ChristianGovernance Report – October 18, 2010
Atheist guerilla warfare exposed
By Tim Bloedow
It has been very interesting engaging with atheists over the past couple of weeks. They came looking for us, finding our website, it seems, due to exposure by a PZ Myers, a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota. Mr. Myers is brash about his own atheism, declaring that his website is about “Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal.” If these people are his “disciples,” he, as a professor, should be thoroughly embarrassed.
One of the most evident characteristics of these atheists was their demand that you produce evidence for your views and your charges against them. There is nothing essentially wrong with this expectation, but these manipulative and dishonest people made this demand in a particular context. If you engaged them at all, you would start to learn that when you gave them evidence for your views, they would simply dismiss it, often not engaging with it at all, and because they didn’t acknowledge your defense, they would then accuse you of being irrational and pathetic for not producing any evidence for your views.
These atheists would also demand that you lay out the material backing up your position. If you told them to go and look for it themselves because you know how easy it is to find on the internet, or if you even just tell them, that if their interest is genuine, they should just keep reading your own website, you again got accused of not having a defense, of not having rational reasons to back up your claims.
On numerous occasions, I accused these atheists of engaging in guerrilla warfare, trying to wear down their enemies by sucking them into a long, drawn-out battle, demoralizing them at the same time with fraudulent accusations and sarcastic, mocking criticism. I am sure that if I bothered to look, I’d find a book somewhere called “Atheist Battle Strategies Against Christians.” The tactics used by some of them were so repetitive and robotic, as though they were brainwashed disciples of some cult leader.
Last week, I attended a local talk by a guest speaker from Creation Ministries International. In his presentation, he provided at least one quote from an influential evolutionist which revealed the evolutionist strategy in the government schools against creation as being a strategy of mocking, not hostility. They want to make belief in creation seem “silly.” Most of us will probably acknowledge that being humiliated, and made to look like a fool, is worse to our self image than facing direct hostility. The evolutionists know this, so that is a key tactic for them. It certainly came out in the hostility of these atheists commenting on our ChristianGovernance site.
We can have a good discussion about what the right way is for Christians to deal with such attacks. We know that Elijah mockingly humiliated the priests of Baal. But we also see many exhortations to speak with gentleness. At any rate, due to the evident lack of sincerity and constant mocking of these atheists, those of you reading through some of the back-and-forth will see that at times I was quite derisive and condescending in my replies. This wasn’t for the purpose of revenge, but to expose the absurdity of their logic, and the incoherence of their arguments. Even if this didn’t help them, it would hopefully help thoughtful readers see, not simply how wrong atheism is, but how truly pathetic the worldview is.
I finally got fed up with one person who was consistently manipulative when, in the midst of what I thought could finally be a reasonable conversation, he changed the terms of the discussion on me in order to protect his position and marginalize mine, not with reason, but with sleight of hand. So we deleted all his comments from our website, instead of allowing him to use ChristianGovernance as a forum for his bigoted and childish comments.
So what did this fellow, “Etch,” do?
In response to a brief comment of mine – “It’s excellent the # of Ph.D. holding scientists are on board with that 6-day creation org.” – he wrote: “I’m glad that you agree that Ph.D.s are a sign of educated authority, however the University where it was obtained is relevant (because of the existence of Diploma Mills), and the subject it was obtained in is relevant. Just because someone has a doctorate doesn’t mean they know everything, and it’s been shown that a disproportionate number of ID and creationist supporters with Ph.D.’s are Engineers, who aren’t particularly qualified for the topic, unlike Biologists, Geologists and Physicists who are. I can try to find the statistics if you like.”
So, he makes this allegation about the qualifications of creation scientists. I drop over to Creation Ministries International and look over their list of speakers and find people with credentials in a diversity of fields. So note the context: He dismisses credentialed scientists who are creationists by saying a “disproportionate number” are not qualified in the appropriate areas of study. He doesn’t use specific numbers. He doesn’t say what percentage. He insinuates that although not all these scientists have the necessary qualifications, not enough have the right qualifications to make creation science credible.
In this more general context, my intent was not to capitulate to his guerrilla warfare and do the exhaustive research myself to determine such numbers. I did, however, produce a few different areas of expertise among the CMI speakers, and I listed the biographies for two of them.
In response to that, “Etch” displays his deceit and aggressive dishonesty. He writes: “Yep. Two scientists totally disprove that clearly a disproportionate number of creationist supporters are engineers. Are you intentionally bad at reading what people write?”
