Dangerous Talk is an atheist/progressive daily blog discussing the three most dangerous topics of polite conversation: Religion, Politics, and Sex. Our goal is to fight back against the Religious Right and push for a more free and rational society.

While this blog is primarily about atheism and our target audience is intended to be atheists, we of course welcome the opinions of religious people (particularly Christians). Dangerous Talk is different than many other atheist blogs in that our emphasis is not as much on news of interest to atheists, but rather on philosophical issues and arguments. As such, feel free to search the categories in the sidebar for past articles which may be of interest.

The host of Dangerous Talk, Staks Rosch, has also appeared as a panelist on Pennsylvania Television’s CN8 on It’s Your Call with Lynn Doyle to argue against Intelligent Design in the classroom.

Filed under: Uncategorized | No Comments »

Apparently, we are all evil sinners who deserve to be tortured for all eternity. According to Christianity, humans aren’t perfect, we are wretched creatures filled with sin. But not to worry, because Jesus can fix us. Oddly enough, I don’t feel broken. In fact, I don’t need fixing and that means that I don’t need Jesus or Christianity.

This really isn’t about Christianity, but rather it is about most religions which create a problem which only they can solve for you. Christianity is just the most blatant example of this.

It’s a con game. The way it works is that religion spends a great deal of time telling you that you are broken and then continuing to push the idea that you are broken and that you need something. Christians call this a “hole in your heart.” Then they present to you a way to fix the problem that only they can provide. Oddly enough, all religions can fix the problem that any religion creates. This is why religions often spend time tweaking the solution so that only their solution will fix the problem. Christians often say that other religions try to get you closer to God, but with Christianity, God comes to us as long as you worship Jesus to get closer to God.

The way I see it is that we are who we are. We don’t have a hole in our heart, we are not broken, and we don’t need fixing. We should work to be better people here on Earth, but that doesn’t require anything special. We aren’t perfect, but why should we be perfect? What does perfect even mean in relation to human beings?

If there is anything broken about us humans it is because religion broke us and is trying to blame it on us instead of taking responsibility for what they have done and what they continue to do.

Related articles

• Refuting ‘Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus’ video (examiner.com)
• Can You Follow Jesus without Religion? (godlessgirl.com)
• Can you separate Christian religion from Jesus? This video has the answer… (pakos.me)

Filed under: Alternative Worldview, Judge God, Religious Manipulation | No Comments »

I rarely ever say anything negative about other atheists. The way I see it is that we are all in this fight together and we each have our own approaches to the problem. With that said, Alain de Botton’s “Atheism 2.0” is stupid.

Alain de Botton is basically the British equivalent to Greg Epstein, but worse. Greg Epstein is the Humanist Chaplin at Harvard University and for the most part I don’t have much of a problem with his approach. I don’t like that he is trying to make Humanism more like the traditional theistic religions except without the God, but that’s his thing. But it seems that de Botton takes it much further and the fact that he confuses atheism with humanism makes it even worse.

Atheism is just a lack of belief in deities. It is not in and of itself a system of belief. Not all atheists are rational, nor do all atheists value rationality, reason, and science. These are Humanist values. While all Humanists are atheists and most atheists are Humanists, not all atheists are actually Humanists. When de Botton labeled his ultra-religious Humanism as “Atheism 2.0” he is confusing the already confused theists.

Take for example, the recent Huffington Post article, “Atheist Temple: Nonbelievers To Get Place Of ‘Worship’ In UK.” The fact is that Humanists already have meeting places so de Botton isn’t doing anything new really. There are Ethical Humanist Societies all over America and much of Europe too. But by labeling it as an “Atheist Temple” de Botton gets people’s attention. Plus, it seems like de Botton’s idea of an “Atheist Temple” would even make most Humanists cringe.

Again, while I disagree with Alain de Botton’s “Atheism 2.0,” I would support his efforts in that I think we need to take multiple approaches to the problem of religion. However, I don’t like his terminology which I think is confusing at best. For more on “Atheism 2.0,” check out de Botton’s TED Talk.

Related articles

• Atheism 2.0: Alain de Botton on TED.com (ted.com)
• Against Atheism 2.0 (resnikoff.wordpress.com)
• Do we need an atheist religion? (whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com)

Filed under: Alternative Worldview, atheism, Atheism NOT Religion, Church, culture war, humanism, Religion | 1 Comment »

The state of the union is fucked up. It is fucked up because we have politicians who are bought and sold by corporate lobbyists and who more often than not try to appease religious zealots rather than scientifically minded constituents.

Our country and our world will not get better until we take the money out of politics and our politicians start listening to scientifically minded people. When all four of the remaining Republican candidates for President of the United States don’t accept the science of evolution and global climate change and the current Democratic President seeking re-election doesn’t care to support the teaching of evolution in schools even from his bully pulpit, we have a problem. When the current President doesn’t act to prevent and reverse global climate change with anything more than his bully pulpit, we are in real trouble.

