold on.

A few minutes later . . .

FBI: Yeah, I'm sorry, sir, apparently choosing not to exercise religion is protected by the First Amendment too.

GF: You've got to be kidding me! What am I supposed to do, torture my daughter myself?

FBI: Well, you could try. We don't arrest people for torture anymore either.

Posted by: Mark | May 24, 2009 6:17 PM

I say let the dad report her to the FBI. I'd love to read the news article about the moronic man who called them and was turned away.

After all, it's not against the law to think for one's self. There are no US Codes that prevent college students from turning away from their parents' religion. And there are no camps (not yet, anyway) for atheists to be shipped off to.

Posted by: Marc Abian | May 24, 2009 6:22 PM

Don't give you Poe's law? Are you aware how laws work here on the internet?

It's like saying don't give me rule 34. No exceptions buddy.

-----------------------------------
Also, nice work Liveliest Crib.

Posted by: Chris Davis | May 24, 2009 6:24 PM

The trouble with Poes is that there's not a satirical derangement under the sun that some christbot hasn't committed for real.

Posted by: natural cynic | May 24, 2009 6:28 PM

Hey, this can happen even at the best Christian Universities. A friend that went to Wake Forest Law School in the '70's told me about numerous cases of bright Baptist kids going to Wake, taking religion classes and rejecting Baptist beliefs and dogma. Lotsa parents complained to the university to little avail.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | May 24, 2009 6:32 PM

Leander, all godbots have a stick up their butts. It's called believing in imaginary deities. It takes away from their sense of humor and intelligence. I thought you knew that. Sorry, you are afflicted, so you wouldn't.

Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip | May 24, 2009 6:38 PM

an audience that assumes that anyone religious is ipso facto batsh*t insane.

Just keep bashing that strawman, Mike. I bet it makes you feel big and strong.

Posted by: Mark A. Siefert | May 24, 2009 6:40 PM

Re: FBI

Personally, I'm not surprised. Last summer, I came out atheist to my fundy relatives. Along with the usual demands that I move to China of Cuba and that I have drunk the "Devil's Kool-Aid" (sic) one of my cousins wrote to me saying that the "authorities" should be notified of my "activities."

I guess there is a meme in the hard-core Christian community that atheism is somehow illegal. I wonder where the hell they got that from?

Posted by: Victor | May 24, 2009 6:43 PM

My inability to detect if anything is poe is scaring me.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM | May 24, 2009 6:45 PM

Sven DiMilo #35

*shrug* If it's a spoof, then I got Poed. I still don't think it's an obvious spoof, though. Which is 2 ways to say the same thing.

Considering some of the crap I've come across from goddists, this was mild. If I've been spoofed, oh well. I can deal with the shame.

<Hey dear, have you seen the ammunition for my pistol?>

Posted by: Robert | May 24, 2009 6:50 PM

Don't get too excited, AssProf PZ. I went to a university that's considerably better than the one you teach at (not saying much, but still), and I can assure you that there are many idiots even in top-tier universities. That this woman's daughter has learned to regurgitate the ideas of other students and professors is no more impressive or meaningful than when a dog learns to do tricks.

Clearly, the girl had over-protective parents who made sure she went to church and was a good girl. When freed from this supervision in college, she rebelled against everything she was raised to accept. It's a familiar trajectory: the freshman 15, slutty behavior, and ignoring familiy/religion/all other frameworks that stabilize individuals and promote morality. The bounce-back is equally familiar. The girl will graduate, get married, recognize the error of her ways, and start taking her little one to church. Thank God.

As for your statement that college students are some of your favorite people, I'm guessing it's because you have a lot in common: you're bratty, think you know everything, and love it when other people tell you you're smart. *rolls eyes*

Posted by: Newfie | May 24, 2009 6:52 PM

This is off topic, PZ, but I've been watching old Original Series Star Trek episodes for the last three weeks, and now I'm reading your posts in William Shatner's voice.

Wrong series.. and species.

Posted by: Zeno | May 24, 2009 6:57 PM

The brilliant (in his own mind) Leander says it's obvious that the letter is a hoax. It's possible, but not at all obvious to me, and I am astonishingly brilliant myself (as I have reason to know). The bit about the FBI is a dead giveaway? Hardly. Wacky Daddy's chain of "reasoning" is not that hard to reconstruct: (1) This is a Christian nation (or Judeo-Christian, if you push me up against the wall). (2) My daughter is rejecting Christianity (or at least that mainstream Judeo-Christian stuff). (3) She is now opposed to our nation. (4) Next she could become a terrorist! (5) Call the FBI.

If anyone thinks this is unduly far-fetched, they just haven't been paying attention to the entirely sincere loons out there. My dear old Dad is one of their fellow travelers, so I know!

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 24, 2009 7:03 PM

Is this Robert guy ("AssProf") O'Bri*n?

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | May 24, 2009 7:03 PM

*Yawn, Robert still isn't funny or cogent. Maybe in twenty years or so, when he grows up...*
Given the fundy mentality, it could be a Poe or not. Since my Poedar is poor, I'll just sit back and watch how the discussion goes.

Posted by: Newfie | May 24, 2009 7:08 PM

FWIW, I think it's a Poe, also... and not a good one. #52 is how it's done. Robert does a great Poe.

Posted by: Bob B | May 24, 2009 7:09 PM

Well, Poe or not, I have personal experience with friends and family that are equal to this or worse. For example, I have a friend who attended Bob Jones University, built her life around going into the Ministry, and then went off and married a young man who was a totally committed pastor. The problem? Her family didn't think her husband was conservative ENOUGH, disapproved of her marriage, excommunicated her from the family, refused to recognize her son, would not visit or talk to her or anyone in her family, did not attend her wedding, and to this day considers her all but non-existent. As a result, she began entertain doubts about her beliefs and is still struggling with the internal conflict of how she was essentially programmed by her family, church, and SCHOOL (if you call BJU a school), circle of friends, and so on. There are so many examples of this kind of brainwashed behavior it's scary. So why is it OBVIOUSLY a Poe? It's not obvious at all.

Posted by: Alexandre | May 24, 2009 7:13 PM

I think you're being unfair to Margo, PZ. The reply she gave was entirely sensible, and I don't feel like she bent over backwards for the parents just by not going off on a spiel about the irrationality, stupidity, etc. of religion. You do have to convince people to change their viewpoints, and insulting Christianity would just make her defensive and unresponsive and would hurt their poor daughter further.

Posted by: Kseniya | May 24, 2009 7:15 PM

Uh-oh. Mom is on to us. Atheism is an anti-American communist conspiracy!

Let's hope that reporting this girl to the FBI doesn't lead to something worse. Let's hope they don't thwart our conspiracy by putting God into the Pledge of Allegiance or on US currency. That would really screw us!

Posted by: Bob B | May 24, 2009 7:17 PM

Well, Poe or not, I have personal experience with friends and family that are equal to this or worse. For example, I have a friend who attended Bob Jones University, built her life around going into the Ministry, and then went off and married a young man who was a totally committed pastor. The problem? Her family didn't think her husband was conservative ENOUGH, disapproved of her marriage, excommunicated her from the family, refused to recognize her son, would not visit or talk to her or anyone in her family, did not attend her wedding, and to this day considers her all but non-existent. As a result, she began entertain doubts about her beliefs and is still struggling with the internal conflict of how she was essentially programmed by her family, church, and SCHOOL (if you call BJU a school), circle of friends, and so on. There are so many examples of this kind of brainwashed behavior it's scary. So why is it OBVIOUSLY a Poe? It's not obvious at all.

Posted by: 2ndAthiestChild | May 24, 2009 7:17 PM

This is almost exactly what happened to my brother. He became an atheist just after turning seventeen and my parents freaked. My mother prayed over him and had their pentocostal preacher come over to "drive the daemons out". This not working however, my dad called the cops to talk some sense into my brother. When the police became upset with my dad over being called out for something so stupid, it set my dad's temper off. He came back in the house after they left, enraged and humiliated, and beat the ever loving crap out of my brother. When he became to tired to wail on my brother and left to watch football, my good Christian mother went over to him (never having tried to stop my dad) and told him it would be best if he left. He moved in with a friend and finished his junior and then senior years of high school. He didn't talk to my parents for almost a decade until my mother called him wondering why he hadn't been in contact. She claimed that telling him it was best to leave wasn't kicking him out and was mystified how anyone could see it that way. She also denied my father ever beat him even thought it was one of the clearest (and most horrifying)memories of my childhood.

So Leander, this really isn't far of from what many xtians believe. You can call atheists stupid or whatever names you feel free to pull out of your ass. But most of us have had experiences with xtians that exemplify the thinking shown in this letter. It is unfortunately a good (if mild)example of how most of them think.

Oh, and fuctard Robert, most athiest women have strong self images and self confidence, hence they don't sleep around and have stable monogamous relationships. Cristian women have been told they are the bringers of evil thier whole lives and tend to have little self-respect. However at my school here in Sacramento, you can tell which girls are xtian by how they dress. They less they wear the more "devout" xtian they are. They are also the ones with several children by different fathers and are on welfare. But thats ok because they go to church right?

Posted by: Bob B | May 24, 2009 7:19 PM

Well, Poe or not, I have personal experience with friends and family that are equal to this or worse. For example, I have a friend who attended Bob Jones University, built her life around going into the Ministry, and then went off and married a young man who was a totally committed pastor. The problem? Her family didn't think her husband was conservative ENOUGH, disapproved of her marriage, excommunicated her from the family, refused to recognize her son, would not visit or talk to her or anyone in her family, did not attend her wedding, and to this day considers her all but non-existent. As a result, she began entertain doubts about her beliefs and is still struggling with the internal conflict of how she was essentially programmed by her family, church, and SCHOOL (if you call BJU a school), circle of friends, and so on. There are so many examples of this kind of brainwashed behavior it's scary. So why is it OBVIOUSLY a Poe? It's not obvious at all.

Posted by: Kseniya | May 24, 2009 7:22 PM

When freed from this supervision superstition in college

There. Fixed it for you, Robert. You jerk.

Posted by: Bob B | May 24, 2009 7:22 PM

Well, Poe or not, I have personal experience with friends and family that are equal to this or worse. For example, I have a friend who attended Bob Jones University, built her life around going into the Ministry, and then went off and married a young man who was a totally committed pastor. The problem? Her family didn't think her husband was conservative ENOUGH, disapproved of her marriage, excommunicated her from the family, refused to recognize her son, would not visit or talk to her or anyone in her family, did not attend her wedding, and to this day considers her all but non-existent. As a result, she began entertain doubts about her beliefs and is still struggling with the internal conflict of how she was essentially programmed by her family, church, and SCHOOL (if you call BJU a school), circle of friends, and so on. There are so many examples of this kind of brainwashed behavior it's scary. So why is it OBVIOUSLY a Poe? It's not obvious at all.

Posted by: Leander | May 24, 2009 7:23 PM

Okay, in reply to

"Leander, have you ever considered that playing along with a joke and imagining that it is real and serious is part of the fun of the joke"

and all the "Poe's law" BS...(and Zeno, are you kidding me ?)

Yes I have considered that. And Poe's law, fine...only I would consider PZ to give the slightest hint that he either a) is playing along with a joke instead

of swallowing it like a fish the bait, or b) is at least assuming the possibility that this is a joke, as reference to Poe's law. He does neither. If he has

indeed not just blindly swallowed this BS 'cause it suited his own small-minded and rather unsopisticated agenda...why does he rely on his devoted followers

to point that out instead of devoting a simple sentence to clarifying that himself ?

So anybody asking, Leander, don't you think anybody could be that crazy, do you think it's impossible and blah blah blah...did I ever claim that ? I just

claimed it seemed an obvious joke, and why so. Doesn't mean I completely rule out the possibility it's real. But to embrace it like PZ did, without the

slightest hint of "playing along", or to Poe's law...that takes some fucked up gullibility and double standard when it comes to rationally investigating the

world around you. And that's the marvellous entertainment value PZ has to me, every once in a while. And sometimes he posts fascinating scientific info, gotta give him that. It's a win-win actually, be it the scientific fun, or the narrow-minded, gullible, Rumpelstiltskin stuff he posts.

Posted by: Aquaria | May 24, 2009 7:24 PM

Anyone who can't understand how anyone might possibly take this letter seriously, even if only for a second, FBI threat, prayer trees, exorcism wacked out narrative chronology and all, have never been to East Texas. Until you've heard a parent bouncing off the walls about a child who's gotten a lot of high falutin' ideas from those pointy-headed intellekshuls, you can't imagine people actually thinking these things, much less saying them.

