Tuesday, January 30, 2007
First thing to remember when arguing with a fundamentalist is that you can't win. Don't go into it with the expectation of changing their mind, if your really really goo you might get them to think about their faith for a moment, but even thats not likely. So whats the point you say, well there's two points one is that its fun, the other is your goal (if your into goals) which is to make anyone who overhears the argument realize how silly the fundamentalist sounds. Your not debating the person your talking to, your giving a speech to those who will listen. Its also a good idea to go into the argument with the mindset of just wanting to screw with the person, otherwise you'll feel like you didn't accomplish anything, with this mindset as long as you have fun and the other person get all flustered then your winning, oh and extra points for every time they tell you your going to hell.
Now you can get into attacking the bible. This is highly entertaining and I recommend learning as much of the bible as you can stand for the amusement of knowing the bible better than the person who thinks its the source of all truth. Which brings me to a side subject, its funny but it seems like on average the most knowledgeable people on the bible (outside of clergy) are atheists. Which is ironic, but makes total sense, oh and is the only part of this post (which I found because of Planet Atheism) that I disagree with, I also wanted to point out that post because its what got me going on my post today, so thank you. Yeah, if you spend much time talking to atheists, it seems like far more of them are at least fairly well versed in the bible, sometimes because of an overbearing parent that tried to force religion on them so they studied the bible so they could point out the flaws, or they just wanted ammo for these discussions after they embraced atheism. Anyway I personally am not particularly knowledgeable in the bible, but I do wish to read it in the near future, so I'm not going to tell you what verses to use against theists. theres other sites for that, you can start with the previously mentioned Planet Atheism or Deep Thoughts both of which have a fairly comprehensive list of atheist sites. Then you can go to The Skeptics Annotated Bible and search for more. So if thats not what I'm talking about then what the hell am I talking about. Good question.
If someone brings up intelligent design then here is what I do. Immediately say, ok, its a scientific hypothesis (its not yet a theory) so what have they done to test it? What are the results of their years of research? They'll start bringing up bacteria flagellum motor's and the like, to which you can nod if you like, and say ok so finding some flaws in an established theory, what I asked was what scientific research has been done to test the hypothesis of ID? Many of the people who are particularly adamant about ID have been home schooled or taught at an evangelical christian school, so they will have very very limited knowledge of the scientific method. Ask them if they have read any peer-reviewed journal articles on the subject. You may need to explain what a peer-reviewed journal is, then you can explain that none of the proponents of ID have ever submitted an article on ID to any scientific journal. Then cut them down say that its pathetic when people think that by pointing out a few holes in a theory that it must be wrong, tell them that in REAL science one of the tenets is that you never assume any theory is correct no matter how much evidence there is, hell Gravity could be wrong, but I doubt it. Then turn the tables around again just to keep 'em on there toes. (this only works with the literal translation folks) Your bible on the other hand you claim was written by or at least directly inspired by an infallible omnipotent being. Therefore any flaw that is clearly more than a simple typo proves that at least one of your theories is invalid. It either proves that the bible is not directly inspired by god (or through a muse), or it may prove that god is not infallible, the other option being that there is no god, which of course is my hypothesis, and I have not yet been able to prove myself wrong. hmmm.... heres an idea. Offer a test, but first put it in context, by the bible, and the old testament in particular clearly god is willing to kill sinners. The ultimate sin is to deny gods existence. The bible also claims that god is good an will save the devout. So here is my challenge, I will deny gods existents publicly then tell him that if I am wrong he should strike me dead where I stand. The believer on the other hand has to put themselves in a life threatening situation and ask god to save them, this could be jumping off a building, standing on train tracks, jumping into a lion pit (been done), or whatever they choose. So both of you are risking your life for your faith, although the denier also faces the possibility of eternity in hell, while if they die they'll go to heaven. The key is not actually carrying out the challenge (although some have) but the persons response to it, are they willing? If so they are at least honestly devout, but if they are not willing to then they do not truly believe at which point you tell them to STFU already.
And thats how I deal with fundamentalists and ID because they're the same thing.
Monday, January 29, 2007
They follow a few children around, the two main characters are very bright young people but I pity them, unless they break away they will never know the joy of simply asking why. I also pity any child that is followed so closely, they're 10-12 years old and seem to rarely be out of sight of their parents. This is a big problem I have with home schooling. Going out and having fun, doing stupid things that might get you injured but won't kill you is part of growing up. You can raise a child that has diverse experiences that will be able to adapt to any surroundings, or you can isolate a child so their only goal is to ensure that their surroundings never adapt. I am not sure that the second route is not child abuse, or more properly, child neglect.
