Who do you trust?

Scenario...
Tomorrow, several top scientists inform the world that a 60 mile long meteor is headed straight for the earth. It will be here in 7 days. There is no defense against it, as it is large enough to completely wipe out everything on the face of the earth.

OR

Tomorrow, several top religious leaders inform the world that God is going to destroy the earth in 7 days, because of the rampant homosexuality and prolific abortions that are occurring. he is going to destroy the earth by releasing a gigantic seven headed monster that breathes fire.

Who would you believe?

Latest Letter-to-the-Editor

In response to all the letters about God and prayer that I read in the Journal Star:

I read these impassioned letters from the religious, trying to convince us through faulty circular logic, and despite the evidence, that prayer does indeed work. Instead of convincing me of anything, they only show me a startling portrait of self-contradiction.

Prayers of Petition contradict the very idea of an omniscient god. The “free will” argument that the religious then invoke in defense of prayer, further contradicts their very own description of God. No being can be omniscient and omnipotent at the same time.

As we now know about Mother Theresa, whose deeds seemed inextricably linked to her closeness to God, she was actually living her life in the absence of belief. In a letter to a spiritual confidant, she remarked, “the tongue moves in prayer, but does not speak.”

We know that the multitudes of pedophile priests, being protected by the Catholic Church as they raped our children, could not possibly believe in the god of the Bible and still perform the deeds that they did.

The books of the Bible are themselves walking and talking self-contradictions. It is not possible for God to give Moses the Sixth Commandment- “Thou shalt not kill”, and then continue to order genocide, murder, a scorched earth policy, ethnic cleansing, rape, and slavery on all his enemies, all with his blessing.

Self-contradictions seem to be the hallmark of religious belief.

Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator

After watching the Phoenix land on mars, I watched this.

Very entertaining.

Thanks God

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7)

The Ten Commandments

The Biblical account of the Ten Commandments:

1) The first time Moses came down from Mount Sinai with commandments, he merely recited a list (Exodus 20:2-17), which is the version most churches today erroneously call the "Ten Commandments," although they were not engraved on stone tablets and not called "the ten commandments."

2) The first set of stone tablets was given to Moses at a subsequent trip up the mountain (Exodus 31:18). In this farcical story, Moses petulantly destroyed those tablets when he saw the people worshipping the golden calf (Exodus 32:19).

3) So he went back for a replacement. God told Moses: "Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest." (Exodus 34:1) Here is what was on the replacement tablets (from Exodus 34:14-26):

1) Thou shalt worship no other God. 2) Thou shalt make thee no molten gods. 3) The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. 4) Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest. 5) Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks. 6) Thrice in the year shall all your menchildren appear before the Lord God. 7) Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven. 8) Neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left until the morning. 9) The first of the firstfruits of thy land shalt thou bring unto the house of the Lord thy God. 10) Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.

Keep this in mind next time you are tempted to boil a goat. This list differs, obviously, from the one in Exodus 20 (was God's memory faulty?), but it is only this list that is called the "Ten Commandments": "And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments." (Exodus 34:28)

Stuff God Hates

Here is a link to The Stuff God Hates

American Atheists

American Atheists (the organization) seems to be lost right now. The Board of Directors fired Ellen Johnson because they think she has gotten too big for her britches. Apparently she doesn't really listen to them, as shown by her "Freedom Walk" which was not sanctioned by the Board. I'm finding that as far as the organization goes, I don't really care. There are quite a few other Atheist organizations doing good work. I am becoming more impressed with The Atheist Alliance.

Pity

Right now I'm feeling sad and lonely (feeling sorry for myself).
It's always upsetting to lose a friend. But, I am reminded of theTom Hank's movie, Castaway. There is a poignant scene where he's talking to his buddy, and he says he is so grateful that he had his girlfriend on that island with him. He says he’s so sad that shegot married while he was gone, and that he’s lost her all over again.

But, he says he knows what he has to do...keep on breathing. You never know what tomorrow will bring.

Obama and Religion

I saw Senator Obama yesterday in front of a huge cross touting "faith and morals" .
I am disappointed that here is yet another politician promoting prejudice by linking religion and morality. I am offended when Jesus gets pushed down my throat by politicians wanting to get elected.

Now, having said that, he is probably the better choice over the other candidates, because he does believe in the separation of church and state.

But, for Christ's sake, get off the Jesus bandwagon.

What does this show you?

In reading about more pedophile priests, I am struck with this thought...

If these priests TRULY believed in an all knowing god, they would not, they could not, abuse children (and when I say abuse, I really mean "rape"). We now know that Mother Theresa could not bring herself to truly believe in God, and so I have to conclude that these priests do not really believe.
Religion continues to be a scam, and in the case of the Catholic Church, provides cover for men who want to have sex with children.

Read the next story...

More Pedophile Priests

Here is a story about why the Catholic Church will never learn...