But they do think them, and they do say them.

Posted by: nih | May 24, 2009 7:26 PM

Why are you re-reporting a troll? Some agony aunt gets snapped, you don't have to weaken yourself by taking it for its word.

Posted by: Mike | May 24, 2009 7:28 PM

Good Lord, was I intemperate on the Internet?

Anyway, I still think it's a obvious hoax, and the general unwillingness to admit that (because those religious people are the white hole of crazy) that concerns *me*.

Posted by: Mike | May 24, 2009 7:30 PM

Oh, and #81 was me. Anonymous by accident only.

Posted by: nih | May 24, 2009 7:36 PM

The agony aunt fed a troll. Why are you geniuses following in her steps?

Posted by: David G. | May 24, 2009 7:38 PM

It's very interesting indeed that God always seems to agree with the one who is proselytizing.

Off topic: I found some gold for you, PZ. http://www.reincarnationbank.com/

It is what it sounds like.

Posted by: Silver Fox | May 24, 2009 7:43 PM

Sorry, but that letter sounds like a Poe to me.

Ordinarily, the parents would have said what the father said. "Get out of my house and I don't ever want to see you again". "You have given yourself over to the secular world and all of its pollutions; the world, the flesh and the devil". I do not want you to be contaninating your younger siblings". "Obviously, your mother and I made a terrible error in judgement with you and I can assure you we will not make the same mistake again." "Good luck and best wishes with your new found 'friends'".

Again, I think the letter is a Poe.

Posted by: Rick R | May 24, 2009 7:48 PM

"The Bible is a manual teaching us to love, respect, and tolerate with understanding."

This is such a pantload of wrong, I don't even know how to react. This is not what the bible says, and it is certainly not evidenced by what the majority of christians actually DO.

Try reading the damn thing. Once, even.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM | May 24, 2009 7:58 PM

I don't think it was a poe and it appears a bunch of other folks don't think so either. Now that Silver Fox has firmly committed himself with the poe faction, I'm even more convinced it wasn't a poe.

Posted by: ConstantNeophyte | May 24, 2009 8:01 PM

"This is such a pantload of wrong"

Where did you come across the use of "pant" as an expletive?

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | May 24, 2009 8:05 PM

Its a fallacy of ambiguity.

Posted by: Newfie | May 24, 2009 8:14 PM

not only stupider than we suppose, they are stupider than we can suppose.

Moses supposes this proses is Poeses

Posted by: Daumier | May 24, 2009 8:18 PM

"We really ought to send little information packets to the parents of our students, carefully explaining that there will be little shocks like this, because their kids will come back as smart, independent human beings."

Well, my university does it.

Posted by: GMacs | May 24, 2009 8:19 PM

Now my husband refuses to let her in the house and is threatening to turn her in to the FBI.

Oh noes! I hope my dad doesn't find out he can do this.

This is exactly what happens when you send your kids off to college: if it works, they start thinking for themselves

Hehe, last fall, my friend was a YEC Christian. When I found out, I told him why evolution makes sense, and how it actually works. I told him why most [okay, many] people think creationism is stupid, and why the arguments of god being "outside logic" actually worked against creationism and the bible.

I talked to him a couple weeks later, and he was an agnostic. I didn't even say anything about Christianity in general, just Genesis.

Posted by: William Jennings Bryan | May 24, 2009 8:22 PM

“There's a regular stampede of young people doing exactly what "God-fearing" describes — isn't it wonderful? This is exactly what happens when you send your kids off to college” -
And that is exactly what I pointed out 84 years ago, in Dayton Tennessee (93 years ago if you count my many editorials in my newspaper). And I would have gotten farther with it too, if that damned Darrow had not interfered. We’ve known this horrible fact since James Leuba published his study, The Belief in God and Immortality, back in 1916. Oh! You all mocked me then, yes you did. Everyone denied it back then; but I’m glad to see that you atheists are now finally admitting that I was right.

Posted by: Wowbagger, OM | May 24, 2009 8:30 PM

Ichthyic wrote:

funny how what SF thinks is "ordinary" is completely bugfuck nuts.

Yep. It's also funny him pointing out the logical fallacies of others when his 'justifications' for his nonsensical belief system are dependent on so many of them.

That's our Foxy!

Posted by: Silver Fox | May 24, 2009 8:33 PM

#105 is not anonymous; it's mine

Posted by: raven | May 24, 2009 8:37 PM

This letter may or may not be a Poe. But it is so realistic that if it didn't happen, it could have.

Fundie Death Cult xianity is built on hate and lies. These are the people who want to overthrow the government and head on back to the Dark Ages. The people who hate minority groups when they can and all have lists of groups to hate and kill. We all know who the demons are. Gays, Catholics, scientists, MDs, Democrats, commies, Moslems, Hindus, and of course, ATHEISTS.

Hating someone in the family is no big deal, par for the course. And religious cults can be pretty vicious. People get killed in them.

Quite often what families of religious kooks do is "shun" the apostate. (They even have special words for rebels, apostates, heretics, corpses, and so on.) The whole family, extended family, and church just push them out and that is the end of it. I've seen it a few times, not often, but then again, on the WC there aren't that many fundies.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 24, 2009 8:53 PM

Ich;

"...because students never come home to visit on wknds or during breaks.

Oh, sorry, I must have misread the letter. I thought it said, "my husband won't let her into the house". I didn't know that he would only keep her out of the house when she was away at school but would let her in on weekends and breaks.

Try to exercise a minimal amount of reasoning. THE LETTER IS A POE.

Posted by: Katkinkate | May 24, 2009 8:56 PM

Posted by: Leander @ 29 to NerdOfRedhead "Are you kidding me ? Stick up my ass ? Fun and entertainment are the only reason I stop by here, and this entry only reassured me. I don't expect to get something intellectually valuable out of a guy like PZ. And by the way, are you trying to make it look like PZ saw through that bloody spoof, and you all with him ? Right. Who are you kidding ? It's just embarrassing, and un-stick-up-my-assingly funny how he just swallows bullshit whenever it suits his agenda. So much for the skeptic."

I don't know if PZ believes it or not, but I wouldn't put it past him to have seen through it, but post it the way he has, to see our reactions and the debate. Alternatively, it could actually be genuine. I know some people would genuinely over-react to a perceived threat to their beliefs similarly to this and some may acquaint atheism to anti-American terrorism, if they've taken the 'christian nation' meme too seriously. Then again, the woman writing the letter may have misunderstood what her husband actually said in her own panic over her daughter's 'plight'. There's a lot of crazy out there

Posted by: Ken Cope | May 24, 2009 8:57 PM

Wouldn't want to be caught making eye babies, or committing optical intercourse, at Pensacola Christian College...

Posted by: Mill | May 24, 2009 9:04 PM

The whole point of Poe's Law is to remind us that fundies can and do behave in ways so stupid that the rest of us cannot comprehend them in terms other than satirical. It would seem from PZ's tone that he at least considers the possibility of it being fake. No "Damn you all" tirades or obvious sympathy to the girl at the centre of this inanity.

Assuming the letter is real, it couldn't have taken too long for the daughter to reject everything they taught her. A five minute afternoon thought session should be enough to question and reject one book.

Posted by: Janine, OMnivore | May 24, 2009 9:07 PM

Silly old goat, the main point of Poe is this, the beliefs of the religious can get so silly, one is hard pressed to conduct a parody of religious beliefs.

For example, I cannot tell if you really believe the stupid stuff that you say or if you just some smart as pulling the wool over our eyes.

Posted by: 2ndAtheistChild | May 24, 2009 9:14 PM

For those who keep saying this is a poe because the mother prays over her daughter and the father won't let her in the house, would it be so out of the realm of possibility that the mother prayed over her at first and when that didn't work THEN the father wouldn't let her in? There is no way to tell from the letter if one came first. Also I often observed in my extended family arguments between parent and child where one parent refuse to allow the child to enter the house (usually the dad), the other parent (usually mom) let the kid in when the other parent was out or argued with the "banning" parent to let the kid in. It seems like this scenario is standard operating procedure for most uneducated fundies, at least those I've met. Many of you are trying to apply logic as if it actually applies to these people.

Posted by: Wowbagger, OM | May 24, 2009 9:18 PM

Foxy Fox on the Run wrote:

Try to exercise a minimal amount of reasoning.

Did you really write that, Silver Fox? I mean, seriously? I'm so glad I've got my irony meter set to Ray Comfort level; on anything less you might have given it a run for its money.

Posted by: littlejohn | May 24, 2009 9:28 PM

The FBI reference makes me suspect poe.

Is anyone else old enough to remember the letter to Dear Abby, 20-odd years ago, which simply paraphrased the lyrics to John Prine's song, "Dear Abby"? You surely remember: Dear Abby, Dear Abby, my feet are too long, my hair's falling out and my rights are all wrong...

Abby fell for it. A few days later she admitted she had been taken.

Posted by: mandrake | May 24, 2009 9:34 PM

... most athiest women have strong self images and self confidence, hence they don't sleep around and have stable monogamous relationships.

Ahem. 2ndAtheistChild - As an strong-minded atheist female who does not believe that monogamy is the most desirable state for me, and who does believe that traditional mores of marriage have not been particularly useful to women, I would suggest you reconsider that statement.

Posted by: twincats | May 24, 2009 9:36 PM

Liveliest Crib | May 24, 2009 6:16 PM @ #32

Molly nomination, right there, Poe or no!

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | May 24, 2009 9:40 PM

SF, still failing to justify your existence...

Posted by: GMacs | May 24, 2009 9:48 PM

SPOING!

Goddammit! You beat me to it!

Wow, I think I spend too much time on the intar-tubes.

Posted by: kamaka | May 24, 2009 9:51 PM

When I was 16, if I would have told my old man his religion was a boatload of crap, he would have pulled off his belt and whipped me mercilessly.

So. please, spare me the "this letter is a Poe" nonsense. I got hauled off to the Pastor for the merest expression of doubt.

This is what indoctrination and abuse is all about. She's too old to beat, call the FBI.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | May 24, 2009 10:02 PM

OOH, it appears I have hurt SF's feelings. We have shown your mistakes often enough SF, and anybody who can't put up physical evidence for their imaginary deity, but still talk vapidly, inanely, and frequently about it, deserves derision. Ready to show your physical evidence that will confirm you aren't a delusional fool? Until then, you remain a delusional fool.

Posted by: astrounit | May 24, 2009 10:14 PM

Robert, the accomplished megalomaniac #52, says, "As for your statement that college students are some of your favorite people, I'm guessing it's because you have a lot in common: you're bratty, think you know everything, and love it when other people tell you you're smart. *rolls eyes*"

You must be an apostle of Don McLeroy, State Board of Education chair in Texas, who has voiced sentiments very similar to your own: (as recounted by PZ in a recent post): He said, "Somebody's gotta stand up to experts"

Similarly, you have to stick it to relatively smart people, don't you? Bright and exceedingly brilliant people.

People you just don't have the wit to understand, and love to roll your eyes about over because of their incomprehensibility.

Well, bub, that's just the thing. Some people got it, and some can't do anything much more than just roll their eyes in total puzzlement, as you do.

Life is unfair that way, don't you think? You suppose God had anything to do with your shortcomings?

Of course, we are all quite willing to accept that you surround yourself with people who think you a genius for your eye-rolling capacity. People with truly enquiring minds. But to actually BRAG about being able to recognize who YOU think are bratty smart people who think they know everything...man, that takes a lot of guts. Who the heck do you think you are talking to here - your local church chapter?

Posted by: Angel Kaida | May 24, 2009 10:20 PM

Wow. Quite a lot of humorless trolls today. Is someone using Raider Rally?

"by finding an audience that assumes that anyone religious is ipso facto batsh*t insane" - Mike
You have a logic fail in there which no one seems to have addressed yet. We would not have to assume that anyone religious is crazy; we'd have to accept the apparently controversial(?!) notion that some very, very crazy religious people exist.

As someone who's been forced to deal with fundie antics in her immediate family and those of her closest friends, I can attest that if this is a spoof, it's not too far off from reality; if anything, it's the sheer stupidity of the FBI claim that gives it away, but even that has Poe's Law written all over it. I know people who have literally had their homes invaded by fundie relatives attempting exorcisms, so a family talking to a priest about exorcising their daughter is not far-fetched. And from the letter, there really is no way to tell, but it sounds like the father is in a snit and it's entirely possible that he just decided the girl wasn't allowed in the house now; at any rate, the story isn't contradictory the way she's telling it.