Perhaps “Etch” is one of the worst fools among modern atheists. Otherwise how can one see his response as anything other than a malicious and cunning deception, and another guerrilla warfare attempt at demoralization. I didn’t bring two examples to him. I listed four different fields of expertise among the CMI speakers – horticulturalist, chemist, medicine, zoology – and provided the bios for two of them. Everything in the context of my comments, and “Etch’s” comments to which I was responding, indicated that the info I was providing was representative, not the sum total of what was available. But “Etch,” desperate to shore up his defense of Atheism, had to use deceit, mocking me for supposedly having only two examples. Even he acknowledged that he didn’t have the information at hand to back up his initial claim. He wrote, “I can try to find the statistics if you like.” But, he holds me to a higher standard that he doesn’t hold himself to, by, in effect, expecting me to have all the information at hand that I needed for a defense, and therefore he pretends to assume that I presented all my information, and mocks me for having only two names to produce.
The deceit, the dishonesty, the lies, the ignorance, the manipulation is astounding. And it’s on display for everyone to see. Yet, one of his atheist colleagues – “joe” – who’s also been active on our site comes to his defense when I post a notice saying I am taking down all of “Etch’s” comments. Instead of showing any real interest in the essence of the offence and analysing the discussion between myself and “Etch” to see what was offensive, he also pulls a guerrilla warfare stunt with his knee-jerk accusation against Christians of being embarrassed at their lack of defense. I’m not posting these pathetic comments by “joe” either. But he wrote: “It was only a matter of time before Timothy got so embarrassed that he started banning the only people making logical comments… So predictable. And these clowns wonder why nobody respects them, or takes them at all seriously. … For the record: instead of banning people you could just point out all of the places they’re wrong… oh yeah – they’re right and you’re wrong, and so you have no other option than to delete and ban. How embarrassing for you…”
And “Etch,” maintaining his arrogant, self-righteous posture, also takes the same line instead of acknowledging his manipulative, deceitful, ignorant tactics. In a post that I left up for a few hours, he wrote, “If you look at my first comment on this blog, I didn’t expect it to actually survive moderation, because censorship is the response of those who have no arguments.”
Meanwhile, we left that post up for days as well as many other posts and had some dialogue with him on some of them. But he and his atheist colleagues still fall back on their visceral hatred of Christians or Christianity and their presumptive bigotry that we are ignorant and censor competing views. You won’t receive respect or deference for acting contrary to their bigoted presumptions. They’re out to get you. You can write the atheist script after a day of discussion with them because it’s so predictable and robotic. They use aggression instead of argumentation and mockery instead of ideas. I commented to another atheist during the week that I was more scared of an atheist with a knife or a gun than an Islamic radical because some of them seem to hate Christians just as much, and there’s no evidence that they possess any intellectual or moral restraint.
“Etch” had a few other things to say, but he’ll have to move on to more interesting territory now. I told him to stick around for a few more days because I was preparing an analysis for our ChristianGovernance supporters on this matter that he might want to read before his final departure.
An important point to be made from this kind of interaction and conflict is that there is no meeting ground between God’s truth and hostile worldviews. Adherents of both talk past each other because their presuppositions and fundamental convictions of what is true and real are different. In other words, you can’t argue someone into the Kingdom of God. The best way to communicate truth to them is simply to declare it. Declare the Word of God to them. Affirm it in its truth and relevance. They don’t like it unless God is working conversion in their hearts, but it has the power of God behind it, working with it to accomplish God’s purposes. That is His promise regarding His word. Our philosophy and argumentation does not receive the same guarantee. And when we choose to use it instead of the Bible, atheists and others don’t respect the compromise either. Sometimes they see it as hypocrisy because they know better than we do what we should believe and declare. There were some provocative quotes along those lines from evolutionists in the CMI presentation I saw last week.
Don’t abandon the Word of God – and don’t let mockers and scoffers intimidate you. The Word of God is a sword. It slices and dices and penetrates – far more effectively than any knife or gun in the possession of a hostile atheist.
What i find most disheartening in this comment is that you end up giving these type of people some standing. If people such as ETCH cannot or will not be honest then call them what they are “LIARS”. Why would you waste your time with such people?
One of the reasons Christians are losing so badly in our “culture wars” is because so many Christians have so little intellectual content to their faith, and the reality is that you can’t beat something with nothing, so atheists look more credible and intelligent than Christians in the light of Christians having nothing to offer in response. It’s important for Christians to engage with nonchristians at times to defend the faith and to show other how to do it. If you read the back-and-forth comments before they were taken down, you would have seen the clarity of the charges made against “Etch.”