A Burlington jury issued a landmark verdict against the state's Roman Catholic diocese Tuesday, ordering it to pay $8.7 million in damages to a former Burlington altar boy fondled multiple times by a priest the church knew was a child molester.

It's a harsh penalty, but warranted by the way the church turned a blind eye to outrageously criminal behavior. I'd like to say that they'll learn a lesson from it, but the comments from Catholic officials suggest that no, they won't.

A grim Bishop Salvatore Matano, who attended the six-day trial, said in a brief, separate interview that the size of the verdict could pose serious problems for the diocese. He called the looming predicament a "sad and tragic moment in our history."

Wrong! The sad and tragic moment occurred in 1972, when they hired the child molesting priest while fully knowledgeable about his prior history. The legal damages aren't the problem, it's what these people did to children.

"I have to look very seriously at what this verdict means as it impacts on our services and the activities of the diocese," Matano said. "I have to be very conscious that the verdict as it stands will have a very serious impact on a rural diocese; a small, rural diocese."

The diocese? What about the people? Where was your concern for the diocese when the church set a child predator loose upon them?

"I do not want in any way to inflict any suffering or any pain upon the faithful in this diocese because of what happened in the past," Matano said. "That is certainly not appropriate, and I am conscious of the universal needs of the diocese."

Diocesan lawyer Tom McCormick said he was taken aback by the jury's decision and would likely appeal.

"Clearly, in hindsight we should have, could have looked at things differently," McCormick said. "We expected that a Vermont jury would not unleash a number of this sort for behavior that took place 35 years ago."

Idiots. When you've defined yourself as a moral authority (often, the sole moral authority) you don't get to back away from the consequences of your actions because time has passed or because the consequences are severe. Perhaps they ought to look at this expression of tangible outrage by a community as a not-so-subtle signal that they have not and are not supporting the actual behaviors that community considers important, and regards as part of the church's trust.

Personally, I think bankrupting the gilded monstrosity of Catholicism is an eminently desirable goal in itself.

Einstein's Letter

An Einstein letter is going up for auction, one in which he makes his views on religion, very clear.

For example: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

And: "For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."

Read more...here

Another one bites the dust...

And so another one of my relationships ends. Further proof that I am incompatible with most human beings. So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Boy Scout Bigotry

The Boy Scouts of America continue to have the position that private bigotry and discrimination shouldn't justifiably come with any social or political costs. They further insist that by discriminating against gays and atheists and by depicting them as morally inferior, they continue to serve the public good.

If the Boy Scouts engaged in similar bigotry and discrimination against other groups like Jews, Hispanics, Catholics, or liberals, there's no way that public agencies or charitable organizations would continue to support or help them. This is because it's generally accepted that discrimination against those groups is harmful; people don't yet quite understand that the same is true about discrimination against gays and atheists.

The Boy Scouts of Religious America, promoting bigotry in a school near you.

Dumbass Floridians

Wake up Florida....here

Pray for me

Religious people say that prayers work, yet when you question them and ask why, like when they prayed for a specific something ("Father, please don't let my father die of cancer"), they say that they're prayers were not answered because it was God's will.
I point out that, if there is a god, and he knew everything in advance, what is the point in begging him to change his mind? The results of prayer are exactly that of random chance.
Look at the story of Jesus Christ, who prayed in the garden that he would be spared, yet this wonderful, forgiving god ignored him. Of course, Jesus Christ, according to the Church, is God (one of The Trinity)...so that makes it even more confusing and illogical.
Jesus Christ, or so we are told, also asked God why he had been forsaken, while he was being crucified. So, God is questioning God...and God couldn't get God to change his mind...but I digress.
The act of praying, although it has a psychological element, makes absolutely no sense. Christians cannot explain it, because it is basically impossible to explain.

I Agree with Mr. Hitchens

Christopher Hitchens

Belief in Belief

A question that interests me very much (and always has) is this: I know that I do not believe in either any god or any religion, and I can give my reasons in a manner that the other side can at least understand, but can the same be said for those who claim that they do believe? A shorter way of putting this is to ask whether our antagonists in this ancient argument truly mean what they appear to say.

The recent disclosure that Mother Teresa had for almost half a century been unable to feel the presence of Christ in the Eucharist or the ear of God listening to her prayers, is of great im­portance here. (See the recent book of her despairing letters, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light.) Not even her most fervent admirers regarded this woman in any sense as an intellectual, and she evidently struggled to combat her doubts in a highly traditional way—namely, by making ever-more extravagant and even masochistic professions of “faith.” This would be superb confirmation of Daniel Dennett’s hypothesis about "belief in belief"— the strange idea that, though faith itself may be ludicrous and incoherent, the mere assertion of it may possess some virtues of its own.