Posted by: raven | May 24, 2009 10:23 PM

When I left Christianity, I began to ask around; "Has anyone heard from L?" The only answer I got was that he was probably in jail. After all, he was "rebellious".

Sounds like a horror story waiting to be told. These days with the internet, just about anyone who isn't hiding or in the witness protection program can be easily found.

Something similar happened to a girl I grew up with. She also ended up being abused by her new stepfather. She disappeared for 20 years. Without much to show for it. Ten years as an alcoholic, ten years sober but a druggie interspersed with bad relationships with losers. I know where she is now. Dead and buried after she ODed on something or other..

Posted by: raven | May 24, 2009 10:31 PM

The lady can read Ken Ham's new book, "Already Gone: Why your kids will quit church and what you can do to stop it"

Ken Ham has and will make more atheists than Dawkins, Myers, and Hitchens combined. He is giving Falwell and Dobson a run for the title.

The problem with making creationism and anti-science litmust tests for the xian religion. It works both ways. The 6,000 year old earth, Noah had a boatload of dinosaurs, biological lunacy and so on are simply lies. They are wrong. They have as much data against them as the Flat Earth and Geocentrism.

The brighter of the fundies kids will figure it out. They will realize that the adults in their life are deluded fools pushing medieval nonsense. And they will be gone for good.

Posted by: charley | May 24, 2009 10:34 PM

The parents should have sent her here before college. It's a gap year program designed to immunize the student against the onslaught of atheism and secular humanism from evil professors thinking for themselves.

Posted by: Nominal Egg | May 24, 2009 10:39 PM

Does no one notice that all of the mother's attempts to "save" her daughter were written in the past tense, and "Now my husband won't let her in the house"?

Why are fundies so bad at reading comprehension?

Also:
Leander, meet kettle.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 24, 2009 10:41 PM

The way I read this, during the girl's visits home, her "saying that she's joined an atheist club on campus and is questioning everything we taught her" caused her mother to start praying over her (whether literally standing over her, or just about her situation and changed attitudes; could be either or both). Time passes; the prayers don't seem to be working, and the girl hasn't reverted to the "sweet, innocent girl...with strong Christian beliefs" that they raised. At that point, the father "refuses to let her in the house and is threatening to turn her in to the FBI". I don't see anything contradictory, here.

As for the threat to involve the FBI, if your worldview says that atheist = unAmerican = enemy of the state and probable future terrorist or traitor, then threatening her with the FBI becomes entirely credible. Or again, it's possible that he was trying the "scared straight" approach.

I think that what we have here is a case of "no true Scotsman". No real Christian would treat their child this way; if "God-fearing" is a real Christian, then this can not have actually happened. It has to be a Poe! Shame on anyone who thought it could possibly have been real!

Posted by: 2ndAtheistChild | May 24, 2009 11:09 PM

Ahem. 2ndAtheistChild - As an strong-minded atheist female who does not believe that monogamy is the most desirable state for me, and who does believe that traditional mores of marriage have not been particularly useful to women, I would suggest you reconsider that statement.

As a strong minded atheist woman myself I have no intention of reconsidering that statement. Fine, if you don't believe that monogamy is the path for you, that's your choice. And I said nothing about traditional marriage. It is however a stereotype by fundies to portray all atheist women as sex craved whores of babylon. Most atheist women I have met do not fit that stereotype. Most that I know-I'm over thirty and so are most of my friends so this may have something to do with it-are in long term monogamous relationships. If that offends you then that's your problem.

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | May 24, 2009 11:22 PM

You refuse to understand that a theist has a subjective epistomological (a way of knowing) certainty of God. This is a property of his exercise of his sense of diety -his faith. Every person by nature has a sense of diety.That faith is the proper object of his will. So, what he does with that faith is his own doing; he can deny it, surpress it, ignore it, or he can exercise it. If exercised, it is tne confirmation of the ontological (a way of being) existence of God. The only proof of a transendent God is a transendent proof. There is no physical evidence proof of God in the temporal order because there is no temporal God

blah blah blah blah blah

Posted by: SC, OM | May 24, 2009 11:28 PM

Oh, and fuctard Robert, most athiest [sic] women have strong self images and self confidence, hence they don't sleep around and have stable monogamous relationships.

I have to say, this is just...odd. "Hence"? What?

Posted by: Sastra | May 24, 2009 11:34 PM

Silver Fox #161 wrote:

You refuse to understand that a theist has a subjective epistomological (a way of knowing) certainty of God. This is a property of his exercise of his sense of diety -his faith. Every person by nature has a sense of diety.That faith is the proper object of his will.

How do you know that "every person by nature has a sense of deity?" Is that itself, an act of faith -- the choice to believe something through willpower?

One of the (many) problems with this argument is that it will naturally fall apart to the person it's being made to, assuming the person is a sincere non-believer. Consider, for example, the claim that "Silver Fox knows, in his heart, that The Book of Mormon is true, and is blinding himself to this." To the Mormon, this might be reassuring -- but to you, it's an abject failure. It's not even really trying to persuade you. It's given you up, and is content to shore up the faith of those who are already faithful.

It seems to me that this subjective epistomological method of certainty would give a sense of certainty to anyone, about any thing. Given the fact that we're not gods -- and are not above making errors -- that's a bad idea.

Posted by: Owlmirror | May 24, 2009 11:35 PM

"Diety" [sic]? Repeatedly?

You know, when you rattle these things off without even a basic spellcheck or proofread, it really doesn't speak well of your "subjective epistomological [sic] certainty" in general, let alone of God.

Besides: Presuppositionalist arguments are a denial-of-service attack on your interlocutors.

Posted by: Krystalline Apostate | May 24, 2009 11:37 PM

Hmmm. The "Love your enemies" passage from the bible sounds to me like "lets go to war over religion" that I hear so much from atheists. I read about your site in the newspaper and decided to pay it a visit. The Bible is a manual teaching us to love, respect, and tolerate with understanding. Is all I see on this site is intolerance, bashing, and hate. I also notice that as a religious person, I am stupid, ignorant, unintelligent, and, without a doubt, insane. Who's the wiser here?

Posted by: Krystalline Apostate | May 24, 2009 11:41 PM

Every person by nature has a sense of diety

Posted by: SC, OM | May 24, 2009 11:45 PM

Of course, "sex craved whores of babylon" doesn't describe anyone on this thread. Nosiree. At least no one I know...

;)

Posted by: Owlmirror | May 24, 2009 11:47 PM

Shorter SF:

1. God is not natural. A natural God would not be God.

2. Theists know that God exists because everyone knows that God exists, except for atheists, who don't.

3. A God for whom there was physical evidence would not be God, because there is no God for whom there is physical evidence.

Is it just me, or does SF seem to be arguing that theists are indeed atheists in denial, but being in denial is asserted to be the correct way to be?

Posted by: ConstantNeophyte | May 24, 2009 11:55 PM

"phyaical evidence"

Pro-tips: a) copy and paste to avoid making yourself look stupid; and b) spell check.

"Every person by nature has a sense of diety"

This is complete horseshit. No one is born with a sense of "diety". Maybe you are confusing this sense of deity with ignorance? Just because Goddidit is the simplest answer doesn't mean it is the correct one.

Posted by: Patness | May 24, 2009 11:58 PM

I'm surprised this wasn't mentioned, but it could simply be that the young woman never agreed, and merely conformed.

I was driven to do so for many, many years, while I knew I held views that directly contradicted my parents' religious teachings.

She might well have been an atheist long before going to college, but could only come clean once she was out from under their thumbs.

Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble | May 25, 2009 12:06 AM

"Is it just me, or does SF seem to be arguing that theists are indeed atheists in denial, but being in denial is asserted to be the correct way to be?"

It isn't just you Owlmother, all the atheotards on this immoral blog are confused by Foxy's God QED because Satan has blinded your eyes, deafened your ears, deadened your taste buds and generally denied you the illumination afforded the faithful. He has also, and most unjustly in my opinion, given you open slather on sex crazed Babylonian whores, but no doubt a recurrent genital infection will be your heavenly reward.

What Foxy is saying is that your dessicated souls and directionless moral compasses deny you the refreshing rain of the Spirit and the path to true salvation and happiness. God, for believers like me and Foxy, is the warm glow you get in your tummy in the scary darkness hours when fear of death stalks the psyche, and one's hope is to recall Mama's comforting voice as it drives the bad bogeymen away. It is on this hope that I pin my salvation. Or, as the great writer prayed: "O God! Forge in the smithy of my soul the unsubstantiated nonsense of my faith." Or something like that... I forget the precise words...

Posted by: Dagger | May 25, 2009 12:08 AM

"Now my husband refuses to let her in the house and is threatening to turn her in to the FBI"

... turn her in for what?

Posted by: Bronze Dog | May 25, 2009 12:09 AM

Did some headdesking over the people saying it's an "obvious Poe". Kind of a contradiction, isn't it? The whole reason Poe's law exists is because there's no shortage of crazy fundies who'd say exactly the sorts of things we'd consider writing as over-the-top parodies.

I think it could go either way.

Posted by: King of Ferrets | May 25, 2009 12:14 AM

Ad hominem: "You are an ignorant, half-witted fool. Therefore everything you say is bullshit." NOT ad hominem: "Everything you say is bullshit. Therefore you are an ignorant, half-witted fool."

Even better:
Not ad hominem: saying something outside of the context of an argument, for example (paraphrased): "Don't worry, we can recognize your writing because it's so fucking stupid."

Posted by: Owlmirror | May 25, 2009 12:21 AM

"Every person by nature has a sense of diety"

This is complete horseshit. No one is born with a sense of "diety". Maybe you are confusing this sense of deity with ignorance? Just because Goddidit is the simplest answer doesn't mean it is the correct one.

Well... I might have to argue about that, a bit. I do recall reading that young children of a certain age do seem to have some sort of sense of purpose about the universe; an instinct that everything is "for" something; a sense that there might be something out there.

But then, they also have the fear that stepping on a crack would break their mother's back, and that intent can be a cause, and other childish superstitions.

Posted by: ConstantNeophyte | May 25, 2009 12:32 AM

"But then, they also have the fear that stepping on a crack would break their mother's back, and that intent can be a cause, and other childish superstitions."

That was pretty much my point, that SF is wilfully confusing the ignorance (or if you prefer, innocence) of the young about reality with a "sense of diety".

Posted by: Janine, OMnivore | May 25, 2009 12:34 AM

I have some word for you!

Yes! The rumors are true! I have no sense of grammar!

Posted by: co | May 25, 2009 12:48 AM

Smoggy Batzrubble, if you keep up that lovely prose, we'll all want a bit of comeuppance from you. I'm tempted to say naughty things just to prompt you upward and onward.

Posted by: ConstantNeophyte | May 25, 2009 12:50 AM

Smoggy Batzrubble,

Would it be safe to assume from your various mentions of "Noo Zillund" that you are in fact a self-described small flightless bird?

Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble | May 25, 2009 12:54 AM

"Smoggy Batzrubble, if you keep up that lovely prose, we'll all want a bit of comeuppance from you. I'm tempted to say naughty things just to prompt you upward and onward."

Please don't Co, I beg you in the name of the Lord!

My cell mate, Floyd Rubber, is always saying "upward and onward", and always just before he confuses me with his mattress. If he hears you talking about "comeuppance" the odds are I won't be able to walk for a week.

Yours in anointed misery

S. Batzrubble

Posted by: Owlmirror | May 25, 2009 1:02 AM

But then, they also have the fear that stepping on a crack would break their mother's back, and that intent can be a cause, and other childish superstitions."

That was pretty much my point, that SF is wilfully confusing the ignorance (or if you prefer, innocence) of the young about reality with a "sense of diety".

Hm. But it's not just ignorance. The apprehension (or fear) that something they do might cause real harm is a real emotion. The sense that maybe there's some big, undefinable thing out there that watches everything, maybe up in the sky or outside of reality, is a real feeling. (Of course, you have to suppress or ignore that sense, or you'd never use the bathroom again.)