For decades now, Presidents have been talking about alternative energy during their State of the Union addresses, but when are they going to act in a serious way about this. Where are the wind mill construction projects? When will there be solar energy panels on every home? Will we ever have mainstream cars that don’t run on gasoline?

The state of our union is fucked up when school children can go to prison for stealing pencils, but Wall Street executives get billion dollar bonuses for stealing from the American people and clasping the economy not just in America, but all over the world. If there is going to be a “zero tolerance” policy, it ought to be on Wall Street, not Sesame Street.

Of course there are many more examples to show that the state of our union is fucked up, but the real issue is what we are going to do about it? We need to hold our vote hostage and demand that our politicians not just support taking money out of politics, but actively push for it. We need to occupy our congressional representatives in the House and Senate by writing letters to them at their homes rather than their offices. And we need to question our elected officials at townhall meetings the way Jacob Kramer did. Here is the video:

Filed under: anti-intellectualism, church/state, culture war, Current Events, Obama, People of Reason, Political Activism, Politics | 1 Comment »

The universe is a wondrous place filled with beauty and mystery. One thing that really ticks me off is when religious believers ascribe the wonders of the universe to their deity of choice. The universe is not “God’s handiwork!”

It was Immanuel Kant who is known for verbalizing the fact that our senses are filtered through our brains. What we find beautiful, other creatures may not. In other words, beauty really is in the eye of the beholder… literally.

When we see something like a beautiful sunset or the Aurora Borealis (Northern Lights), it is our brain which translates what we see into beautiful colors. Other animals may not find the same things as beautiful as we do. They may find other things beautiful that we do not.

The universe is what it is and we are here to observe it. Science allows us to understand the universe, but it does not take the beauty out of it. We don’t need imaginary deities to take credit for the universe.

Filed under: anti-intellectualism, Argument by Design, Glory to God, science | No Comments »

One of the most popular things Christians ask me is, “What if you are wrong?” Aside from the obvious attempt at a Pascal’s Wager, this question tries to force the non-believer to consider the possibility that we might be tortured for all eternity simply because of our lack of belief.

It’s true, if atheists are wrong and Christianity is correct, then atheists will be tortured for all eternity simply because of our lack of belief. This is a possibility. It just isn’t probable. While we are talking about improbable possibilities, what if the Christian is wrong is Islam is the correct answer? What if the Mormons are correct? How about if the ancient Greeks or Romans were correct? There are a lot of possibilities out there all equally as improbable as Christianity.

So sure, I could be wrong and so could the average Christian. Anything is possible, but the real question is not what is possible, but rather what is probable. Atheism is probable because it simply demands that theists (whether Christian or not) supply evidence for their claims. The claims of atheists are simply that we lack a belief in deities. This is usually the case because no credible evidence has been presented for such beliefs. In the absence of such credible evidence, it is probable that no such god exists.

I am willing to admit that I could be wrong and that a god does in fact exist. All a theist has to do is to present credible evidence for their belief. But I think it is only fair that theists admit that they could be wrong and that god might not exist. Theists should reconsider why they believe what they believe and consider whether or not there are more probable explanations for those reason.

Is it more likely that they heard the voice of God giving them sage advice or that they were having an internal dialog with themselves and gave themselves that sage advice? Is it more likely that the football player won the big game because God had a plan for him or that he and his team practiced a lot and had more skill than their opponents? Sure, I could be wrong about the whole God thing, but so could you the Christian!

Related articles

• Why Are Theists Angry? (dangeroustalk.net)
• Formal debates are a win for atheists (examiner.com)
• ‘Why Would You Risk Your Soul?’ (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: Alternative Worldview, Belief, Certainty, conversation, Religion | 5 Comments »

Some Christian thought they were doing God’s work by posting a Twitter message to atheists the other day. This Christian asked, “Why would you risk your soul? #atheism” I would like to answer this question.

I responded to the Christian asking why he or she would risk their Thetans by rejecting L. Ron Hubbard? My point is that they don’t believe Thetans exist (I don’t either btw) and that is why they don’t consider it a risk to not believe in Thetans. I don’t believe souls exist and that is why rejecting Christianity in favor of reality is doesn’t actually rick my soul.

In fact, I am so not worried about my soul being risked that I will gladly sell it to you along with all my Thetans to any Christian and Scientologist willing to make me a decent amount of money in reality.

The question itself however, is just a watered down version of Pascal’s Wager. To really protect you soul, you should believe in every religion. Protect your Thetan too with this once in an afterlife time offer. How much would you expect to pay for this protection? You get protection for your soul from every religion’s version of the devil and Hell, plus protection for your Thetans from the Evil Galactic Overlord, Xenu. Ten Million Dollars, you say? Well, it is certainly worth every penny of that. How about one million dollars? What a bargain. Slash that, for this one reality only event, I’ll give you all that protection for free!