Even though I have sometimes described her as a fraud (for her collusion with rich oppressors of the poor like the Duvalier family in Haiti and for her other corrupt dealings), I would now hesitate to put Mother Teresa in the same category as a Falwell, a Haggard, a Sharpton, or a Robertson. These men have never done a day’s real work in their lives and are or were simple parasites who pinch themselves every morning at their good fortune at living the easy life of exploiting the gullible. For them, religion is nothing more than a trade, or a racket.

The same, I think, can be said of the numberless clerics convicted of child-rape (why on earth do we allow ourselves the silly euphemism of “abuse”?). Their foul crime is not one of hypocrisy. No priest who sincerely believed even for ten seconds in divine judgment could conceivably endanger his immortal soul in this way, and those in the hierarchy who helped protect such men from punishment in this world are equally and obviously guilty of a hardened and ob­scene cynicism.

But the racketeering and exploitative side of religion, as with its no-less-mark­ed tendency to generate wars, atro­cities, and repressions, isn’t the whole story. What of those who try their best to help others and lead a decent life, attributing this conduct to their belief in a Virgin, a Prophet, or to the story of Exodus, or any other such fabrication? I never cease to wonder, in dialogues with such people, whether they are really saying what they mean or meaning what they say.

To any humanist, for example, it’s perfectly obvious that the city of Cal­cutta would benefit from an influx of volunteer nurses, doctors, inoculators, sewage experts, and others, just as it would not benefit from the attentions of people who regard poverty and death as a secondhand share in the "mystery" of the Crucifixion. There are actually quite a good number of activists of the first type (I spent some time there once, watch­ing the great Brazilian photographer Sebastiao Salgado do his work for UNICEF documenting the massive campaign for vaccination against polio), but for some weird reason the only person anyone can name is a woman who spent her entire life campaigning against birth control—a stupid campaign that Bengal most definitely did not and does not need.

Is it not possible that the missionaries of "faith" regard the objects of their charity as mere raw material—human subjects for a tortured experiment in their own psyches? It seems that, the more Mother Teresa lost conviction in the teachings of her religion, the more energetically she silenced her doubts by ostentatious crusades against divorce, abortion, and contraception using "the poorest of the poor" as her backdrop and her excuse. And does this not degrade such work as she actually did? For her, the helpless beggar was just that—helpless, to be sure, yet for that reason easily available for her own exhausting propaganda. The case for assisting starving Bengalis is complete on its own terms, but most of the money raised for the "Missionaries of Charity" went—as Mother Teresa herself happily admitted—to the building of convents that were consecrated, in effect, to her own ambition and her own very extreme teaching of Catholic dogma. These preach­ings went dead against the only certain cure for poverty—the emancipation of women from the status and condition of breeding machines—that the human race has ever discovered.

In other words, "faith" is at its most toxic and dangerous point not when it is insincere and hypocritical and corrupt but when it is genuine. At that point, its energy of certainty and self-righteousness can be used, not only to reinforce the Church but also (as Mother Teresa’s continuing reputation demonstrates) to impress even the secular. The evidence now is that this is how she and her confessors squared the circle. Repress your misgivings, overcome your de­spair, re­double your efforts, and we will make you a saint and later claim that you cured the sick even after your death. It’s at this point that the cynical loops round to meet the naïve and say in effect that anything is permissible as long as it keeps the illusion alive. Again, one has to stand amazed before a clergy who can use, as a recruiting sergeant, a wretched old lady whose own faith, as they well knew, had worn to a husk.

Only God can make a tree

Someone once said that only God can make a tree. Probably because it's so hard to get the bark on.

But...what about the dog?

Getting religion...here

7th Commandment

THE SEVENTH COMMANDMENT

"Thou shalt not commit adultery" Ex. 20, 14.

The so called 'sexual' commandments had absolutely nothing to do with sexual morality. They were taboos based on the rights of property. Women in this day were owned possessions. Men could sell them or divorce them at will, and this was ok with God. God must have a penis. He was and is not an equal opportunity Supreme Being. I say we vote for a female God the next time.

Ben Stein's Intelligent Design (yes, it rhymes)

In a nutshell, this is why ID should not be considered as anything but religious...

If ID really were a scientific theory, positive evidence for it, gathered through research, would fill peer-reviewed scientific journals. This doesn't happen. It isn't that editors refuse to publish ID research. There simply isn't any ID research to publish. Its advocates bypass normal scientific due process by appealing directly to the non-scientific public and - with great shrewdness - to the government officials they elect.

Period.

Thank The Lord and Pass The Tornado

Once again, tragedy strikes and people thank the Lord (in Virginia)...

"Brenda Williams, 43, returned Tuesday to the shopping center where she was buried beneath a collapsed ceiling in a manicure shop during the storm. She was pulled to safety by a stranger, she said. “I’m not lucky, I’m blessed,” said Williams, who had a 2-inch gash stitched above her left eyebrow and stitches on her right forearm. “I’m fine. I’m here. I’m in the land of the living.”


If I believed in a god, I would wonder why he was fucking with me, not thanking him for dumping a house on me.