I think knowledge might well be necessary, but not sufficient in and of itself. Being able to confidently reject that feeling as being an illusion doesn't just arise from knowledge (that is, the opposite of ignorance). It's also from being willing and able to carefully analyze that feeling and realize that it must be an illusion: A God whose only sign of existence is a vague feeling cannot be all-powerful, cannot be all-knowing, and cannot be all-good -- and it is almost certainly entirely wrong to call the target of that "sense" a person, or even real.

It's being self-analytical, and seeking a certain degree of internally consistent non-contradictory conclusions.

It's being willing and able to acknowledge that the sense is a form of paranoia, and reject it as a personal psychological delusion.

Posted by: Young Atheist | May 25, 2009 1:13 AM

Anyone who thinks this is an unrealistic spoof obviously wasn't raised with fundie Christian parents like I was. Okay, they wouldn't have gone so far as to call the FBI because they consider the whole world to be against them, but they would certainly have done the prayer chain and been just as horrified and distraught as this woman. I grew up with NO access, and I mean NO ACCESS to secular writings and ideas. Kept out of school and everything. Sadly, this spoof rings all too true.

Posted by: Aquaria | May 25, 2009 1:15 AM

Dearest Aquaman

I see you're gender-confused.

because I love you in the Lord

I just threw up a little at the mental image this conjured.

I pray he will cleanse your potty mouth

Hey, I spent a lot of years in the military of God's own (supposedly) favorite nation, the US of A, and if they thought a potty mouth was good enough to instill in me, then it's good enough for anybody!

and bring you before him spotless and with exceeding joy.

Too late about the spotless thing. Mary and I never did have much in common anyway, so no loss.

If not, then as a back-up prayer, I pray that you will sizzle on Hell's griddle for eternity with on overly endowed demon as your bed mate.

Been there, done that, divorced him.

Posted by: astrounit | May 25, 2009 1:23 AM

SF#161:"To any theist who understands his knowledge of the existence of God, being asked for physical evidence of that knowledge is really silly. Be assured that I do understand how you would see this as delusional and I do have a sense of pathos for you."

1. You have to show how any theist "understands his knowledge of the existence of God". FIRST. You have not done so, and indeed, have repeatedly previously declared it cannot be done by any means other than by faith. Sorry, that's just not enough to qualify as any "evidence" for the basis of any "understanding" that any sane person would recognize as anything else but a fantasy or a hunch. No evidence has ever exhibited itself from natural reality, which has - so far, to a high degree of approximation very nearly equal to certainty - never once supplied it...unless, that is, you are partial to reading significance into hallucination.

2. Without such demonstration of actual evidence, to declare that it is "really silly" to ask such a theist for physical evidence of that "knowledge" is, in fact, truly, "really silly".

3. The "sense of pathos" you claim in "understanding" our views on the basis that such rinky-dinckery is delusional does not fill me with any sense of assurance, nor does it impress me all that very much....although the audacity of it did make an eyebrow twitch upwards about a millimeter or so.

4. If you understand "understanding" AND "pathos", I am puzzled why you cannot seem to grab ahold of the concept of simple "honesty".

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | May 25, 2009 1:27 AM

As a strong minded atheist woman myself I have no intention of reconsidering that statement. Fine, if you don't believe that monogamy is the path for you, that's your choice. And I said nothing about traditional marriage. It is however a stereotype by fundies to portray all atheist women as sex craved whores of babylon. Most atheist women I have met do not fit that stereotype. Most that I know-I'm over thirty and so are most of my friends so this may have something to do with it-are in long term monogamous relationships. If that offends you then that's your problem.

oh, keep your Indignation for yourself. it's not your monogamy that's offputting, it's the assumption that modern women are self-confident and therefore are monogamous. there is no therefore there. self-confidence and monogamy are not that closely causally related, and you're just perpetuating that idiotic madonna/whore BS

Posted by: Darren | May 25, 2009 1:31 AM

My poe-o-meter is going off the chart.

Posted by: Azkyroth | May 25, 2009 1:37 AM

Damn, you're desire to put down "the other camp" is blinding you as much as their beliefs are blinding them. Honestly, reading this question by "god-fearing" (someone sending in a question under that name would already makes my bogus alarm go off) - how can you take this serious ? Looking at that mail, it's a funny spoof. Turning her in to the FBI...and you still don't smell the joke ? Man. It SOOOO fits your agenda, you're just gonna, well, let's see...UNQUESTIONINGLY BELIEVE THAT IT'S REAL ! Thanks for the entertainment. You're expecting people to take YOU seriously ?

Arr all of you highly educated people too gullible to see that the "letter" is a joke? (Not even a hoax, I think: that would attempt some level of plausibility.) If "turn her into the FBI" doesn't clue you in, I'm not sure what would.

Weaver's Rule: Any argument that contains, explicitly or otherwise, a premise substantively equivalent to "No one's THAT stupid!" is invariably false.

Posted by: Azkyroth | May 25, 2009 1:48 AM

Don't get too excited, AssProf PZ. I went to a university that's considerably better than the one you teach at (not saying much, but still), and I can assure you that there are many idiots even in top-tier universities. That this woman's daughter has learned to regurgitate the ideas of other students and professors is no more impressive or meaningful than when a dog learns to do tricks.

Clearly, the girl had over-protective parents who made sure she went to church and was a good girl. When freed from this supervision in college, she rebelled against everything she was raised to accept. It's a familiar trajectory: the freshman 15, slutty behavior, and ignoring familiy/religion/all other frameworks that stabilize individuals and promote morality. The bounce-back is equally familiar. The girl will graduate, get married, recognize the error of her ways, and start taking her little one to church. Thank God.

As for your statement that college students are some of your favorite people, I'm guessing it's because you have a lot in common: you're bratty, think you know everything, and love it when other people tell you you're smart. *rolls eyes*

Shorter Robert: *holds hand out, lowers pinky finger, wiggles it pointedly*

Our sympathies, dipshit.

Posted by: Nominal Egg | May 25, 2009 1:55 AM

I confess I did not know powdered ram semen was a bio hazard.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Posted by: St. Tabby Lavalamp | May 25, 2009 2:04 AM

Silver Fox wrote:

diety... diety... diety... diety... diety... transendent... transendent... transendent... diety

Posted by: Joshua Fisher | May 25, 2009 2:11 AM

Wow. This might as well be my story. Although I was pretty confident in my atheism before college, I didn't let my parents know about it until then. Luckily, I had parents who weren't completely fucking insane. (A little insane, though, OH! I miss Shannon Hoon!)

I wish this young woman the best. Atheism for "red staters" like myself (and, based on her mother's reaction, I assume, her) and actually for most people, is always, in my opinion, organic and eventual. It occurs in the face of resistance, not in the absence of it.

In other words, people don't "become" atheists because of some kind of moral or happiness (or anything) vaccuum in their lives. They do so against the grain. It's an emotional and psychological struggle for many people, not because the decision is difficult, but because friends and family won't let you off the hook.

The decision to be atheist almost always causes friction. No matter what you do, you're going to piss people off.

So whip it out. Whip out the atheism. Good for her!

Posted by: SomeGuy | May 25, 2009 2:17 AM

What's depressing in all this is that Diderot nailed it back in 1770. Must we really spend the next three hundred years reworking the same hackneyed lessons? Sad.

Diderot, incidentally, offers the most sensible possible advice to the family of 'God-fearing.' Better, in fact, than Margo's. It's this: forget your sinful daughter. But take your youngest children, the ones who have not yet turned away from the Light of God and suffocate them as they sleep (passages LXIX & LXX). By doing so, you will assure their salvation and eternal bliss in the hereafter.

Could any responsible and benevolent Christian parent deny their children that joy?

Posted by: Aquaria | May 25, 2009 2:46 AM

Turning her in to the FBI...and you still don't smell the joke ? Man. It SOOOO fits your agenda, you're just gonna, well, let's see...UNQUESTIONINGLY BELIEVE THAT IT'S REAL ! Thanks for the entertainment. You're expecting people to take YOU seriously ?

What a nitwit you are.

Do you seriously think that there aren't parents who believe that the only response to an atheist is to call the FBI to come 'n' get 'em? An entire subset of American culture has been brainwashed into thinking that atheists are Communists, criminal and worse.

They really believe this. This cannot be emphasized enough. Add to that the general ignorance they have about the basic workings of government and law (and everything else). Think about how likely it is that these rubes would read the writings of someone like that disgusting vermin, Anne Coulter, who has advocated rounding up all kinds of people she doesn't like (especially non-Christians and liberals) and tormenting/killing them, and do you really, really think it isn't possible for someone to think that calling the FBI on an atheist isn't the proper thing to do?

Do you think there aren't parents who throw out children over their doubts in the parents' faith?

Do you think there aren't parents who disown their children for marrying someone of a different faith?

Heck, do you not realize that there are young adults who are locked in windowless rooms for daring to want to marry someone from another church?

I've seen fundie girls slapped like they were dogs for picking up a lipstick, even if it was to help someone. I've seen them cursed as whores for looking at a store window featuring the latest women's fashions too long.

What color is the sky in your world that you don't realize how this is all heartbreakingly possible, and all too common, in too many parts of America?

That's why the letter is a Poe. It's just about impossible to tell if it's real or faked.

Posted by: Shut up! | May 25, 2009 2:52 AM

http://www.creators.com/lifestylefeatures/dear-margo/religious-fanatics-on-the-lunatic-fringe.html

Click the damn link and READ! All of you! Now, shut up!

Posted by: GOD | May 25, 2009 3:03 AM

Dearest Mother,

Do not FEAR me, the reason I was wished into this realm of humans is because you fear DEATH, not me. You want a happy ending to the minisode of drama you call YOUR life. If your daughter wishes to think freely and enjoy the blink of an eye that is life, Let her. Let her enjoy the freedoms and beauties of the natural world without your household having to strike fear into her. PS. I didnt kick lucifer out, we simply made a bet and you cant be buddybuddy when you have a bet going...honestly...

Sincerely,

/b/eautiful all knowing God.

Posted by: MadScientist | May 25, 2009 3:38 AM

This sounds like a prank letter to Margo, but it's hilarious either way.

Posted by: Rorschach | May 25, 2009 4:11 AM

@ 233,

Many Christians believe because of what they have seen, and they have seen both sides, with God or without God. They are not all ignorant, and not all atheists/non-Christians are so smart/full of wisdom

What does this even mean,and how is it relevant to this thread?
And who said all atheists are full of wisdom? Strawman.

Posted by: William McBrine | May 25, 2009 4:28 AM

The FBI bit is actually what makes me suspect that the letter is real. It's so absurd that, were I trying to construct a Poe, I'd never have come up with it.

I also recommend the comments at that site. They're a lot more theistic than here, but still split on whether it's real, and they offer some religious horror stories of their own. My favorite is from Joshua Wazo, on page 5:

Several years back, I worked with a nice guy who was also an "elder" in his Christian based religion. He was smart man - very talented, whom I considered to be as normal as possible until he began talking about his beliefs. Among them:

We’re ALL going to hell. Himself included. Heaven only has "so many seats" and they’ve been occupied for hundreds of years.

...

You should never, EVER, even think about having sex unless to conceive. He had been married to his very lovely wife for several years and they had never consummated the marriage - as they were not yet ready for children.

I can't even guess what that guy's motivation is for following such rules if he believes he's already condemned to hell.

Posted by: Walton | May 25, 2009 4:46 AM

A few points.

Firstly, Silver Fox; I'm not convinced that every person "is born with a sense of deity", or, indeed, that such a sense really has any epistemic value whatsoever. Speaking for myself, I was brought up in a Christian family and fervently believed in God for much of my life. I was still (loosely) a theist when I began posting here. But I never felt the "presence of God", however much I wanted it. And I gradually came to realise that, rationally, there is no empirical evidence for the existence of the Judeo-Christian God, or for any other personal god. All religions make various extraordinary claims; Christianity claims that Jesus of Nazareth was God personified and was killed and physically resurrected from the dead in order to appease himself for our wrongdoing. This claim is not backed by a sufficient amount of empirical evidence to merit acceptance. And while you certainly can believe things on faith alone, without evidence, this begs the question of how you distinguish right from wrong beliefs. How do you know the Bible is true, and the Qu'ran and Book of Mormon are not?

This "sense of deity" to which you refer is no doubt very strong for many people. But the human brain has a massive and demonstrated capacity for self-delusion; and it's also true that adherents of different, and mutually contradictory, religions feel equally strongly that they "know in their hearts" that their beliefs are true. They can't all be right. So I'm sceptical, barring any more solid evidence, that a "sense of deity" reflects any real supernatural intervention, rather than simply a delusion of the mind.