Lazarus,
Tim’s not wasting time. He’s, by the grace and plan of God, exposing them and the futility of their thinking. That’s the apologetical task.
Haha I should send this to PZ. He’ll get a kick out of the declaring part.
Gabriel,
You mock? So are you guilty of the things you say you were accused of or are you just reacting because you feel slighted? By the way, I never said YOU were a bigot, you may wish to read that again. Here is the link to make it easier, https://christiangovernance.ca/chrgov-is-unique/comment-page-1#comment-1727
Jesus walked on water.
The graves opened and dead people walked around Jerusalem.
Lazarus was raised from the dead.
Blind people healed with spit.
Sickness caused by demons.
A virgin made pregnant by a god
Water changed into wine
Thousands fed with a few loaves and fishes
Sorry, I’m not that gullible.
Whining about being asked for evidence… oh, that’s rich.
So you’re asked for evidence. So what? How is that “guerilla warfare”?
The fact that they keep asking for it?
Why not? I’ve seen bugger-all evidence for your beliefs on this site so far…
As for evidence for a non-belief in “god”:
http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/central.html
Your views are so fundamentally un-Canadian that maybe you should consider moving to some backwood area of Kentucky. Canadians do not want a Theocracy, and that is precisely what you are calling for. “Christian” governance? I see no difference between that and the Taliban, or the mullahs in Iran.
Canada: love it or leave it. Please leave us alone and stop trying desperately to destroy our country.
I’ve been waiting six decades for someone to produce some evidence for any god, or specifically for the god they claim exists. I am still waiting.
In the end, it boils down to one argument, and one only: force and violence. If you do not believe in my god, you must die. I will take over the government, and force you to believe otherwise you lose your civil rights. I will force you to believe as a little child, and if you then do not believe I will kill you as an apostate.
The argument never varies, only the degree of force. The reason why we are free not to believe in god today is because thinkers argued against this and people fought for freedom, education, science and a secular society.
What you overlook (and what I find that most creationists overlook about evolution) is that it isn’t hypothetical, but a real effect that thousands of scientists use to make solid predictions every working day. It’s not a belief system; it’s a tool. It’s always possible to find PhDs who hold crackpot notions – science is filled with people who offer alternate explanations for everything. Your precious four scientists are what’s known to us as “outliers”, data points that by sheer random chance fall far outside the mainstream. If evolution didn’t work, those thousands of scientists would be embarrassed daily, and the fact is that they’re not. Their experiments would go awry, their data incompatible with their predictions. In point of fact, that doesn’t happen.
Creationism, by contrast, has no predictive value, and is therefore worthless to anyone but religionists. Evolutionary processes long ago proved to be highly predictive, and are therefore accepted by all reasonable scientists today, because they work. Science focuses not on ideology or comfort, but on what works to unearth truth. Religion focuses on blind faith, which is fine if you want to remain blind. Religionists will seriously maintain that the earth must be flat because nothing in a holy book says it’s round. Landlubbers and those who never have to do any surveying may accept that, but sailors and surveys certainly can’t. Belief that conflicts with reality is valueless. Creationism contradicts reality. It’s not that creationism and evolution are dueling belief systems. They’re not. They are, respectively, myth and highly predictive scientific tool. There is no creationist scientific literature worthy of the name, and for good reason. It doesn’t work, and it doesn’t predict.
Ian and RRC,
It looks like they’re back. Or another batch anyway. I hope they can read because I think we’ve addressed all they’re points last week in responses to others.
Man, you guys are gullible beyond comprehension. You chug back humanist association talking points like drunken sailors on steroids. You really ought to do your own reading of original sources and learn to think for yourselves.
I am mortified, ashamed and embarrassed that you idiots are apparently, canadians.
Sorry, my irony meter just detonated…
Site Editor: ‘You really ought to do your own reading of original sources and learn to think for yourselves.’ – that’s hilarious, coming from a Christian! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
Keep it up, I haven’t laughed so much in ages. What a nutjob!
It’s clear that you’re never going to see eye-to-eye with the atheists. That’s fine. But I do have a question about one of the claims on your previous post:
Judeo-Christian political theory is unique in its hostility to totalitarianism. Christian governance, and Christian governance alone, is anti-tyrannical.
It seems to me that there’s plenty of historical evidence to the contrary. Could you give an argument in support of this claim?
Site Editor “One of the reasons Christians are losing so badly in our “culture wars” is because so many Christians have so little intellectual content to their faith”.