I hate dogma, I hate the idea that there is anything that cannot be questioned. It makes me very sad when I think of growing up in a home that does not let you ask questions. But there is hope, even the most oppressive indoctrination cannot completely stifle human curiosity. There is one child that does come forward at church and says that he's struggling with his faith, god shows him no signs and so he has doubt. The camera crew does its best to try to capture the awkwardness of the moment.
Another truly awkward moment is when Ted Haggard takes the stage, he makes jokes with the camera but there is something slightly nasty about the jokes, its in fun, but not completely. There is also the part when he then meets the young boy with the gnarly rat tail who is very very sincere about his faith talking with Big Ted the Meth Head, who seems so blatantly fake by comparison. Even the very short segment that Ted is featured in makes you wonder how he was able to become the head of any major organization.
Well Im outta time, so watch the movie if you want, its worth seeing but its creepy. you've been warned.
Friday, January 26, 2007
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7)
I have to admit those god apologists are crafty. They'll claim that "evil" isn't a physical thing its a state of mind therefore it really was created by us, evil evil man. I agree in part, we invented war, genocide, wal-mart, and reality television but who invented cancer? how about the thousands of viruses and other diseases? These are evil things to man, supposedly his favorite creature, but clearly they were not invented by man. Of course it has been argued that in reality beetles were his favorite creature (and band) due to the fact that he sat down and designed several hundred thousand different types.
So this is a bit of a bold claim, calling the master of the universe an asshole is sort of a big deal, oh I mean god not He-Man, I got no beef with that guy. I guess I need more evidence of the evils of god then. How about this?
Supposedly this dude is omnipotent, and giving advice to Bush, now I consider both of these characters to be full of shit but either way there is some thing very evil about this basic concept. Nah still not convincing. How about that movie Jesus Camp, I haven't seen it yet but I guess its pretty sick and demented, and religious. Oh I just realized that I keep using the term man in the mankind sense, any feminists out there sorry, there was a time when we had a word for man as in people with a penis and another word for all people but we stopped speaking Latin and for some reason decided that distinction was unnecessary, I didn't invent the language so don't blame me. So back to the evil non-existent invisible guy in the sky, he unleashes natural disasters, thats pretty dickish. Here we go, this guy is proud of the fact that he flooded the entire world killing every thing on the land (and all fresh water fish) because he didn't like what some people were doing, now the fact of the matter is that this event never happened so not only is the guy evil, he also seems to be a pathological liar. Maybe there is a god, but he has no real power he just doesn't die and hes a sociopath. Or he's omnipotent and he's a dick head, either way I'm not getting down on my knees for that. Oh theres also the most obvious possibility and the one that seems far and away the most likely, there is no god at all.
But to be honest I just wanted to point out that I have a cold right now, and supposedly god created it, therefor god is a dick, and I need a Kleenex. (which were created by man!)
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
50 Lamest Things of All Time
43. Dane Cook
HAHAHAHAHAHA... Now to put that in perspective, number 50 was little dogs in purses. Dane was 43, that can't be good. I wish I could find the actual "article" it was something like Bostonian frat boy, your 15 minutes of funny are over. Nah, it was better than that, but you get the idea.
1.. The problem of substance abuse and addiction was recognized as an insidious and powerful destructive force in family life.
2.. There was evidence of a widening gap between rich and poor, and already many voices called for action to improve the conditions of the poor, particularly the "worthy" poor.
3.. Traditional American values and institutions were being challenged by the influx of immigrants who did not speak English and who were perceived to make disproportionate demands on the human service systems, suppressing wages by accepting low pay, long hours, and inferior working conditions.
4.. The legacy of slavery and the reality of racism lurked behind the public facade of democracy, and broke out in dramatic incidents from time to time.
5.. To their contemporaries, growing numbers of girls and women appeared to be in moral jeopardy due to the frequency of premarital sex and pregnancy, and the sex industry, in fact, flourished.
6.. Child abuse was entering the public consciousness and there was a sense that juvenile crime was escalating.
7.. Significant numbers of families were not "intact," as mothers frequently died in childbirth and fathers often abandoned families.
This list was written in the late 1800's. The bit about immigrants I find particularly interesting.