That said, moving on to the letter: While I don't doubt that there are a fair few fundies who think atheism ought to be illegal, I find it hard to believe that someone who was literate enough to write this fairly coherent letter would also be stupid enough to believe that atheism is a federal crime. To me, it seems to be a Poe. We've seen letters and emails written by real wingnuts before; they display certain traits, such as incoherent sentence structure, abuse of vocabulary, excessive length and constant repetition. This doesn't show any of those features; and so it doesn't ring true that the author's husband sincerely believed that the FBI was going to investigate their daughter for being an atheist.

Posted by: Azkyroth | May 25, 2009 4:52 AM

"My husband refuses to let her in the house" "I've prayed over her at night while she sleeps"

Where does she go to pray over her? At the girl's dormitory?

The letter is a POE.

From the original letter:

We raised her with strong Christian beliefs, but lately she's saying that she's joined an atheist club on campus and is questioning everything we taught her. Now my husband refuses to let her in the house and is threatening to turn her in to the FBI. I've tried to cure our daughter and reconcile with her, but nothing seems to work. I've prayed over her at night while she sleeps, enlisted friends in a phone prayer tree and even spoken to my priest about the possibility of an exorcism.

"Now." Present tense. "I've". "I have." Past tense.

It's an odd way of saying it - an awkward construction entirely explicable if the writer was agitated - but there's nothing about this sentence construction that implies that the praying-over-at-night occurred after the would-not-let-into-house part, chronologically. The mother might have prayed over her every night for a week when she came home from school until her father realized she wasn't going to magically change her mind and kicked her out. Technically, the construction is consistent even if it was one prayer session and she was kicked out the next day. It's perfectly consistent with what one would expect from a person whose religious faith is more towards the paranoid-psychosis end of the spectrum than the wishful-thinking end, under the circumstances.

So, as I alluded to in my earlier comment, the strongest argument the "POE" people seem to have, other than this blockheadedly literalistic inference of chronological order from order of presentation in spite of conflicting tenses, is "Oh, COME ON! No one's THAT stupid!"

There is always someone "THAT stupid."

Always.

Posted by: Azkyroth | May 25, 2009 5:07 AM

"Don't worry SF, your vapidiness is unchallenged. You are still the poster boy for godbots who should have never posted in the first place. Even as anonymous your banal inane prose shines through."

Ad Hominem

Ad Hominem refers to an argument in which negative personal comments about one's opponent are used (fallaciously) as a premise.

An argument in which negative personal comments about one's opponent are incorporated in the conclusion is neither Ad Hominem nor fallacious.

"Ad Hominem" is not Latin for "YOU MEANY HEAD!"

Posted by: Walton | May 25, 2009 5:19 AM

So, as I alluded to in my earlier comment, the strongest argument the "POE" people seem to have, other than this blockheadedly literalistic inference of chronological order from order of presentation in spite of conflicting tenses, is "Oh, COME ON! No one's THAT stupid!"

No, I'd say the strongest argument for this being a Poe stems from the fact that it's coherently-written, pithy and comprehensible. We know that there are wingnuts in America who sincerely believe that being an atheist is a federal crime; but having read plenty of letters, emails and comments from wingnuts on this site, we also know that they display certain linguistic characteristics (incoherent sentence structure, poor spelling, abuse of vocabulary, repetition, excessive length). This doesn't display any of those features. And so, while a fundie with decent writing skills might well believe that atheism should be a federal crime, it's unlikely that one bright enough to write a readable letter would sincerely believe that atheism is a federal crime. My two cents.

Posted by: echidna | May 25, 2009 5:30 AM

It did strike me that the letter was more literate than most fundies seem to be. However, that is not sufficient to call POE. There is a reason that the "god" language was added to the currency, pledge, presidential oath, and so forth: it was to demonstrate the difference between communism/atheism and USAism/Christianity. Calling the FBI would have been a reasonable response for a suspected communist way back when, and such stuff lingers longer than you might think. The mother, who wrote the letter, is not the one who would call the FBI, and there is no need to insist that she be illiterate.

This is a perfect example of Poe's dilemma. It could very well be real, no matter how much we would like to think it isn't.

Posted by: strangebrew | May 25, 2009 5:43 AM

Point has been well made several times from different posters that in certain households,that fear and consternation in losing someone to rationality is an overwhelmingly consistent attitude.

Folks that have spent their entire life submerged in the Christian dogma are not mentally well prepared for a different opinion on spirituality, it is not a considered option, never has been in the parents and possibly their parents life...it is unknown and very scary.

their standing in their community is jeopardized...they are not good parents, they are doing something wrong, they did not instil the cornerstone of faith early enough, they are slack... etc etc etc!

Even if legitimate doubts on their own faith have been contemplated by one or other of the parents...self image...ego...and a feeling of gross stupidity for going along with the nonsense for so long tend to get submerged again quite rapidly...it is not a good place to be trapped and frightened of being ostracised or worse and the effect on other family members and neighbours just is not tested!

When a family member has the bravery and the integrity to reject a religious dogma in favour of rational thought it is a severe shock to the system of meek kowtowing to the church or pastor...it is easily imagined that the world caves in, and in a way it has!

Extreme reactions like calling the FBI and whatever is an act of desperation because of theist conditioning to regard atheism as a crime against the law.

If it is a Poe...then why?
A parody of fundamentalist xian attitudes is not that funny...it is basically a legalised brain washing in society.
It is not hilarious it is sad and degrading...and very prevalent!
It will take several generations from now to eradicate the worst excesses, if we are lucky, but there will always be folks that are hard of thinking and there will always be folks that take advantage and lie blatantly to snare these vulnerable folk so they can be milked of money, self determination, support for the delusion, support for the leaders in this human corruption and dignity.
So it is, so it has been, and so it shall be.

I see no advantage in Poe...I see no point...

But that is just my attitude...presumably there are bunnies who think it the height of hilarity...I find it contemtible.
Besides Poe lovers tend to keep it forum level...it is to generate a response in forum thread not start a debate in general society...Poe have lowly ambition!

To parody this affliction so publicly is similar to parodying the mentally handicapped and the mentally insane.
Bad taste, not an iota of point and sicker then the bunnies who actually behave in such fashion, they at least have an excuse called jeebus.

To send a Poe to an agony aunt...nah...that is not funny either...one does suspect the possibility of Poe was checked before a reply was made so public.
It is in the interests of Agony aunt reputation.
This situation rings to true to be Poe...simple like so!

Posted by: Drosera | May 25, 2009 5:48 AM

Perhaps I should explain what a phone prayer tree is (I didn't know what is was myself). It is when you call two or more friends with the request to pray for someone or something and ask them in addition to call two or more people to do the same. It's a kind of Ponzi scheme of prayer. It may not help much, but it's good for the telephone companies.

Posted by: Liveliest Crib | May 25, 2009 5:57 AM

Translated into coherence, Silver Fox argues as follows:

The deity is not of this universe; the deity transcends this universe. It is thus improper to seek empirical proof of the deity that can be observed in this universe. By definition, such proof cannot exist.

Nevertheless, human beings have an innate sense of the deity. The sense is universal among humans, but ultimately subjective; each person's sense cannot be adequately described to another.

One human may embrace that sense, while another may reject it. To reject it is understandable, since the deity's existence cannot be proven empirically, but it is folly. Embracing the sense is enough for a human to know the deity exists.

I know I can't prove god exists. I feel god exists. I understand why that argument does not satisfy you, but I'm right and you're wrong anyway.

Posted by: Winston McGrain | May 25, 2009 6:04 AM

No matter how bad things get, always remember: The Lord Jesus Christ loves you with all his heart.

Posted by: Paul Burnett | May 25, 2009 6:19 AM

Drosera (#235) wrote: "In countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia the father actually could have called the cops, with very unpleasant consequences for his daughter."

And that's what the fundies want to implement here.

I vote the letter is not a Poe. I know folks like these - kid goes to college, parents agonize over the top.

Posted by: astrounit | May 25, 2009 6:24 AM

"Of course, God's face is brighter than a million suns, so your retinas will become instant cosmic ash--but won't it be worth it to know the truth and have the truth set you free?"

Wowee. That sounds like a big number. That sounds pretty damned bright. Hope you accurately figured that.

Alright, you asked for it.

Unfortunately you have indicated that your Almighty's "smiling face" is intrinsically FAINTER than most massive (albeit relatively rare, but not THAT rare, since there are billions in the universe) O and B type stars, LESS bright than any run-of-the mill supernova by a factor of several tens of thousands (which pop up several times every day somewhere in the observable universe), LESS luminous than the weakest gamma ray bursts by a factor of at least a million (which go off roughly on a daily basis somewhere in the universe), and quite feeble compared to the original light of the cosmic background radiation that sends us news of a hot "big bang" origin in which - just to exist - "He" would have had to be in thermal equilibrium with the red-shifted photons we now see in every direction that were first released about the time when the universe all over had a temperature roughly comparable to the surface of the Sun (between about 3000 or 5000 degrees K) around 250,000 years after Time Zero and had a luminosity equivalent to roughly a billion photons of that characteristic energy per every nuclear particle.

THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE - IN EVERY DIRECTION YOU COULD POSSIBLY LOOK - WAS THEN AS BLAZING AS BRIGHT AS THE SURFACE OF THE SUN. The Sun subtends a half a degree from our viewpoint here on Earth. A simple calculation shows that if the entire sky was ablaze with the Sun's surface brightness, it would amount to a little over 200,000 times that of the familiar sunlight we bathe under blasting at you from every direction.

Astonishingly, we can still see it: that's the so-called cosmic microwave background radiation that we have actually been able to observe and measure with amazing precision over the last few decades.

(The radiation is today so red-shifted from it's original roughly 4000-degree K temperature that it now appears a paltry 2.7 degrees K. Why is it red-shifted? Because the universe has been expanding...believe it or not)

You may protest - but that's only a fifth as bright as a million suns. Wait. I'm not FINISHED. It gets much MUCH worse. The universe is expanding, so it must once have been quite a bit smaller and therefore hotter than even at the time the first photons were set free from thermal equilibrium with material particles beginning roughly about a quarter of a million years after Time Zero.

Venture much closer to the beginning, if you dare, when the universe was much MUCH more energetic...

Feel any cozier with God? You are now saying that God could hold Himself together in the face of a temperature that made the entire universe one vast hydrogen bomb during the era of primordial nucleosynthesis (converting some fraction of the hydrogen nuclei into helium) several minutes after time zero, and you must posit an entity that can handle temperatures of nearly a billion degrees K, a temperature roughly comparable to that found near the cores of ordinary stars like our Sun.

Several seconds after time zero the temperature has cooled to roughly 10 billion degrees K, a regime in which electrons and their antimatter counterpart positrons - up to then in almost perfectly equal numbers - are about to finish an equilibrium in which every annihilation between them is answered by a pair of energetic gamma ray photon collisions which produces another electron-positron pair.

The universe was so dense before 1 second after Time Zero that that even the ghostly neutrinos were confined

At about tenth of a second the universe was about 30 billion degrees K that consists (at least in terms of "ordinary matter") entirely of a homogenous soup of photons, electrons, positrons, neutrinos, antineutrinos, protons, antiprotons, neutrons and antineutrons all in thermal equilibrium.

About a hundredth of a second After Time Zero (ATZ), the universe seethed at a temperature of a hundred billion degrees.

A thousandth of a second ATZ the temp was a trillion degrees, and electrons and positrons first acquired their "identity".

At 1/10^-7 second (one ten-millionth of a second) ATZ the temperature was about 100 trillion degrees...

Pretty steamy for ANYTHING other than particles and antiparticles and photons and neutrinos to exist for anything but a tiny fraction of a second before either annihilating each other or getting recreated by photon collisions, according to E=mc^2.

At a trillionth of a second ATZ (10^-12 second) the temperature cooled through around 1000 trillion degrees K and the 4 familar forces began their distinct identity, and protons and neutrons (and their anti-partners) began to form out of quarks and antiquarks...

There's a boring interval sometimes called "The Desert" in which nothing much changes for about a trillionth of a second, so let's cut to the chase, to the last big thing that happened previously (and I mean BIG):

From 10^-35 to 10^-33 second, at a seething temperature of around a thousand trillion trillion degrees K the universe underwent a spurt of space-time "inflation" in which the force of gravity acted as a powerful REPULSIVE force upon space-time which, in that incredibly brief span, drastically enlarged the universe by a factor of a 10^40 or more.