That’s true. I was hoping you, Site Editor, had a bit more under the hood. Unfortunately your posts of October 21 above do not hit the heights of intellectual discussion. Your replies are not reasoned, merely political. Have you, yourself, studied the techniques of logical discourse?
Calling names does not help to show that someone’s assertions are wrong.
Simply stating their assertions are wrong is not a logical rebuttal.
If you think you have addressed points previously then how about a link to where those points were raised and addressed?
Show some intellect and ethics, make reasoned arguments!
As an atheist, I must state that the mocking attitude displayed by some of your commenters is not a universal character trait, and certainly you have no need to fear atheists with guns or knives (well, no more than any other person with a gun or knife). Actually, most atheists look at the religious-based terrorism in the middle east, and the promotion of gun rights by the religious right in the US, as scarier than the threat of violence posed by any atheistic philosophy.
That said, your Site Editor makes a valid point in that you can’t beat something with nothing. Atheists are very diverse, of course, but the ones commenting on your site are probably addressing the points where – to atheists – religion makes irrational claims about nature. The creation of the world in six days, the world-wide flood, stopping the sun in the sky, etc. To your skeptical commenters, belief in such things is completely irrational, and in some ways it is scary that so many people can hold such beliefs – if they reject science in these areas, then what do the think about global warming, or environmental degradation, or energy issues…or any other issues where we depend on modern science to identify problems and provide potential solutions? It certainly frightens me that so many voters and politicians appear to have rejected modern science in favor of the writings in ancient religious texts.
Presumably motivated to defend the faith, a number of organizations have emerged in the past decades to counter the scientific knowledge we have developed about the world with an alternate view of reality, commonly known as “creation science”. Certainly some of the proponents of creation science have real educations in the relevant fields, but it is their faith that drives them rather than a curiosity about nature, and their work is a form of apologetics rather than real science. They start with the bible as the source of truth, the ultimate answer, then try and coerce the facts of nature into a form from which they can justify the pre-determined answer. The language can be scientific, and presented in a compelling form, but it is not science.
People who believe in a literal interpretation of the bible, but are not themselves scientists, are often taken in by the literature of creation science, or intelligent design (an old-earth offspring of creation science) because it validates their faith in the biblical account of creation. The real world is simply not that way, however. If you walk outside on a clear night in the fall, and look up at the faintly glowing patch of light that is the Andromeda galaxy, the light entering your eyes travelled two million years to reach you. If you stoop over and pick up a fossil, you will be holding the remains of an animal that lived millions of years ago – depending on where you are, it might be hundreds of millions of years ago. To believe otherwise is to throw away all that we have learned since the enlightenment, and, sadly, to deny yourself the feeling of awe that comes from contemplating the immensity of the universe or the immensity of time that passed since that small creature in your hand was alive and thriving in it’s world.
There is no atheist “agenda”, even though it might seem that way. There are extreme atheists and apathetic atheists. But those who are moved to look at blogs such as this one are so moved because they have a strong opinion about the subject, and you can expect aggressive comments. You have the right to moderate and remove comments as you wish, of course. Just don’t generalize from the sample you receive on your blog to the community at large – this is not a representative sample.
You gotta love the irony of this little whine. Oh noes, they asked for evidence!
Regarding wanting to make creationism look silly : Does one honestly think it needs any help? Ask any Jew about creationism interpretation of the Old Testament, and they’ll stare and laugh. The McCready brand of creationism is not only completely silly but also a recent invention, much like Left Behind – style Rapture and Mormonism.
Regarding the way to respond to atheists : Spouting bible verses really doesn’t work. Christians would no accept someone quoting the Quran to them as a valid argument, so why should someone else have a different reaction to a Christian’s particular ancient book? If Christians had good arguments to back up their claims (And I’m talking the kind you see here, not the more respectable folks that don’t bother with weirdness.) then why would they be hesitant to use them? Does that not simply betray a lack of answer? Firing back that the person asking it is rude does not actually answer it.
Regarding “Atheist Battle Strategies Against Christians.” – there’s actually no really special Christian things one needs to know – most religions are pretty similar in how they work so generic atheist criticism is generally enough to put cracks in that wall of confidence that’s built up (as demonstrated here). There’s quite a bit of atheism-related literature going back a long way, and one should not dismiss deist literature, as it is often far more similar to modern atheism than to any religion.
What’s unclear to me after reading this – the guy said “I can try to find the statistics if you like.”. Have you asked him to produce/link to the statistics?
hmm, seems like no one associated with this site can actually form an argument.