Monday, January 22, 2007
When he got back he told me all about how we need to save the innocent babies, I was rolling on the floor, tears flowing outta my eyes, I think I broke a rib type of laughing. He held his composure for quite a while before breaking into an uncontrollable fit of laugher for a good 15 minutes. He even threw in a crack about, " we gotta save the babies, Foley's got first dibs." We then went skeet shooting, he has a specially made launcher that actually throws "suspected terrorists" about 60 feet through the air. As soon as I saw it fire I said, "you got this idea from Mel Brooks' History of the World didn't you?" to which he responded that Mel is awesome, and its too bad that he's a heathen who doesn't love the baby jesus or else he would look forward to hanging out in heaven with him. To which I said, he's still alive you could hang out with him here if you want to, to which george said, "who's not dead?" We finished up our skeet shooting, BTW george is a way better shot than me, although I did beat Dick, He shot 3 secret service agents, and almost shot me after I pointed out that agents don't count because they were still on the ground, and he had ordered them to stand still.
We went back inside, ate some ludes, smoked a joint and started prank calling Planned Parenthood clinics around the country. Then we called in a death threat to Hillary just for fun, I didn't really want to but he said we must, it was Sunday after all. After all this important work with the sanctity of life he said he had to buckle down and get some important work done, and could I turn down the volume on the Xbox, on the surge. I laughed at him for working on an increase in troop levels on Sanctity of Life Day, he didn't get the joke at all, he then threw an ashtray at my head for insulting him and using big words. He said that he didn't want to share a Vietnamese whore with me anymore and told me to leave. I stole his bike and went home. So thats how I spent sanctity of life day, how did you spend yours?
Friday, January 19, 2007
First Man: Standing on a bridge threatening to jump.
Second man: Comes up and shouts to the man on the bridge…Stop, Stop don’t do it.
First Man: Looks down from the bridge and says, Why?
Second Man: Because there is much to live for.
First Man: Like what?
Second Man: Well, there’s faith and religion? Are you religious?
First Man: Yes
Second Man: Me too. Christian or Buddhist?
First Man: Christian
Second Man: Me too. Catholic or Protestant?
First Man: Protestant
Second Man: Me too. Methodist, Baptist or Presbyterian?
First Man: Baptist
Second Man: Me too. Baptist Church of God? or Baptist Church of the Savior?
First Man: Baptist Church of God.
Second Man: Me too. Original Baptist Church of God or Reformed Baptist Church of God?
First Man: Reformed Baptist Church of God
Second Man: Me too. Reformed Baptist Church of God Reformation of 1879 or Reformed Baptist Church of God Reformation of 1917?
First Man: 1917
Upon hearing this, the second man’s face became red and said … “Die you heretic scum!” And pushed him off the bridge.
Hat Tip to my friends over at Blog 4 Brains
Thursday, January 18, 2007
On a side note, I love all the fundies who just can't wait till the second coming of christ. Now I could be wrong about this but I think the only people who go straight to heaven are 12,000 people from each of the original 12 tribes. Meaning that the only ones who go right away, will be Jews, not evangelicals decedent from western Europe. But maybe hey don't care, maybe they look forward to the tribulation where we fight to the death for who goes up and who goes down (directions that are tough to follow when you live on a sphere), even as they are being run through by a demon they'll be thinking, "I was right...."
This is an example of several things and I'll do my best to keep this organized (yeah that'll happen). First of this is an example of our willingness to hear both sides, the problem is both sides do not always deserve equal attention. If I say the moon is made of rock and someone else says no its made of cheese those are two opposing views, that does not mean that both deserve equal time. The fact that it was a common tale in the past does not in anyway make it true. So if you want to give the Bible equal time thats fine, but give it equal scrutiny as well. Has the bible been a good source of weather predictions before? Is it a credible witness? What research went into the righting of the book? Did the writers of the Bible study the atmospheric conditions of their own time? And why is it that we feel the need to give equal time to opposing views, but not always. During the build up to the Iraq war no one felt the need to listen to those who opposed the war, you know those who turned out to be right. I'm all for giving both sides there fair chance, that means that if both sides are equal they get an equal voice, if one side has a mountain of research to back up their opinion and the other simply says I disagree then they do not get equal time, those who put more effort into there position deserve to be heard.
This is also an example of what both sides Pat Robertson and Richard Dawkins have described as a culture war, its a war between what do we believe in, the natural world or the super-natural. There are days when I get pissed off enough that I just want to say fine, beleive whatever you want, but you can't have your cake and eat it too, so if your going to say that science is flawed and the work of the devil then thats fine, but you are no longer allowed to use it. If you want to buy a cell phone you must declare that the world is billions of years old. If you seek medication from a doctor then you must admit that evolution is real. If you want to use a computer you must sign a statement saying there was no adam and eve, and there was no "great flood." If you care to drive an automobile then you must decree that global warming is real its caused by humans and that this automobile is adding to it. If you want to turn on a light or any other use of electricity, you must admit that there is no god.