Just before the onset of inflation, the entire universe (and all its CURRENT material and energy content of a hundred billion plus galaxies and an equal mass-energy in photons and neutrinos (not to mention how dark matter entered into this mix!) was probably somewhat smaller than a basketball, but saying so doesn't actually mean much, considering such a space-time is so severely curved that one cannot really compare its "size" with an object we are familiar with in flat Euclidean space.

But expanding a universe of that initial "size" by a factor of 10^40 would finish it up as a universe around 300 billion trillion light-years across...of which the local observable horizon can, in principle, never have a radius greater than the light-travel time since Time Zero occurred - which after the completion of inflation at that time of 10^-33 second ATZ amounts to roughly 1/3 million-billionth of an angstrom, or 1/3 million-trillionth of a micron or 1/300 billion-trillionth of a centimeter (3 x 10^-23 cm), which is ALL the universe anything could POSSIBLY "see" (even if photons COULD travel that far, which they could not without striking another photon or other particle and destroying the news from the edge of the "observable universe"), the rest of it far beyond the range any signals that can have arrived within the allotted time.

Actually, since the universe is expanding at a furious rate, the observable universe radius to a close approximation actually represents the distance at which the contents are moving apart at just about the speed of light, so all that extra universe out there beyond that miniscule 3 x 10^-23 cm radius from that time on is and has ever since been permanently and forever off-limits to our kin.

Some Omniscient being who cannot EVEN IN PRINCIPLE keep track of everything He was working on, I'll say...and at temperatures that make Hell look like Pluto yet.

Your Good Book predict any of that? Or is the devil perhaps far craftier than even YOU dare to think?

The temperature of the universe near the earliest allowable moment of time (the Planck time unit, of 10^-43 second) comes to 10^32 degrees K. As far as the standard Model goes, we can deduce that the 4 fundamental forces we are familar with (gravitation, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces) were simplified into two basic forces, a kind of "gravity" and the so-called "Grand Unified Theory" force, which combines the other three forces into one.

At any "times" any "earlier" than this (and suggesting it may have no conventional meaning at all) it is thought that there is a single force and a single particle dominated. (In the form, quite possibly, of LITERALLY a SINGLE PAIR of "particles"). But it may be meaningless to speak of a distinction between "force" and "particle" under such conditions: at some point near the Planck Time dimensional space and the arrow of time must have been asserted before "things" of any sort could have had room to exist, let alone time to move. As we all know, time is nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once. Well, the very earliest "moment" may have been a condition that lasted a timeless eternity, or at least lasted ALMOST "forever" due to relativistic considerations.

Either the entity people insist as the "Creator" doesn't exist and really is a weak figment of the human imagination, or He was

"Something Completely Different" that has nothing to do with nature as far as theoretical physics can penetrate. Unfortunately for the religionists, the latter hypothesis is not necessary, let alone feasible. It's easy enough to see why. For those who insist that "God" is as good an explanation as any, so the atheist cosmologist can assert that "nothingness is impossible" is as good an explanation as any.

It's not even a decent draw, by any stretch of the imagination, no matter how pixilated it may be: the latter hypothesis is by far more compelling by actually addressing potential aspects of a theory rooted in reality and evidence. They may yet be worked out. We'll have to keep working on it and stay tuned.

On the other hand, yacking up the God hypothesis is just...well, yacking. It has nothing to do with anything other than a big mouth.

Your friendly and honest atheist at your service.

Posted by: Peter Ashby | May 25, 2009 6:48 AM

@Smoggy Batzrubble

Lincoln or Massey?

Yours a good Southern Man in Exile. Mine's an Old Dark once you're out.

Posted by: Crudely Wrott | May 25, 2009 6:59 AM

Astrounit! Wow. Nice push, man. You've got me convinced for sure. Sadly even such concentrated content is lost on some. I am weary of weeping for them.

Posted by: Evolving Squid | May 25, 2009 7:16 AM

Me: I guess you got me there. Oh - BTW - I am really a Wizard and could turn you into frogs on the spot if I wanted to!

Godiots: That is just silly. PROVE it!

Me: I rest my case.

I dunno... I think a lot of Godiots might just respond with something more like

"Burn him! he's a witch!"

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | May 25, 2009 7:27 AM

Thanks Liveliest Crib for translating SF's weasel speak into a coherent sentences. Your last version got to the point.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 25, 2009 7:35 AM

High five, college girl!

Posted by: IainW | May 25, 2009 8:09 AM

Silver Fox (#161):

You refuse to understand that a theist has a subjective epistomological [sic] (a way of knowing) certainty of God.

The only context in which a "subjective way of knowing" isn't an oxymoron would be knowledge of one's own immediate subjective states, where, for example, being in pain would count as sufficient justification for knowing that one was in pain. However, knowledge of God isn't like this - it's alleged knowledge of a supposedly objectively existing, mind-independent entity, and subjective states or private criteria cannot provide any means of justifying knowledge claims about such external, independently existing states of affairs. For that, you need shared, public criteria. So frankly, your claimed subjective-yet-certain "sense of deity" seems to be ruled out on epistemological grounds alone.

Every person by nature has a sense of diety [sic].

And how precisely would you distinguish between a genuine sensus divinatus from an inbuilt cognitive bias? The only way you could do so would be by being able to verify your God-claims independently. So please explain how you would go about doing this.

The only proof of a transendent [sic] God is a transendent [sic] proof.

Let's see one, then.

There is no physical evidence proof [sic] of God in the temporal order because there is no temporal God.

Which rules out the possibility that God is a personal agent. Since agency is the ability to perform actions, and actions are events, agency can only be meaningfully ascribed in a temporal context - i.e., a context in which it makes sense to talk of "events" in the first place. Similarly, thinking and planning and intending and all the other elements that go into being an agent are also temporal concepts - they presuppose the passage of time. So well done. You've just admitted that theism is false.

However, the delusion is not in the theist but it is that which the atheist refuses to release himself from. The release can come only from the recognition of a sense of diety [sic] which all persons have by nature and is their's [sic] by will to exercise.

This seems to be a common theist trope: "If you don't believe what I believe, then you must be deficient (and morally culpable for that deficiency)". Now if this is the case, then you should be able to justify the accusation, yet you make no attempt to do so. It's not like us accusing creationists of willful ignorance, because we can cite evidence and set out arguments to justify the charge, by showing how and why they are wrong. What we don't do is waffle on about a mysterious yet universal "sense of evolution", and sneer at those who choose not to exercise it. If we did that, then the creationists could quite legitimately accuse of us having abandoned reasoned argument altogether, and of refusing to engage with them on any serious intellectual level. So pray tell: why this exact same charge not applicable to you?

Posted by: rev. Bigdumbchimp | May 25, 2009 8:38 AM

Thank you Ian for explaining to SF how utterly ridiculous that claim was.

Nicely don

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | May 25, 2009 8:43 AM

No matter how bad things get, always remember: The Lord Jesus Christ loves you with all his heart.

Jesus is dead. Get over it.

Posted by: dave souza | May 25, 2009 9:01 AM

My, this is a fun long thread. Skipping some, don't know if anyone's clarified this point: "Now my husband refuses to let her in the house and is threatening to turn her in to the FBI." Why so intemperate? Couldn't he just have turned her into a toad, or a newt?

Posted by: raven | May 25, 2009 9:09 AM

'No matter how bad things get, always remember: The Lord Jesus Christ loves you with all his heart.'

Sure. And according to the Rapture Monkeys, he is coming back any day now to destroy the earth and kill 6.7 billion people.

Most people would settle for dinner and a bottle of wine.

Posted by: Holbach | May 25, 2009 9:19 AM

Winston McGrain @ 254

There never was a lord jeebus christ, but only in the demented minds of it's originators and now yours and others of your idiotic ilk. Of course you are unaware that you sound like a madman, especially here on this blog which does not suffer religious insanity lightly. Can you bring your imaginary jeebus down to beat the crap out of us who ridicule and shit on it? Notice the "it". Bet you can't do it.

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | May 25, 2009 9:35 AM

What a great illustration of Poe's Law: it's over-the-top enough to be a parody, and yet not quite too unrealistic.

communism/atheism and USAism/Christianity

Thread won.

Every person by nature has a sense of diety [sic].

Is that so, Silver Fox?

It's not so. I, for instance, completely lack that alleged sense of deity. No, I don't repress it or anything; it's just not there.

Where exactly did you take that ridiculous arrogant certainty from? :-)

Posted by: cazfans | May 25, 2009 9:54 AM

THE UNTENABLE ARGUMENT

My adversary's argument
is not alone malevolent
but ignorant to boot.

He hasn't even got the sense
To state his so called evidence
in terms I can refute.

--Piet Hein
so ably assisted by
Jens Arup

The original has a sketch which is quite good

Posted by: anon | May 25, 2009 10:00 AM

My ex-gf has been exorcised for being depressed. Her father raped her when she was a child, and she tried to kill herself after a couple exorcisms. They also exorcised her autistic brother.

So I think this might not be a spoof. I know these people, and they seem reasonable, but they ARE NOT.

Posted by: raven | May 25, 2009 10:04 AM

Winston and eat the rich are most likely the same poster. It is multi ID time with sockpuppets proliferating like weeds.

This is the mentally disturbed fundie 12 year old troll from previous threads. Look for 5 or 10 more IDs. Don't look for sanity or intelligence, it isn't there.

Posted by: Luna_the_cat | May 25, 2009 10:34 AM

Personally I'm not convinced this is a Poe; my grandmother and members of her family spoke/acted like this, and then some. When one of my brothers announced he had decided to study Buddhism, you'd have thought he had exumed my dead grandfather and raped the corpse on the kitchen table, from the reactions he got from that side of the family. He ended up disinherited and my grandmother never spoke to him again, except to go over the fact that unless he repented he would certainly burn in hell.

I've heard worse on daytime talk radio in Texas, too, from people who are quite evidently perfectly serious about it.

Seriously, I *haven't* seen a position so obviously crazy that some people won't truly believe it and act on it. Not all religious people are anything like that, but that fact does not invalidate the point that some are.

Posted by: kre8tr | May 25, 2009 10:39 AM

Religion is a seemingly necessary though bogus concept. You think Christianity is stupid. Try Sharia law. Dad would have to kill his little daughter for turning away from the "teachings". There are many more sound reasons for killing each other than disagreements about which religion is best. Like, I want to eat your creamed corn. That makes pragmatic sense if there's not enough corn to go around. But turning your baby over to the authorities for finally thinking on her own is outrageously vain and ultimately incomprehensible. Get past religion. It puts blinders on everyone. It's the real killer.

Posted by: The_mummy | May 25, 2009 10:42 AM

I read this article by coincidence and it attracted my attention because this problem is wide spreading in all over the world. College can be described as an open world and contain many people with a big difference in their thoughts and believing. Naive youths can be effected by that [as she complain] and if there is no any back-up information, they will be an easy victims. But, if their parents taught them well. There are many groups can be described as opportunistic and try to make like a brain washing to those youths, why? to join to them and can be used like assistance to them.
The behave of her father is totally wrong. Instead of that, her parents must try to erase all bad thoughts with presenting all evidences to convince her. Everything surrounding us is evidence for presence of God. Reflection on the creatures and thinking about everything and how everything is balanced is a very strong evidence.
Young people need a certain policy to deal with them but not that rough and immoral treatment. To convince someone, you need time like those groups gave that. They give you an enough time and have patience for that. So, we must be like them to protect our children.
I hope that everything is going well soon.
Thanks

Posted by: kre8tr | May 25, 2009 10:47 AM

Religion is a seemingly necessary though bogus concept. You think Christianity is stupid. Try Sharia law. Dad would have to kill his little daughter for turning away from the "teachings". There are many more sound reasons for killing each other than disagreements about which religion is best. Like, I want to eat your creamed corn. That makes pragmatic sense if there's not enough corn to go around. But turning your baby over to the authorities for finally thinking on her own is outrageously vain and ultimately incomprehensible. Get past religion. It puts blinders on everyone. It's the real killer.