I’m sure the cognitive dissonance will kick in for the people on this site too. Reality has a tenancy to deconvert or force one deeper into delusion. I’ll give you guys enough credit that you’ll do the former and not the latter. It was sure liberating for me.
SiteEditor: can’t you understand that we see no substance? And you come back with this total absence of substance – just more whining. We are desparate for some substance! Many of us left your particular religion precisely because we found no evidence for or substance to it.
And you accuse us of gullibility?
Don’t be so patronising (” I hope they can read”): did you know that empirically intelligence and atheism are correlated?
Give us some substance! We aren’t your sheeple here. We are calling you on your claims because you make them in the public domain.
Produce your god or be quiet.
Yes. Really. Murderous Elijah is a model for ChristianGovernance to follow? Plan to round up atheists and have them slaughtered like the prophets of Baal in 1 Kings 18:40?
While I find much in the Bible a stretch, such as Elijah spinning off in a whirlwind to heaven, escorted by a chariot of fire, the aforementioned slaughter is an apt metaphor for the deletion of ALL Etch’s comments. You yourself mentioned that you were “in the midst of what [you] thought could finally be a reasonable conversation,” so not all of what Etch wrote could have been “bigoted and childish.” But then, I’ll never know as Etch’s comments were slaughtered, so to speak. Or perhaps the better NT word would be purified, I suppose.
As an aside, evolution does not equal atheism. It is quite possible to accept things like evolution and reject geocentrism and be a theist, even a Christian. However, rejecting evolution is about as rational as accepting geocentrism. One may very well be able to find even physicists who embrace geocentrism but that doesn’t make geocentrism true. (I once met a physicist who was convinced that UFO’s visited him. Sweet man but quite senile.) Given what is at stake for the religious scientist, both in terms of his idea of soul and identity and in terms of his employment, it isn’t surprising that one can find more than a few that flounder and flipflop as much as William Dembski (see http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2010/10/dembski-coming.html) While creationists may feel comfortable using logical fallacies such as “appeal to authority,” (after all, the only leg creationism has to stand on is the appeal to the authority of the Bible) in other circles we tend to call out such strategies as being illogical and damaging to ones argument.
Finding PhDs who support creationism won’t make it anymore true than finding PhDs who support geocentrism. Nor does finding PhDs who support evolution make it true. Theories of evolution are accepted because they work as science. (I feel compelled to point out that evolution is the observation and natural selection is a theory explaining the observation whereas creationism ignores the observation and simply says that God did it. But this gets lost on creationists for some reason.)
Since you sound so defensive and apologetic for your religion, allow me to say that no one wants to persecute you (at least not really, as far as I can see), all we atheists want is for the holier-than-thou to mind their own business. If, on the other hand, you are so arrogant or uneducated as to think that disagreement is persecution, well, there’s nothing we can say to you. So, let’s examine this holier-than-thou thing.
We, as a humanists want to have your religious leaders make public health pronouncements based on proven, common sense practices and not ideology. To not orchestrate campaigns which lower science standards because they conflict with your ideologies, especially at a time when we need them most. It does not make any of us better when the child mortality rate in a country like the United States ranks at number 33, right between New Caledonia and Croatia, when it used to be the one of the lowest in the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate).
To not automatically overreact with calls for blasphemy or heresy laws when being criticized. People poke fun at other people, their ideas and their totems. People write fiction based on almost anything. People criticize and ridicule almost every topic imaginable. That’s the point of free speech. The religious do not have any special right to circumvent that and your psyches are no more fragile than the next person’s.
To not set up litmus tests for ideology, such as laws mandating that atheists may not run for elected office. To not allow state sponsored religions (I know you must realize that it protects you more than me, or are you really looking forward to bringing something like the internecine fighting in Northern Ireland to the Northern Hemisphere?).
To not deny basic human rights to anyone based on some arbitrary criteria. Just because you believe something does not mean you have the right to expect that everyone else has to believe in the same thing or be coerced into a behaviour which is in keeping with your belief. No, can’t have. Your rights end when they infringe on ours.
To not imprison people with religious chains. Teach people to stand on their own two feet, not to turn to some god as a crutch. That crutch is superficial and does nothing to really make a person whole, healthy or sane. What it does do is fill the collection plate at the expense of the credulous.
To not influence people to risk their lives based on some half baked promise of eternal life. Life is here and now, there is no extra at the end. That makes people’s lives very precious. That is the basis for good morality and the Golden Rule. True “Good” does not come because a sky-cop is watching you and taking notes. Good behaviour is not the same thing as not getting caught. If you can’t be good without good coming from some god, then you’re actually a pretty dangerous individual.