What’s that, you will get eternal protection for your soul from every religion’s threat of eternal torment, plus eternal protection for your Thetans from the Evil Galactic Overlord Xenu, and a more enjoyable reality all for free? How do you sign up? It’s easily, use reason and skepticism and become an atheist.

No more risks to your immortal soul for working on the Sabbath. No more risks to your immortal soul for having fun in bed. No more risks to your Thetans for taking anti-depressants. You can live the good life by being moral for its own sake and embracing the real world. Become an atheist today!

Order within the next ten minutes and you will get a free sense of wonder and curiosity about the universe and everything. Hurry, supplies are limited.

Filed under: anti-intellectualism, atheism, hell, Religion, scientology, Soul, twitter | No Comments »

Yesterday as you know doubt are aware, much of the internet either completely went “black” or put up information about stopping SOPA & PIPA, two bills which are currently being pushed in the House and the Senate that would limit the internet and effectively censor information.

Free Speech is kinda my thing. In 2004 and 2005, I personally went down to DC and lobbied several Senators on behalf of myself, against the Broadcast Decency Act. The bill passed both times with 99 Senators supporting it. The first time however, then-President Bush forgot to sign it. But he did sign it into law in 2005. That bill came in the aftermath of Janet Jackson’s half-second “wardrobe malfunction” and raised the fines of broadcasters who air “indecency” to absurd levels. This would shut down small radio stations if they got fined. But worse, the law created an atmosphere of fear and over censorship by station owners.

So yesterday, Dangerous Talk was quick to join the black-out strike against SOPA & PIPA and any other pieces of legislation that would or could censor the internet in any way. I was disappointed however, that many other atheist websites did not feel so moved to support the strike.

Atheists depend on the internet for many reasons. For one thing, it has become a place where we can go and be open about our lack of belief. It is also a place we can go to find other atheists, freethinkers, and humanists. But most importantly, the internet is a place where religions die. Freedom of information is the strongest weapon atheists have against religion. So one would think with so much at stake, that the atheist community online would be the first to lend their voice to support a strike aimed to call attention to SOPA & PIPA.

While I was initially disappointed that Google didn’t go entirely black yesterday and shut down their search engine, at least they and many other sites took part in the strike by calling attention to the issue and putting a link right up front so that people can learn what they can do and who to contact. Some atheist websites did this. Kudos goes out to Freethoughtblogs, AtheistNexus, ThinkAtheist, and many others for taking part in this strike in that way.

Most of the major atheist organizations did not take part in the strike and that is disappointing. American Humanist Association is one of the few that did take part and kudos to them. I sent a message to Hemant of the Friendly Atheist blog asking him to take part in the strike and he said no. That’s his choice, but it was disappointing.

As it stands now, it is very likely that SOPA & PIPA will be defeated. But just a few days ago that was not the case. The bills enjoyed massive bipartisan support. This of course has more to do with the fact that lobbyists run our country and the entertainment industry really wants to stop online piracy. It was only because of the threats made by large websites like Google, Wikipedea, Facebook, and Reddit combined with the public outrage shifted the tide of this fight. Most news outlets didn’t cover the problems with these two laws until the threat of the blackout began to look like a reality.

The blackout is over, but your support is still important. You should still contact your representatives in the House and the Senate and let them know you stand against any attempt to “put regulations” on the internet. Republicans hate “regulations” so that is the term to use. If you have a few extra minutes, find your representative’s home address and write them there too. Occupy their house!

For more information of SOPA & PIPA, check out: http://americancensorship.org/

Related articles

• Stop SOPA/PIPA!!! (gwynna.wordpress.com)
• SOPA blackout shows little hope of peace with Hollywood (latimesblogs.latimes.com)
• Outsiders Window Protests Against SOPA & PIPA (outsiderswindowmagazine.wordpress.com)
• Say NO to SOPA & PIPA! (jeenus.wordpress.com)
• Please Oppose SOPA & PIPA in Congress. Here’s why & how. (paulburkhart.wordpress.com)

Filed under: 1984, atheism, censorship, free speech, Government, Political Activism | 3 Comments »

Many Christians are surprisingly ignorant about some of the basic facts concerning the Bible. When I talk about these facts, I mean that these are things that really aren’t in dispute even among Christian Biblical “Scholars.” This isn’t coming from some atheist like me who is critical of the Bible, it comes from religious believers who have looked at the evidence and have accepted these facts and facts.

The Bible which was written by multiple anonymous people decades after Jesus was alleged to have died and those accounts have been re-written by yet more anonymous people to suit their agendas. Contrary to popular opinion among most mainstream believers, we have no idea who wrote the Gospels. We do know that it wasn’t Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. Those were simply the names assigned to the books. The Gospels are anonymous! The Gospel of Mark was the earliest Gospel and Matthew and Luke plagiarized from Mark and another Gospel account which has been labeled “Q.”

The Gospels were edited over and over again by anonymous scribes. These various scribes changed the Gospels sometimes by accident and other times on purpose to suit their agendas. We know that whole verses were added and probably some were subtracted. The often quoted “He who is without sin, cast the first stone” story in John 8 for example was almost certainly added centuries later.