Posted by: Invigilator | May 25, 2009 11:03 AM

I just wanted to add my subjective two cents: I never had a sensus divinitatis either. I somehow figured out that the Christian message my dad was preaching to the heathen (in Japan!) didn't make any sense to me 'round about the third grade. Moreover, my parents were decent, loving, non-fundie mainstream Protestants, tolerant of non-Christians (you kind of had to be in Japan), and didn't come close to rejecting me when I "came out" as a non-believer while I was attending the church-affiliated college they were paying for.

The Christian story never made sense to me, though I did manage to convince myself once or twice in later life that I was having a spiritual experience during a Russian Orthodox liturgy. That only happened when I was somewhat drunk or extremely hungover, though. There also had to be good choir.

Posted by: rev bigdumbchimp | May 25, 2009 11:11 AM

For fucks sake people

Read the the damn submission error and do not repost

Ugh

Posted by: IainW | May 25, 2009 11:26 AM

The_mummy (#293, #295, #296):

There are many groups can be described as opportunistic and try to make like a brain washing to those youths, why? to join to them and can be used like assistance to them.

Yes. They're called religions.

Everything surrounding us is evidence for presence of God.

Methinks you don't understand what the word "evidence" means.

Posted by: Duke | May 25, 2009 11:33 AM

The girl should just keep telling her parents she believes in bible fairy tales and then go do whatever she wants. You can't reason with some Christians.

Posted by: Skrivarn | May 25, 2009 12:14 PM

It is simply awfull that religous intolerance can split up family's.
They should encourege their daughter to question everything, questioning often reveals a thirst for knowledge, and thus, she might show good potential for her future.

Posted by: Bob Vela | May 25, 2009 12:27 PM

I was brought up through Catholic schools, not necessarily for the religion but because the public schools in the area are, lets say, less then what a educational institution should be. Though the education provided was excellent, the people who ran the schools would have been considered mentally ill in any setting other then a religious one. Religious people on the whole are either naive, attempting to fill a void, or taking advantage of others. I can see how the idea of a greater being may bring some comfort, and that is fine, but it is time people get real and stop fighting over who has the better imaginary figure. Religion is the root of all evil. It sounds like something taught in a Catholic religion class...Evolution makes sense, and there is a vast quantity of evidence, but lets ignore that because the bible did not say the same thing, the Earth was created in 7 days, I forgot. Long live the baby Jesus.

A naturalistic evolutionist.
Bob Vela

Posted by: Bob Vela | May 25, 2009 12:32 PM

I was brought up through Catholic schools, not necessarily for the religion but because the public schools in the area are, lets say, less then what a educational institution should be. Though the education provided was excellent, the people who ran the schools would have been considered mentally ill in any setting other then a religious one. Religious people on the whole are either naive, attempting to fill a void, or taking advantage of others. I can see how the idea of a greater being may bring some comfort, and that is fine, but it is time people get real and stop fighting over who has the better imaginary figure. Religion is the root of all evil. It sounds like something taught in a Catholic religion class...Evolution makes sense, and there is a vast quantity of evidence, but lets ignore that because the bible did not say the same thing, the Earth was created in 7 days, I forgot. Long live the baby Jesus.

A naturalistic evolutionist.
Bob Vela

Posted by: Rey Fox | May 25, 2009 1:10 PM

"Everything surrounding us is evidence for presence of God. Reflection on the creatures and thinking about everything and how everything is balanced is a very strong evidence."

The trouble is that in college, or at least good college classes, they teach you how vapid that sort of thinking is.

Posted by: E.V. | May 25, 2009 1:27 PM

god is dead.

Posted by: urmom | May 25, 2009 2:22 PM

You made that up and you expect us to believe it? You're nuts, PZ Myers.

Posted by: Atheists are as blind as the fundies | May 25, 2009 2:30 PM

Would a religious fanatic of this degree be writing in to seek advice from a secular/liberal advice column?

Posted by: Atheists are as blind as the fundies | May 25, 2009 2:35 PM

Would a religious fanatic of this degree be writing in to seek advice from a secular/liberal advice column?

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | May 25, 2009 2:44 PM

Everything surrounding us is evidence for presence of God. Reflection on the creatures and thinking about everything and how everything is balanced is a very strong evidence.

Why, why, why, and why, respectively?

You made that up and you expect us to believe it? You're nuts, PZ Myers.

Maybe someone did make it up – but if so, it wasn't PZ, as you could have found out very easily by just clicking on the link!

Posted by: tazman | May 25, 2009 3:11 PM

And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth? (Luke 18:7-8)
Faith in Hitler: 6+ million Jews murdered
Faith in Stalin: 20+ million murdered
Faith in Mohammed: millions murdered
Faith in Jesus Christ alone [not the Roman Church]: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.(John 10:28)

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | May 25, 2009 3:32 PM

Faith in Jesus Christ alone [not the Roman Church]:

The Thirty-Years War, moron.

Also, don't act as if Islam didn't have a clause that promises direct ascent to heaven for all who die in a holy war and have fought on the right side.

Posted by: Drosera | May 25, 2009 3:41 PM

Excellent point, tazman, that's why atheists like me have no faith. Not even in your friend Jesus Christ alias the god who killed himself in order to ask himself for forgiveness for the sins committed by creatures that he created himself.

Eternal life, indeed. All you religious folks are only in it for the reward at the end, aren't you?

Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble | May 25, 2009 3:51 PM

Dear Robert Picton @ 309

"I have access to significant frontin' money and am looking for an enterprising sort who is also able to pilot a very small, very fast plane."

Count me in--I'll try anything once. I've never flown a plane or handled any sort of motorised vehicle (we have no roads in Noo Zillund) but I'm great at bareback sheep riding...how different can it be?

Posted by: MrFire | May 25, 2009 4:13 PM

Attn Batzrubble Esq:

I humbly place a request for your services also. Given the newly expanded storage compartment that you now possess, courtesy of a certain Mr. Rubber (and alluded to, I sense, by Mr. Picton), might I interest you in smuggling a shipment of Holy Bibles to Afghanistan? Together, we can succeed where more simple-minded evangelicals have failed. Your Rubberized compartment shall serve as the most appropriate holding place for these sacred texts, all the while imbuing them with a certain musty odor that shall later betray their supposed antiquity when we flog 'em to gullible villagers for five mountain goats apiece. Just think: you shall be doing God's shitty work for him - quite literally!

Yours in All Earnest Seriousness,

MrFire

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | May 25, 2009 4:20 PM

Thou shalt burn for eternity!

What, Lord? There's only one atheist in the universe?

Posted by: tazman | May 25, 2009 4:56 PM

David M wrote: "The Thirty-Years War, moron."
moron: slang for a stupid person
Etymology: irregular from Greek mōros foolish, stupid

Writes St. Paul:
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18)
...and again, St. Paul:
Being defamed, we intreat: we are made as the filth of the world, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day.
(1 Corinthians 4:13)

David, read a New Testament about Jesus Christ and decide for yourself after that...I may wrongly assume you have never read them in your life...all of them all the way through...

Posted by: Steve_C | May 25, 2009 5:16 PM

Fuck, Taz you're boring.

Posted by: tazman | May 25, 2009 5:24 PM

Drosera wrote: "Eternal life, indeed. All you religious folks are only in it for the reward at the end, aren't you?"

Drosera: there is an end of the physical life. then what? we have no promise that we'll live a long life...science nor gov't can prevent one's death...

No Christ, no peace; know Christ, know peace
Christ is the reward, Drosera, in Him is life...

Posted by: Rick R | May 25, 2009 5:27 PM

Sorry, that should be #331....

Posted by: MAJeff, OM | May 25, 2009 5:32 PM

No Christ, no peace; know Christ, know peace
Christ is the reward, Drosera, in Him is life...

blah blah blah

Posted by: Felix | May 25, 2009 5:36 PM

taz,
an acquaintance's grandmother died crying in fear and pain.
You write "No Christ, no peace; know Christ, know peace".

The woman was a devout Christian until her death. So why was she so afraid? Because she realized that all she had believed in had been a lie, all along her life, of which she had wasted so many years. There is no person Christ to know in any meanigngful sense. There is no afterlife. There is no prevention of death by magic, no justice that will make everything right, nor blissful peace for eternity.
And it does not become real by believing it really really hard.

Grow up. Do yourself a favor, and more importantly your descendants.

Posted by: DILLIDAFFUM | May 25, 2009 5:37 PM

I think the father should call the FBI. He'd then get to talk to some nice agents who all went to college and encouraged more than anyone to think forthemselves in non-religious ways. And then he'd get done for wasting the FBI's time. Praying over her while she sleeps? Creepy and weird.

Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble | May 25, 2009 5:41 PM

Praise God, O my Brother Tazman, a fellow believer in this hellish place of darkness and damnation. Bless you brother for speaking up for the Lord. I too am God's missionary in this evil place, suffering slings and arrows for my faith.

I was talking to the Lord this very morning, Spazman, and he told me to assure you that you're on the right track, but you need to amp it up a bit. The Atheotards aren't listening. Your Christian cliches are too weak and over-used. With all due respect and Christian love, Tashlan, "No Christ, no peace; know Christ, know peace" was a little bit passe when I was a kindergarten Batzrubble attending the Christian Brothers' Sunday-Funday School and God-Botty Camps. The time for vapid woo has passed, O My Brother, God's new plan calls for fear-mongering and preemptive abuse (Yes, it's the plan our Christian brothers Bush and Cheney have followed religiously!). Hatred and fear are the only things the Evolrationalutionists understand, Pacman! We need to pump the fear of ever-loving Christ into their moral vacuums. They need to be continuously reminded that they are cursed and damned and will suffer for eternity. Repeat after me: "Hell's maw gapes to receive you, satanic apostles of the Demon Myers, repent now or burn with Promethean regularity for the next five thousand eternities."

See what I mean, Sandman? You need more Hate in your Christian love.

Your brother in Christ,

Smoggy Batzrubble

Posted by: Ichthyic | May 25, 2009 5:51 PM

hey smoggy-

If they allow you out on any given day, and you're in the Welly area this Friday, join us for a pint of Speights at Kitty's, eh?

a few of the regular Kiwis that post here meet there for a piss-up every other friday.

Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble | May 25, 2009 6:00 PM

Dear brother Itchytic,

You're generosity is noted and appreciated. I'll do my best to get there if I ever get day release--Kitty's has good Guinness as I recall. But Te Wai Pounamu is my natural home and the last time I was in Willytown (I went to witness for God at the Sevens dressed as Mary Magdalene in her professional capacity) I was arrested for relieving myself in that large open-air urinal in Lambton Quay.

Yours from the Godzone

S. Batzrubble

Posted by: Azkyroth | May 25, 2009 6:18 PM

JESUS MYTHICAL CHRIST, what the hell is so hard to understand about "please do not resubmit your comment?"

Posted by: Josh | May 25, 2009 6:23 PM

then, if she weighs the same as a duck...

Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of science?

Posted by: ConstantNeophyte | May 25, 2009 6:26 PM

"(we have no roads in Noo Zillund)
that's not true.
there's roads..."

If you define roads as a trail of potholes, lumps and dips coated in a special quick-melt seal and strung together in a squiggle that would make an S sick, then yeah, NZ has roads...

Posted by: cicely (Inadvertent Phytocidal Maniac) | May 25, 2009 6:35 PM

Walton @ 244:

No, I'd say the strongest argument for this being a Poe stems from the fact that it's coherently-written, pithy and comprehensible. We know that there are wingnuts in America who sincerely believe that being an atheist is a federal crime; but having read plenty of letters, emails and comments from wingnuts on this site, we also know that they display certain linguistic characteristics (incoherent sentence structure, poor spelling, abuse of vocabulary, repetition, excessive length). This doesn't display any of those features. And so, while a fundie with decent writing skills might well believe that atheism should be a federal crime, it's unlikely that one bright enough to write a readable letter would sincerely believe that atheism is a federal crime. My two cents.

I can't agree with you, here. Granted that most of the material suitable for Comic Sans is incoherent, badly-spelled, etc., I gotta say that unfortunately the same is true for a lot of other material on the web today; and I understand that many teachers today dispair at the creeping increase in the inability of their students to write well.

In other words, it ain't restricted to wingnuts.

In other, related news, my mother is a wingnut, but can write very well. I know many others who can say likewise. Good writing skills are not diagnostic of non-wingnuttery. I think the problem (?) is that here, in Scienceblog Country, the proportion of competent writers is unusually high; the drecky stuff suffers badly by comparison.

Also, its possible that the father doesn't actually believe that atheism is a Federal crime, but that isn't necessary when making over-the-top, hysterical threats.