Luckily for all of us (including the health and welfare of your children and grandchildren) the wider audience sees religion and its ideas waning more and faster. 500 years ago we may have been put to death, 200 years ago we may have been jailed, 50 years ago we may have been shunned, today we are an active, vocal and growing group and we can say that the end to superstition and magic is in sight. Tomorrow, I can’t wait to see tomorrow.
Note: to those who feel like they are being persecuted here, no one is saying you can’t be religious or can’t believe in your god of choice. Just as much as we don’t want to do what you want, I understand you don’t want to do what we want. It is simply that this is not the 16th century anymore and your religions are not magically born into privilege.
There is only one place where religious rights end, and that is when religious ideology affects the rights of another human being. For example, parents who do not “believe” in medicine. The state must intervene when the proven efficacy of medicine can prevent harm to their children. They have the right to kill themselves off if they wish, but absolutely no right to kill off their children.
Some Hints for what evidence should be:
Allegations are not evidence.
Hearsay is not evidence.
Unsubstantiated claims are not evidence.
…Personal revelation is not evidence.
Anecdotes are not evidence.
Rumors are not evidence.
Wild speculation is not evidence.
Wishful thinking is not evidence.
Illogical conclusions are not evidence.
Disproved statements are not evidence.
Logical fallacies are not evidence.
Poorly designed/executed experiments are not evidence.
Experiments with inconclusive results are not evidence.
Experiments that are not and cannot be duplicated by others are not evidence.
Dreams are not evidence.
Hallucinations/delusions are not evidence.
Experiments whose methodology is not open for scrutiny are not evidence.
Data that requires a certain belief is not evidence.
Information that is only knowable by a privileged few is not evidence.
Information that cannot be falsified is not evidence.
Information that cannot be verified is not evidence.
Information that is ambiguous is not evidence.
“Man, you guys are gullible beyond comprehension. You chug back humanist association talking points like drunken sailors on steroids. You really ought to do your own reading of original sources and learn to think for yourselves.”
“”Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?”
-Matthew 7:3
We’re the gullible ones because we’re not believing the unsupported claims of ancient texts, and instead accept the evidence for scientific theories which, as has been stated multiple times, have vast amounts of supporting evidence? Where exactly have you provided any evidence for your claims? I’ve seen none on this site, or anywhere else.
What you’re doing here is trying to replace the best parts of a country which I am happy to live in with a theocracy. As much fun as it may sound to you to be able to keep slaves, kill homosexuals and nonbelievers, oppress women and be under the iron fist of a tyrannical sky-daddy who we have absolutely no reason to believe exists, I’m quite certain that your view is not one shared by any significant number of Canadians. It’s utterly deplorable. To quote some guy on the internet, ” We don’t capitulate to that kind of bigotry over here.”
You xtians always get very cranky when asked to provide some proof as backup to your preposterous mythology. Then you publish whiny “essays” like this one without ever responding to the requests for proof.
Face it : there is no proof. Your god is a fairy story, and a nasty, evil one at that.
It is common that you be asked to substantiate your claims, when they sound incredible. That you see as an affront should tell you that you need to pay attention to what PZ is saying.
Just show it!
If it is simple, then you could it easier than ranting this way
The Site Editor doesn’t understand that for all his fervor for his ideas he cannot get all the religious people to agree with him on everything he says. Atheists are all in agreement – there are no gods. Christians, to take an example, fervently disagree with each other about their god and what he does or doesn’t say, as to whether there is evolution or creationism, whether to hate gays or not, whether to stone people to death – the list goes on and on and on.
The reason is simply that there is no evidence to back any of it up. Just as the Site Editor prevaricates and says “look it up on the internet”.
We HAVE – there’s nothing there but a bunch of money grabbing thieves extracting money from the gullible in the name of “religion” by spreading fear and lies.
You might want to note that historically atheist and heretics were tortured and killed for their heresy. People like John Calvin, Martin Luther and practically every Pope has called for the torture and death of heretics/atheists. This is because they rejected Christianity.
In terms of history, it is only very recent that atheists have been able to speak freely without fear of death or harassment. In view of this you would be wise to expect atheists to no longer be content remaining silent and keeping their thoughts to themselves for fear of upsetting a god believer.
I’m no expert on Canadian governance, but in America we have a constitutional right to speak out minds. Increasingly American atheists are no longer content to sit at the back of the bus, quietly.
If we were African Americans I wonder if you would be portraying us as “uppity” for speaking our minds.