Another important fact that Christians need to realize is that there is no singular message of the Bible. The Bible is not one book by one author who has one message he or she wants to get across. The Bible is series of books written by many authors over a large period of time. Each author had their own agenda and was writing for people living in a particular time and place to address particular issues of that time and place. So when Christians try to tell you that the main point of the Bible is X, they don’t know what they are talking about.

Filed under: Biblical Scholarship, ignorance, Religion, the bible | 2 Comments »

Be careful today everyone. In case you haven’t looked at a calendar, today is Friday the 13th! It is a cursed day in which bad luck runs abundant. Sure, we can laugh at this ridiculous superstition now, but there was a time when the vast majority of people took this cure extremely seriously.

Triskaidekaphobia, or the fear of the number thirteen was once a very common thing. If you have ever lived in a large city, you might take notice that many older buildings don’t have a thirteenth floor. They go to twelve, skip thirteen, and then proceed to fourteen as if changing the label on the floor would somehow erase the actual fact that the fourteenth floor is really the thirteenth floor.

Also, if you are an Astrologer, you are no doubt aware of the twelve zodiac signs, but if you are an Astronomer, you know that there are actually thirteen. No one wants to be born during a cursed zodiac sign.

Again, we laugh at this stuff today. Not just atheists either. You can go to your favorite fundamentalist Christian and ask them if they fear the number thirteen or consider Friday the 13th to be a cursed day. My guess is that most will laugh at the thought and it should be noted that fundamentalist Christians tend to be the most superstitious people and even they think it is a joke.

Did God release a new book in the Bible letting Christians know that they ought not to fear Friday the 13th? Of course not, so why is it that just a few generations ago large majorities of people (mainly religious) feared this cursed day and today we laugh at it?

Part of it I guess may be the ridiculously funny horror series of the same name. But honestly, I knew about the Friday the 13th movies before I even heard of the superstition around the day. I think what has accounted for our dismissal of this curse has been societies greater emphasis on reason. I know it doesn’t seem like much of an emphasis, but believe it or not people (even religious believers) consider reason a virtue. Sometimes they just don’t realize it.

So the more we can get people to reason and to value reason the less we have to deal with ridiculous curses like Friday the 13th. In fact, the more we can get people to reason and to value reason, the less we have to deal with religious superstitions and religion itself. Today’s silly superstitions were once yesterday’s divine realities. Which means that today’s divine realities are tomorrow’s silly superstitions.

Related articles

• Friday the Thirteenth (growingyoungereachday.wordpress.com)
• Superstitions on Friday The 13th (paulocoelhoblog.com)
• Why Friday (the13th)? (1fridayatatime.wordpress.com)
• Friday The 13th: A Brief Look At The Superstitiously Unlucky Day (huffingtonpost.com)
• It’s Friday 13th! (And there are THREE this year, which is bad news for the superstitious) (dailymail.co.uk)

Filed under: Belief, Friday the 13th | No Comments »

Apparently “Nothing” is almost all there is in the Universe and that “Nothing” is something after all. Last night, I attended a lecture by Dr. Lawrence Krauss about his new book, A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing.

It was an awesome lecture and I learned a lot about cosmology, the age of the universe, and how we know what we know about the universe. However, I almost certainly won’t be able to explain it. It was pretty complicated stuff and I don’t know it well enough to explain it. Fortunately, Dr. Krauss does.

While I talked about the substance of the lecture a little bit in my Examiner article, what I found more interesting was the theological implications. As we learn more about nothing, we start to understand more about the universe.

Krauss makes the argument that Edwin Hubble did for the creation of the universe what Charles Darwin did for the creation of man. Both men presented evidence which takes God out of the process. This leaves religious believers with nowhere to go. The gaps are closing and God is left out.

The lecture itself was educational and fun. Krauss had fun playing with the word “nothing” and cracking jokes about string theory (which he notoriously opposes). Hopefully his book will have the same wit and humor as his lecture. It is interesting to note that Christopher Hitchens was working on the forward to the book, but never finished it. Richard Dawkins wrote the afterward.

Buy the book: A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing.

Filed under: Creationism, First Cause Argument, science | 3 Comments »

One of the main problems with arguing against religion is that people get very passionate about the subject. Religious believers have invested a great deal of time and often money into their beliefs and as a result, they are very resistant to reconsidering their opinion on the matter.

Politics is viewed in much the same way but just quite to the same extent. A great example of this is when people wanted to end the war in Iraq, the main criticism from the other side was that if we left without “winning” (whatever that meant) then all those soldiers died for nothing. Therefore, we have to send more soldiers to die because we were as they say in poker, “pot committed.”

In any case, these issues make people very passionate in their arguments and sometimes when this happens people let their passion control the argument. It is one thing to use passion in an argument to make a more compelling case, but when we let our passion run away with us, we lose control of the argument.