Posted by: Ichthyic | May 25, 2009 6:50 PM

Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of science?

ah, remind me later to tell you how we know the earth to be banana-shaped.

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 25, 2009 6:58 PM

Danielle? From Winnipeg?

I think I made up her cousin.

Posted by: ConstantNeophyte | May 25, 2009 7:04 PM

"the "paved" roads are so bad I took to driving on the beaches instead.
much smoother."

Except for the occasional child they're pretty good. ;)

@Richard Smith (#367)

Ahahaha, nice!

Posted by: Sastra | May 25, 2009 7:23 PM

Brownian, OM #363 wrote:

Given the paucity of meaningful descriptions of Jesus in the Bible, I wonder how much of the intimacy those who claim a personal relationship with Jesus stems from the same sort of thing.

I think a lot of Christians flesh out the character of Jesus by using their own fantasies and desires, and fail to realize that this is what they're doing. In a discussion group I once pointed out that the character of Jesus was rather grim and demanding: there didn't seem to be anything in the Bible which indicated that Jesus was ever relaxed, happy, had a sense of humor, etc. I was met by a storm of protests from the liberal Christians in the room. Why, Jesus laughed and smiled all the time! I needed to go back and read the Bible!

When I asked where the NT shows Jesus laughing, I was met with some baffled silence, till someone cited the passage where Jesus says "suffer the little children to come unto me." Obviously, he would have been gentle and smiling when he said that, or else the children would have been afraid to come to him.

Uh huh. Strained, to put it mildly.

Walton #244 wrote:

No, I'd say the strongest argument for this being a Poe stems from the fact that it's coherently-written, pithy and comprehensible.

If you read the letters to the advice columnists regularly, I think you'll notice that almost all of them are coherent, pithy, comprehensible, grammatical, and manage to get the point succinctly. What are the odds? My guess is that these letters are usually heavily edited, for space and ease in reading (and, perhaps, to be kind to the agonized.) For all we know, the original may have started out as a rambling mess.

Posted by: Holbach | May 25, 2009 7:43 PM

No tazman, no imaginary god. Now that isn't hard to figure out, is it?

Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | May 25, 2009 8:12 PM

David, read a New Testament about Jesus Christ and decide for yourself after that...I may wrongly assume you have never read them in your life...all of them all the way through...

I am one of the rather few people here who haven't read the Bible cover-to-cover, but I have read some parts, and I'm familiar with the two Paul quotes you quoted. In short, you are assuming wrongly.

Now, have you ever read anything else than the Bible? Because you really don't give me that impression.

Drosera: there is an end of the physical life. then what?

I don't know – and you don't know either. You only believe you know.

Hey, prove that the Sumerian idea of the afterlife was wrong. Go ahead! We're waiting.

Or maybe you'd like to start by providing some evidence that death isn't simply The End™. That is, after all, the simplest assumption that is compatible with all observations. Isn't it?

Posted by: MrFire/MrsDoubtfire | May 25, 2009 8:14 PM

O Batzrubble! My Beleagured, Buggered Brother-in-Bondage! Stand firm! Or at least, wide-stanced!

Though some may finger you as a Dickensian villain on acid, I know better. For do not the lost Gnostic gospels, true avatars of the Word, verily say:

And behold, the Christian Brothers shall come upon an anal virgin, and fill him with their Holy Spirit, and he shall bear a gun, and massacre them in righteous anger

...Well? I believe you are destined for great things.

Yours,
A newly gender-curious MrFire

Posted by: Cortney | May 25, 2009 8:19 PM

This submission is so dumb, beyond words. I never comment on this like this, but I just had to. They want to bring in a priest for their daughter who learned to think for herself. When sending their daughter away they should of gotten the hint that they can't run her life for her. They are trying to turn her into themselves. How many people out there are happy they are not 100% like their parents? EVERYONE! It sounds to like this parents need to get out of the church walls and find something to keep them busy. Or better yet, try and find something new to nag over.
one last thing: I'm so happy these guys aren't my parents, I would of left them a loooooong ass time ago!

Posted by: Orson Zedd | May 25, 2009 8:39 PM

tazman @ #338

I realize your inability to see other's points of view. In psychology, this is a stage that most toddlers get out of. But I understand that it might stick around with you for the entirety of your life.

Posted by: MrFire | May 25, 2009 9:01 PM

Holbach @ 381:

I am being sucked into the Batz-bubble, and the White Russian I just consumed is not helping. Please refer to my ranting @334, Batzrubble's reply at @337, and then his various assorted pearls of wisdom from #18 through #356, before you call the police on me, or worse still, lump me in with Dave Mabus.

Posted by: Holbach | May 25, 2009 9:22 PM

MrFire @ 384

I did read all the noted posts with little interest to reply, but your last one at 378 was the most baffling and required an obvious "Huh". Back off on the White Russian for a while or you just might morph into a Dave Mabus.

Posted by: MrFire | May 25, 2009 10:16 PM

Back off on the White Russian for a while

Too late Holbach, tonight I am lost to the dark side. But rest assured, I shall take my absurdist sentiments where they do not bother you.

Posted by: j. frank parnell | May 26, 2009 12:33 AM

There should be a Federal Bureau of Dip Shit Parents. They are obviously clueless. The thought that a person can go away to college and come back an independent thinker? WOW! It's a bloody miracle! You mean she's no longer a Christian Robot Sheep? Amazing! She must be on drugs!

I just shake my head and laugh at parents like this. They just don't understand how the world is outside their little cocoon. Free thought is a truly amazing thing for those who have been force fed the same religious pablum their whole lives. To have your eyes opened at College and become a 'gasp' Atheist! Oh My! She's going to hell in a hand basket!

The next thing she will tell the parents is that she is a Lesbian.

More free non conformist thought.

Posted by: j. frank parnell | May 26, 2009 12:38 AM

There should be a Federal Bureau of Dip Shit Parents. They are obviously clueless. The thought that a person can go away to college and come back an independent thinker? WOW! It's a bloody miracle! You mean she's no longer a Christian Robot Sheep? Amazing! She must be on drugs!

I just shake my head and laugh at parents like this. They just don't understand how the world is outside their little cocoon. Free thought is a truly amazing thing for those who have been force fed the same religious pablum their whole lives. To have your eyes opened at College and become a 'gasp' Atheist! Oh My! She's going to hell in a hand basket!

The next thing she will tell the parents is that she is a Lesbian.

More free non conformist thought.

Posted by: Drosera | May 26, 2009 6:13 AM

Walton @371,

Thinking that atheism should be a crime is insane; thinking that atheism actually is a crime, on the other hand, is stupidity and/or ignorance.

Millions of Muslims do think atheism should be crime, even a crime punishable by death. Yet, horrible as that is, I would not call them insane. Dangerously deluded, yes, but not insane.

This letter might well have been written by an insane wingnut, but it's extremely unlikely, from the style, that it was written by someone who was stupid or entirely uneducated.

Several people have already pointed out to you that the letter was probably heavily edited for publication. So why do you insist on sticking to your invalid argument? You’re no Sherlock Holmes, so much is evident. The original letter was perhaps just as incoherent and badly written as you imagined it to be.

Posted by: Frizz | May 26, 2009 7:00 AM

Why call the FBI? Daddy needs the SI, the spanish inquisition. That helps the daughter alot more.
Never read such a bulls... before.

Posted by: Richard Smith | May 26, 2009 8:43 AM

@Frizz (#396)

Why call the FBI? Daddy needs the SI, the spanish inquisition.

Well, that would certainly have the element of surprise (and fear) since, of course, nobody expects...

Posted by: Walton | May 26, 2009 10:33 AM

Millions of Muslims do think atheism should be crime, even a crime punishable by death. Yet, horrible as that is, I would not call them insane. Dangerously deluded, yes, but not insane.

I wasn't using the term in a clinical sense. Neither do most people today, since it isn't sufficiently precise to have any real scientific meaning in the field of mental health. I was using it in its ordinary colloquial sense, as we would in saying, for instance "policy X is insane".

Several people have already pointed out to you that the letter was probably heavily edited for publication. So why do you insist on sticking to your invalid argument? You’re no Sherlock Holmes, so much is evident. The original letter was perhaps just as incoherent and badly written as you imagined it to be.

I don't know why you feel the need to be so hostile over a very minor disagreement. On reflection, you're probably right about this point and I was probably wrong. But that doesn't mean you need to be condescending.

One of the main problems with this site is that people tend to think that those who disagree with their own convictions on any point must be stupid, ignorant or malicious, and that there's no need to be polite in expressing disagreement or to think about other people's feelings. Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that we should abandon the importance of objective truth, or start accepting weak or vacuous ideas simply in order to avoid hurting those who hold them. We certainly shouldn't. Rather, I'm simply saying that, when disagreeing in good faith with someone who holds a reasonable opinion, there's no need to attack them personally.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 26, 2009 1:16 PM

her parents need help if they think that the FBI wants to deal with minor things like personal beliefs. they're tapped and need help. i was raised christian, confirmed as a protestant, and now i'm happily an agnostic. LIFE IS GOOD

Posted by: jayneflower | May 26, 2009 2:23 PM

How very Christian of them. Loving unconditionally must be an atheist thing.

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | May 26, 2009 3:58 PM

Christians are supposed to know these things - it's obvious from the Bible if you read it the right way.

LOL

Posted by: onecae | May 26, 2009 4:05 PM

Of course, why read it the wrong way?

Posted by: Steve_C | May 26, 2009 4:15 PM

Logic fail.

Why doesn't god just tell everyone in person so there's no misunderstanding.

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | May 26, 2009 5:17 PM

Okay. Go ahead and post whatever you want. Organize it however it occurs to you. The result will be expressive of who you are.

last I checked, that's exactly what Christians do, which explains why there's 38000+ denominations; and it's exactly why your claim that there's such a thing as "reading the bible the right way" is so utterly lol-worthy

Posted by: onecae | May 26, 2009 5:27 PM

Jadehawk,
Thank you for understanding. :)
Davel,
One is not identical to what one organizes.

Posted by: onecae | May 26, 2009 5:50 PM

It was only yesterday that I chilled a martini to sub 0 degree C. Admittedly, other factors were involved. But the martini was perfect, and I take credit for that.
So, I disagree that low temperature was the source for organizing that perfect martini. There are many places where it is cold, yet no martinis occur (as much as I would have liked to protect you from that sad news).
And I feel obligated to add: I am not now, nor have I ever been, a martini.
I hope this clears things up.

Posted by: Ichthyic | May 26, 2009 6:00 PM

So, I disagree that low temperature was the source for organizing that perfect martini.

fucking inane. It wouldn't be perfect without it, and you didn't "make" low temperature.

go back to your martinis.

oh, and make me one while you're at it?

that's a good lad.

Posted by: onecae | May 26, 2009 7:24 PM

"oh, and make me one while you're at it?"

So, after all your naturalistic, snow-flake-like helplessness you admit I can in fact make a martini?

Now that you want one too, you lose all sense of decorum and start issuing pretentious orders full of hope and promise. Well, okay then. I'll make you a martini. I'll even drink it for you. Hope your satisfied. Then we can both marvel at the snow flakes. Oh, I should point out, I am not making you a martini, I am making a martini for you. You are who you are, all on your own.

Posted by: Mill | May 27, 2009 9:45 AM

DiscoveredJoys @ 329;
A Poedar sounds like some kind of device for measuring children or feet.

Posted by: Theodivine | May 27, 2009 1:21 PM

HAHAHAHAHA this made my day. It sounds like something my grandma would do. The FBI is going to look at her dad and laugh. I'm glad this girl began thinking for herself. And as for her mother praying over her while she sleeps and thinking of arranging an exorcism, I'd say her mother isn't religious, she has a mental disorder which manifested as it. Haha. God I hate people like these parents. Let people think for themselves. If I were that girl, I'd be packing up my stuff and voluntarily leave, they wouldn't need to kick me out. Lovesit.

Posted by: phantomreader42 | May 27, 2009 4:54 PM

Matthew Black @ #425:

i very highly doubt that this letter is real. what kind of wackjob christian fundamentalist would write an obvious atheist and ask for advice on the brain(un)washing of her child?

The letter was written to an advice columnist, not to PZ. There's a link to the column near the beginning of the post.

Reeding comprehenshun: U R Doin It Rong!

Furthermore, if what this wackjob fundie did made sense, she wouldn't be a wackjob fundie!