I am an atheist/anti-theist because I did my own research. What research did i do? I read the bible.
You should be ashamed, Tim. I am certainly ashamed for you.
I found those “Atheist Battle Strategies Against Christians” handbooks you were talking about.
Google ‘science books‘. There are millions of them.
Joe Blow said, “Jesus walked on water.
The graves opened and dead people walked around Jerusalem.
Lazarus was raised from the dead.
Blind people healed with spit.
Sickness caused by demons.
A virgin made pregnant by a god
Water changed into wine
Thousands fed with a few loaves and fishes
Sorry, I’m not that gullible.
Joe, yes you are!
Tim, we could put all this to rest if you will simply provide conclusive evidence of your deity. I mean compelling evidence not double speak or word games. Evidence that could be tested so we’d know we were not being hoodwinked. Do that and we’ll all become believers, heck I’ll even indulge in sacrificing a goat and offer a burnt offering upon an alter to please god with you if you can prove god exists. Until you can produce that you would do well to remember the burden of proof is on you and not those who reject ancient superstition and mythology.
The Angry Atheist
The angry atheist, doth sputter with spite
As he spouts his drivel, with all of his might
Oh how he thinks, that he is so coy
By avoiding the truth, like an unwanted toy
Don’t play with that thing, it’ll come back to bite
As it shows that their rhetoric, is nothing but spite
So why do they hate, with such vehement zeal
While their blathering on, with their unsupportable spiel
No rhyme and no reason, for so strong of a hate
Making it up on the go, is their most common trait
One of the commenters above made the very good point that we atheists don’t really have this visceral hatred of Christians and Christianity that you imagine, provided you do not interfere in the lives of others.
However, you want Christian GOVERNANCE, and as such, I do not think it unreasonable that it is you who are called upon for evidence to back up claims which you are using as justification to interfere in others lives.
Oh, and If you read the back-and-forth comments before they were taken down, you would have seen the clarity of the charges made against “Etch.”
“If only you’d seen how awesome we were, before being forced to remove such an obvious win from our own site!”
I guess I will put up a little challenge here. I am willing to debate any person of your choosing on here on the topic evolution. If you are willing to accept the challenge please send me an email and we will set it up. The only condition I require is that, the debate be posted on a main section of the site, and stay up for a period of six months. All other rules of the debate can be decided before we start. All conditions will be posted on the section so everyone knows the rules.
Are you willing to accept?
Andy, I’ll give you a little hint, since you guys don’t read well or are too lazy to read the site and just want to see yourselves in print. We make it clear on our site that the primary aspect of Christian governance is self-governance. It’s the presumptive state-ism or socialism of atheists that has them thinking that governance must first be – or only be – a political issue. Because civil government or the state is the central organizing principle – or god – of the humanist/atheist, everything becomes a political issue (that’s why state recognition of same-sex “marriage” is so important to state-ist homosexuals). But to Biblical Christians, civil government is only one of several governmental structures and plays an important but not central role in our worldview and concept of social order. Keep reading, reading, reading, reading. It’s good for you. Reading can expand your mind, broaden your horizons and introduce you to truth. Reading is wonderful because God gave us eyes and minds and hearts to process and appreciate knowledge and truth. It’s good stuff. Tell all your friends too.
Haha sorry Christian Governance, I might have invited the horde by emailed this piece to PZ and getting him to write about it….
Cranky atheist out.
Tim,
No one cares if you want to go into your closet and pray…um…govern yourself. What we care about is your desire to impose any of your myth- and dogma-inspired “governance” on the rest of us. If you don’t want to have an abortion or marry someone of the same sex, or make believe that the Earth was created or that life didn’t evolve, fine. If you want to cheer on climate change, that’s up to you. But we know that’s not all. You want to get rid of human rights protection. You want to abolish secular public education. You want to see the passage of legislation that mirrors your own small, warped, religious ideology. This we will stand against.
The bottom line about all three moronic faiths of Abraham are that all these deluded masses believe they want to spend eternity in the loving embrace of a self-confessed, mass-murdering, maniac.
Unfortunately, for these deluded and huddling masses, ignorance isn’t always bliss and wisdom isn’t always folly. Quite the contrary actually.
Religion be gone!
We can read the bible to understand what christian rule would be like. In Deuteronomy 20:10-17, God commanded the Israelites to enslave the cities which made peace with them, kill all male inhabitants of cities who are not in their “inheritance” (who had the sense to defend themselves from invasion) and to completely wipe out all the inhabitants of the cities in their inheritance. In one fell swoop this God commanded enslavement, murder, probably rape (“the women … you shall take as booty for yourself; and you shall enjoy the spoil of your enemy”) and pillage.