Sometimes we need to pause and consider. Sometimes we need to take a step back from the argument, calm down, and consider what the other person is saying. This refocusing will help us understand their point of view and if we still disagree, we can refocus the argument into a better direction using logic and reason.

The real trick is to get the other person to pause and consider too. Especially when dealing with religious believers, having them take a step back and re-consider their position without “fire in their belly” might help to shake them loss from their dogmatic delusions.

Related articles

• God is not great, but Christopher Hitchens was! (examiner.com)
• Doubting Personal Experiences (dangeroustalk.net)
• Formal debates are a win for atheists (examiner.com)

Filed under: Belief, conversation, discussion, Religious Manipulation | No Comments »

One of the most common pieces of “evidence” religious believers claim supports their belief in their deity of choice is the argument from personal experience. They claim that they have personally felt the presence of God. When challenged on their beliefs, they often ask how an atheist can possibly doubt their personal experience.

First, it is important to point out that personal experience does not qualify as actual evidence. Anecdotal evidence is not really evidence. Obi Wan Kenobi put it best when he said, “Your eyes can deceive you; don’t trust them.”

Second and more importantly, it isn’t the religious believer’s personal experience that I doubt; it is their interpretation of their experience that I question. To best illustrate my point I am going to use a personal experience of my own. When I was in college, I was auditing a class on religion. There was a person in the class who told us about how they had prayed for money and then found a quarter in the cushion of the car seat. This was their personal experience and iron clad proof that God exists and had answered the prayer.

The problem with the story is that people lose change in the cushion of their car seats all the time. If you pray for money and start searching around in places where you are likely to find some, a more plausible explanation can surely be found. People love patterns and we love to draw conclusions based on insufficient data.

First X, then Y, therefore X caused Y. But that isn’t necessarily true. Correlation does not necessarily mean causation. I have no doubt that the person in my class prayed to some deity and I am certainly not doubting that they found a quarter in the car seat cushion. I do not even doubt that the person considered this to be a profound moment of deep connection to the world around them. It isn’t the experience that I doubt; it is the interpretation of that experience that I question.

There is a lot going on in the world and there is a lot going on in our minds and bodies much of which we are not even slightly aware of. Here is another anecdote. Last week, my father got sick. Nothing serious, but he was puking and shitting a lot. He felt like crap and he blamed it on a food that he thought might not have been cooked properly. Earlier that day he noticed that the food in question looked a little discolored, but ate it anyway. Then he got sick. Conclusion: The food did it. However a day later, my brother got the same illness and he didn’t have the questionable food. This implies that it wasn’t the food that made either of them sick and that it was most likely some sort of virus.

According to my father’s personal experience, the food had made him sick. But later evidence suggested that was not actually the case. Religion works in much the same way. A Christian is in a rut. They have hit bottom. They pray. Then things get better. What they fail to remember is that they hit bottom and then they did something to help their situation. Things got better because they did something to make them get better.

Filed under: Belief, conversation, Personal Experience, Religion | 1 Comment »

When I criticize religions like Christianity, I almost always criticize the system of belief rather than the believers in the system. There are reasons for this however many Christians don’t see this distinction.

I view the belief system of Christianity as a living system, like a virus. They system adapts and changes in order to remain relevant. It takes advantage of weaknesses within the human psyche and cements itself into people’s lives. While people push this belief on others, they do so because the belief system uses them to spread itself.

I don’t blame religious believers as much as I blame the system which has taken control of them. When someone is sick and pukes, we don’t blame the person for puking; we blame the illness for causing the person to puke. The same is the case with religious believers.

When a particular Christian hates gay people, it isn’t there fault as much as it is the fault of the belief system which has distorted their moral sense.  While there are a few Christians who don’t hate gay people, it is because the system of belief has identified that compassion toward gay people would be a liability toward the spread of the belief system in those cases. As a result, the system of belief has adapted to focus on some other issue while finding a way around this issue despite the obviously fact that the Bible strongly opposes homosexuality.

Ironically, much like how Christians claim to hate the sin and not the sinner, I hate the belief system of Christianity rather than the Christian. Curing the Christian of this system of belief is difficult and takes a great deal of time. Usually, the Christian has to find their own way out, but we can help my dismantling the excuses they use to protect them from the seeing the problems with the belief system. Some of those problems are logical and some are moral. These problems must be exposed so that the believer can see them clearly and find their own way out.

Filed under: Belief, de-conversion, delusion, Religion, Religious Manipulation | 5 Comments »

I was talking with a liberal Christian recently and she was talking about how human beings aren’t perfect and how we God loves us anyway. As our conversation continued, I asked why it matters that we aren’t perfect and what that even means. What does “perfect” mean in relation to sentient beings… God included?

When we are doing a task which has a known final outcome, I can understand what perfect mean. For example, when doing a puzzle if we are able to put all the puzzle pieces in the correct spots, we can say we did the puzzle perfectly. But people are a little different. There is no single final outcome. This means that there is no real perfect in relation to people.