Thats probably taking it to far but you get my drift. I honestly don't care if people believe in god, allah, yahweh, leprechaun's, the tooth fair or invisible pink unicorns, just so long as they don't try to interfere with the working of the world by saying well this old book disagrees with your evidence so you can't say that. I don't care what your book says. If you want to throw some inspirational quotes from your book go for it, because it really doesn't matter where an inspirational quote comes from, it doesn't even have to be true so long as it puts you in a positive state of mind. So believe what you want but keep those beliefs the hell outta my way.
I'll also say that this is a war that has been raging since Galileo if not before. Eventually it will come down to black or white, real or fake, natural or supernatural, but now is the wrong time. We need people to move towards reason for a bit longer, we need to weaken there ranks. If everyone was to take a side right now I do not know that we would win, and if we lose we could end up in another dark ages. Don't get me wrong I think that the age of reason will be here soon, but if we push to fast we could stumble and lose a lot of ground.
BTW: for those nay sayers for global warming, I live in upstate NY, winter finally got here, as in a week ago i wasn't wearing a coat, still no snow but at least its cold. Go ahead and blame it on El Nino', but why do you think its such a strong el nino?
These shouldn't be opposing forces, but welcome to planet bush! The pentagon did a press conference denouncing those lawyers and law firms that are/have defended Guantanamo detainees. These people's guilt or innocence, nor crime they are accused of has nothing to do with the fact that in America everyone has the right to be fairly represented. If they are guilty then the courts will find them guilty, the only reason a lawyer hurts a case is if those gathering evidence do so in an illegal manner or the person is innocent. If the person is innocent then clearly they deserve to go free. If the person is guilty but the proof was gathered in an illegal manner, well some will say that they are still guilty. And I don't argue that, but they should walk, if we allow illegal evidence to convict someone then what will be left to prevent police from abusing their authority?
Hat Tip to the always great Crooks and Liars
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
So heres a couple of musical views on money.
Cash rules everything around me, Cream, get the money, dolla dolla bills yall.
You would think that Google would make Youtube embedding work particularly well with blogger seeing as it owns both. WTF.
Peace! I'm out.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
AP - US detains 6 Iranians
Ok at first I was thinking that they meant we kidnapped the people from Iran, they were in Iraq. Not as bad but still not good. This could give Iran (shaky) legal standing to invade Iraq outright. By most accounts we're not holding onto peace as it is, would have a chance if Iran actually attacked? We would need to continue to hold Iraq together while fighting off organized army while quelling an active civil war. Heres a plan, lets avoid getting into a war with Iran, at least until we finish one of the two wars that were fighting already.
So back to my original point about religious leaders, its a hell of a gig. You don't need proof or evidence of anything, although you do need those passages from the book, then you can bend other wise rational peoples morals till they think its acceptable to scream God Hates Fags at the funeral of a soldier who just died in Iraq. Actually I take back that example, there is no possible way that the Phelps family was rational at any point. This is still a good example of the power of the church in general. I'm all for free speech, but can you imagine trying to do that same protest without calling yourself a church? You'd get lynched.
I totally lost my train of thought on this one.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Good for a quick laugh. Hat tip to Atheist Revolution
I think Number 9 is my favorite
9 - You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.
Of course Number 1 fits a few people I know as well....
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Salvador Dali - Thank god I'm an atheist...
Luis Bunuel (NOT Salvador Dali!) - Thank God I'm an atheist.
funny that both were on the same list.
One of Murphy's laws - A man without religon is like a fish without a bicycle
Robert G. Ingersoll - Why should I allow that same God to tell me how to raise my kids, who had to drown His own?
Donald Morgan - Jesus' last words on the cross, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" hardly seem like the words of a man who planned it that way. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure there is something wrong here.
Richard Francis Burton (1821-1890) - The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never worshipped anything but himself.
unknown - People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs
Mark Twain - The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also
Haywood Newkirk - Religion is a lot like NASCAR, something for the ignorant masses to believe in.
I hate Nascar, hence this might be my new favorite quote.
Frater Ravus - If you have to lie to prove what you believe, then what you believe is a lie.
Dan Fouts - I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in.
Scott - Jesus Saves! But I Recycle