In Samuel 15:1-3 “Now go and smite Am’alek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”
In II Samuel 24:15-16 God caused David to call a census on the people of Palestine. And after that God punishes the people, by killing 70,000 of them….
This goes on and on to the point where God directly kills millions.
Christianity does not do better. The Crusades killed an estimated nine million people. The medieval Inquisition caused the death of more than one million people. The witch-hunts which terrorized Europe for three centuries killed as many as two million people. The Spanish Inquisition killed more than thirty thousand people. The wars between the Catholics and the Protestants in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries killed more than fourteen million people.
I don’t want the Christian religion in control of the state, history shows that such religions states kill millions.
“Weak atheists” see that there has never been any solid evidence for deities, only coincidence, assumption of agency, and special pleading; therefore it’s extremely unlikely that there are deities. “Strong atheists” see that there has never been any evidence for deities, only thousands of years of assumption of agency, coincidence, special pleading, and scamming the gullible for money and power; therefore until they see some evidence that there are deities, they conclude that there are none. It’s still not a matter of faith any more than my faith that there are no fairies or unicorns despite all the pretty illustrated tales about them. If you want to believe in an omnipotent, invisible sky fairy, it’s up to you to provide the evidence for it.
SiteEditor
Your latest post does not seem to make any sense to me. What you seem to be saying is that atheists should not be worried by your efforts because you are simply interested in self-government. If this is true, why would you need to fight for this right?
For example:
If you are interested in nothing more than self-government AND this is only one of your governmental structures THEN why would you need to fight for ‘christian governance’ when you should already be able to self-govern your own lives?
If you are seeking to make changes to laws or governing structures so that they reflect your particular beliefs then this is far removed from self-government and goes against the very rights that protect your particular form of religion from everyone else forcing their ideals and opinions upon you.
I will not fight your right to practice your religion as you so chose, I will however be rightly offended if you try to force ME to practice your religion or any ideals it supports as YOU so chose.
Your callousness towards the equal rights of homosexuals in your above comment does not bode well for the likelihood that you will simply respect every other person’s beliefs as they must supposedly do for you. The whole point of equal rights for all (including you) is that any one group or person will not be discriminated against by the others. Just because you may believe homosexuality is a sin cannot and should not effect the rights of homosexuals especially when they are not effecting you. If this were the case then my belief that religion of all kinds is both fundamentally damaging to human society and absurd could be used to alter your rights and I’m sure you would rightly take offense at this. Please kindly refrain from assuming your ideals trump everyone else’s.
Also: It’s not nice to insult people’s intelligence. I’m not insulting yours, I just don’t agree with you.
I love Canada. I’ve lived here all my life and I believe it is the best country in the world. I take pride that my country is multicultural, that we accept people, no matter what thier beliefs. However, there is a line. You may have your own beliefs, but the very nanosecond you try to force those beliefs onto others, then I take your opinion as pure garbage, your arguments as worthless. Freedom of speech includes the freedom to lie. If I were to say to you “You should give me all your money, I will invest it and by the time you retire I’ll make you a millionair.” Would you give me any of your money? No? why not? becuase it’s just a claim. I have not shown you that I’ve done this before and PROVEN that I will do what I say. This is how I treat not only religion but everything in life. It is just logical. So when I hear “repent your sins or go to hell” and I say, “prove it?” and am given no evidence, why would I believe? Why would I even waste my time considering?
Ibis, I’m shocked that you would promote atheist theocracy so publicly. You condemn me for opposing “secular publich education.” That means you support the right of the state to take money from me to pay for your kid’s education. Education is much more important to civilization than sex – well at least as important. Yet you oppose laws against sexual license, while supporting laws that coercively take one person’s money to pay for other people’s schooling at the state school. That kind of totalitarian brutality is terrifying.
Site editor said “You condemn me for opposing “secular publich education.” That means you support the right of the state to take money from me to pay for your kid’s education. Education is much more important to civilization than sex – well at least as important. Yet you oppose laws against sexual license, while supporting laws that coercively take one person’s money to pay for other people’s schooling at the state school. That kind of totalitarian brutality is terrifying.”.
Everyone has money taken from them to support things they don’t like. I paid thousands of dollars in property tax every year to support religious schools so stop pretending you’re being singled out for abuse. If everyone could refuse to pay taxes for things they don’t support our entire society would collapse. You are free to educate your child however you want so spare us the hyperbole.