Sure we can always strive to be better people. We can understand what that means. It means that we observe that certain traits make us happy and make others happy. Certain traits lead to a better quality of life for all involved. Being a better person would entail maximizing those traits for the wellbeing of ourselves and others. But is there a perfect way to maximize those traits? Are there perfect traits to be maximized?

I don’t think so and if there are, we as a society have not yet identified them yet. We don’t know what perfect is or even if there is a perfect. We do know that we are not perfect. We make mistakes all the time. But that isn’t a bad thing necessarily. It can be part of the learning process.

The character of God as he is thought about in Christianity and other religions is deeply flawed. He’s flawed because he is alleged to be perfect. God can’t learn. He can’t progress. The flaw is that his journey is over.

God can’t love us despite our flaws. In fact, he can’t love at all. Love is a journey; it changes and there is no room for change in perfection.

Filed under: conversation, Glory to God, god, humanism, Love | No Comments »

Christians almost always get into a tizzy when atheists compare their holy book to other works of fiction. It doesn’t matter what aspect is being compared, it is the comparison itself that seems to generate the outrage.

Usually when I compare the Bible to some other work of fiction, I am comparing a particular aspect of the books. For example that they both list real people and/or places. Like when I use the DeVinci Code for comparison. Sometimes, I will compare the Bible to Star Wars when talking about moral themes (to which Star Wars blows the Bible out of the water).

Another comparison I often make is on the fancifulness of the story with the Harry Potter series. Sometimes I will compare characters like Jesus and Superman. It isn’t always even a negative comparison either. Superman is a great guy. But it doesn’t matter. Religious believers still get angry.

My thought is that the Bible is fiction and when it is talked about in the same breath as other fictional stories and/or characters, it becomes all the more obvious just how fictional the Bible really is. This is why Christians hate when the Bible is compared to other works of fiction even if those comparisons are positive.

Filed under: Biblical Scholarship, Religion, the bible | 3 Comments »

Whenever I complain about how crappy a President Obama is and how I probably won’t vote for him unless he starts acting real progressive real fast, I get people telling me that not voting for Obama is a vote for the Republican. Then they tell me that I am “cutting off my nose to spite my face.”

Well that is a graphic analogy, but if that is the analogy they are going to use, I guess I’ll stick with it. Expanding from that analogy, it seems my nose has cancer and so it would be stupid to not cut off my nose to save my face. Your nose as cancer too, but you are probably going to die because you refuse to cut it off to save face.

Politics is not a horse race in which you win if you back the winning horse. Politics also isn’t about our gang colors. I’m a Democrat because I agree more with their stated platform than I do with the Republican platform. But if there is an individual candidate who I strong disagree with, I am not going to vote for them because we wear the same gang colors.

I don’t believe any politician is entitled to my vote. No politician owns my vote either. Every politician has to work hand to earn my vote. Obama isn’t doing that and he doesn’t get my vote by default.

Obama supporters have to stop blaming the victim. If I don’t vote for Obama and he loses, it isn’t my fault; it is his fault for not earning my vote. If he was a better President, he would have earned my vote. I value my vote, but it seems that Obama doesn’t. He seems to think he is entitled to my vote or that he can use fear to terrorize me into giving my vote away.

Then his supporters tell me that we lost a lot of seats in 2010 because Democrats like me didn’t vote Democrat (although for the record, I did vote Democrat). To this, I point out that the Party hasn’t learned their lesson. They are going to do the same thing they did in 2010 and they are expecting a different result. I think that is the definition of insanity or something.

Filed under: Election, Obama, Politics | No Comments »

I’ve taken this post down because it was poorly thought out and I agree with some of the criticisms made about it. It doesn’t help the community and I have never been a fan of the drama. Having caused it was not my intent and I apologize. I think the whole award thing was probably a bad idea to start with.

Filed under: atheism, Coexist, Feminism | 27 Comments »

Happy New Year! I know most people are using a calendar based on the alleged birth of Jesus (which even Biblical scholars disagree with), but I think it is time to change that. I actually started this campaign a few years ago, but was reminded of it again for obvious reasons.

I never liked using BC and AD and to be honest, I am not even a fan of BCE and CE since the “Common Era” seems to perfectly coincide with the “Year of Our Lord.” But given the choice, I would prefer BCE/CE over BC/AD any day. Still, I think we can do better and fuck with the Christian Right at the same time.

We could base our new year on anything and someone will object. Some people think we should base it on the publication of the Origin of Species, others suggested the birth of the internet. People use whatever significant event in their field of interest, but it doesn’t really make a point.

I recommend that we base the year on the signing of the Declaration of Independence. I say this for a couple of reasons. First, the American Revolution set the seeds for resurgence in democracy all over the world. Second and more importantly, it puts the Christian Right in a difficult place. These are people who generally wear their patriotism literally on their sleeves and who always talk about putting America first. Well now they have the chance to put America first and Jesus second.

The problem for them is that they also put God first. So how are they going to choose what to put first, America or God? Obviously I think they will go with God. But then we can question their patriotism and criticism them for not putting America first.

It will be fun. So I am once again asking people to write their politicians and tell them that you want them to propose a bill to change the dating system to the American system. This would make the new year 236 AE (American Era). Anything before the signing of the Declaration of Independence would be BAE (Before the American Era).

Filed under: AD/BC | 3 Comments »

Twas the blog before Christmas, when all through the blogosphere
Every atheist was stirring, even Christopher Hitchens was here.
The banners, signs, and billboards were hung by the crèche with care,
In hopes that Dr. Dawkins would soon would be there.

The children were nestled all snug in their beds,
While visions of the Flying Spaghetti Monster dancing in their heads.
And Stephen Hawking with his robotic tone, and I with my Kindle,
Exciting my brain for a long winter’s cosmology riddle.

When out on the lawn there arose such a clatter,
I sprang from the bed to see what was the matter.
Away to the window I flew like a the Wright brothers,
Tore off my boxers and threw up the covers.

My frontal moon on the breast of the new-fallen rain,
Gave the lustre of distain to those who are sexually constrained.
When, what to my wondering eyes should appear,
But an annoying politician, and eight homophobia Christians coming near.

With a little old preacher, so lively and quick,
I knew in a moment he must be a prick.
More vapid than reasoned his angry slurs came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called me many an ugly name!

“You Satanist! You slut! You communist and Nazi!
You heathen! You homo! You enemy of orthodoxy!
Get out of this country, you are making it unwell!
Now dash away! Dash away! Dash away before we send you to Hell!”

And then, in a twinkling, I heard on my computer,
The reasoning and sound arguments of many a YouTuber.
As I drew in my head, and was turning around,
There over my speakers, Hitchens was the sound.

The microphone in hand tight to his lips,
his voice was steady as he refuted the apocalypse.
He had a broad face and a slightly round belly,
He pointed when he laughed and called his opponent Machiavelli!

He was witty and articulate, a right jolly guy,
And I laughed when I saw him, in spite of the passersby!
A wink of his eye and a twist of his head,
Soon gave me to know I had nothing to dread.

He spoke such fantastic words and went straight to his work,
He eviscerated his opponent, then called him out as a jerk.
Laying my finger onto my mouse,
I give a nod and turned toward the window of the house.

I sprang into debate, refuting their God with a shout,
And away they all ran, out of the fear of their own doubt.
But I yelled and exclaimed, before they ran out of sight,
“Happy Holidays to all, and to all a good-night

Related articles

• Put the Chris in Christmas (examiner.com)
• God is not great, but Christopher Hitchens was! (examiner.com)
• The Remarkable Mr. Hitchens (dangeroustalk.net)
• A Few Christian Replies to Hitchens’s Death Worth Noting (freethoughtblogs.com)

Filed under: Christmas | 1 Comment »

It is bad enough when atheists dogmatically believe in the nonsense of grand conspiracies, but when Christians believe this crap, they are two levels of crazy.

The other day, I posted an Examiner article about how Christians have been tweeting death threats to atheists. Yesterday, a Christian called me out on this. He claimed that all those people who left those death threats were probably atheists who are part of the hacker group Anonymous pretending to be Christians to make Christianity look bad.

I pointed out to him that I cited at least ten twitter accounts with their twitter identities and that it wouldn’t be hard to just look those people up and see how long they have had their accounts for and what the content of their tweets has been. This would certainly show that they are Christians. He wasn’t having it. Instead, he insisted that the members of Anonymous are devious.

So I had to point out to him that threatening violence and even carrying out violence is not really out of character for many Christians. Without going into the long history of Christian violence (from the crusades to the inquisition),  I told him that often times all it takes is an atheist wearing an atheist themed shirt, going into a fundamentalist church and that atheist is sure to be threatened if not beat up. I also told him that it doesn’t even have to be a fundamentalist church sometimes nor does it even have to be in a church at all. I have had Christians yell threats out of a car window because I had a Darwin Fish on my car.

But I guess the old saying is true, God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son and that whoever believes in him will believe in ANYTHING!

Related articles

• Christians issue death threats over Twitter hash tag (examiner.com)
• Christianity: The Religion of Peace (dangeroustalk.net)
• Censoring the World for Santa (dangeroustalk.net)
• Christopher Hitchens’ ‘God Is Not Great’ Trends on Twitter, Christians Threaten Violence (wazaghun.blogspot.com)

Filed under: Alternative Worldview, conversation, delusion, Hitchens, Religious Manipulation | No Comments »

Christians are always complaining about how mean atheists are and how Christianity is a religion of peace and compassion. But this is just another Christian delusion. The fact is that the opposite is true.

It is pretty rare for atheists to threaten Christians over some expression of their religiosity. Sure, there may be atheists that do, but it is extremely rare. It is even rarer for threats to come from an atheist who is part of the greater community of reason. What do I mean by that? I once worked with a guy who was a fellow atheist, but he wasn’t knowledgeable about religion, didn’t attend any atheist groups, and was just an angry guy in general. He was not part of the greater community of reason. People who go to atheist groups or write and advocate about and for atheism tend to be humanistic and not prone to violence or to delivering threats. Atheism is just a lack of belief in gods.

On the other hand, it is not unusual at all for church going Christians to issue threats and act violently. Yesterday, I posted an article on Examiner about how Christians made threatening tweets on Twitter over an atheist hash tag.  This wasn’t an isolated incident either. Christians are always making hateful and threatening comments and actions towards atheists because we lack belief in their ridiculous deity.

The only thing Christians can do is to jump into the No True Scotsman defense. But that doesn’t really work because anyone who reads the Bible will see that it is a series of books which often advocates a great deal of violence. Sure Jesus said to love your enemy, but he also said that he didn’t come to bring peace, he came with a sword. He also advocated cutting off your hands and plucking out your eyes. The God of the Bible is over the top violent. So if he the the example that Christians want to live up to, it really is no surprise that they act so violently.

Related articles

• Christians issue death threats over Twitter hash tag (examiner.com)
• Some atheist parents take kids to religious services (examiner.com)
• Dear Bill Donohue (dead-logic.blogspot.com)
• Hitchens and the Christian Reactions to His Death (atheistrev.com)
• The Good Atheist (secularcentered.wordpress.com)

Filed under: Evils of Christianity, Love, morality, twitter | 3 Comments »

On Sunday, I was on the Twitter and saw that some of the atheists that I am following had experienced a miracle. It turns out that Christopher Hitchens was seen alive three days after he died of cancer. The evidence is clear, Hitchen has risen!

People tweeted about seeing an empty coffin and others saw him arguing with religious believers. Then before their eyes, he just vanished into another dimension. Christopher Hitchens has defeated death itself. He has fulfilled the prophecy, died, and on the third day he has risen.

Now, no religious believer with even the miniscule sense of reality would accept this as true. Yet these people on Twitter have no reason to lie. In fact, talking about their experience only opens them up to ridicule and might even cause them to lose their jobs in our theocratic infested nation.

So who wants evidence that Christopher Hitchens had really risen from the dead and is alive today in another dimension? Who will accept the testimony of these people on Twitter as proof of this? Who will pretend that this is a claim that has nothing to do with science or that it is somehow beyond science and yet equally as valid as anything that the scientific method has done or could do?

Now let me offer this; Adolf Hitler didn’t believe that Hitchens returned from the dead. Therefore, everyone who doesn’t believe that Hitchens did not return from the dead must be like Hitler. In fact, not believing that Hitchens returned from the dead leads to the mass murder of Jews.

Think about it, how many people who believe that Hitchens rose from the dead are in prison today? Zero! How many people who believe that Hitchens rose from the dead killed Jews or anyone else? Zero!

Admittedly, these are all terrible arguments and yet atheists have to address these very arguments on a daily basis from Christians. How can a Christian really prove that Hitchens didn’t rise from the dead as so many people claim that he has and that they have seen him? They could present the body, but that doesn’t really deal with the issue since we all know that the body is just an empty vessel and that Hitchens’ personality lives on in another dimension in the form of spaghetti sauce or something.

It actually takes more faith not to believe that Hitchens has risen on the third day than it does to believe that he has. One would have to claim to know everything in the entire universe in order to reject the belief that Hitchens has risen. How arrogant! These people must hate Hitchens and are just angry people. One must at least be willing to admit that it is possible that Hitchens did rise on the third day and that he is the world’s true savior. Kneel before the Hitch!

Related articles

• The Remarkable Mr. Hitchens (dangeroustalk.net)
• God is not great, but Christopher Hitchens was! (examiner.com)

Filed under: Belief, death, delusion, Hitchens, miracles, twitter | 8 Comments »

When atheists and Christians discuss religion we often talk past each other. That being the case, I came up with an idea that might change that. I think we should try to meet Christians halfway… as long as they are willing to meet us halfway.

Here is how it works. First, we offer to meet halfway and let them know that we are willing to consider the possibility that there might be a god and that we can’t rule it out with 100% certainty. This seems like a reasonable concession to make.

Then we ask them to admit a concession. Specifically, we ask them if they are willing to at least admit that on the surface, the whole Christian story does sound a little farfetched. You can go into the whole virgin birth, walking on water, raising the dead, raised from the dead thing in you want, but the point is to get them to at least try to understand why someone might not take such a stseriously. It is pretty absurd.

That’s as far as we need to go. While the whole god concept is possible and we can’t rule it out with 100% certainty, it is extremely improbable and as we just pointed out and they admitted, it is a bit ludicrous.

Now we have given them something to think about and we don’t need to concede another inch. We’re done here. The seeds of doubt have been planted and watered.

Related articles

• The Certainty Trap (dangeroustalk.net)
• Hitchens dead at 62 (examiner.com)

Filed under: Alternative Worldview, conversation, de-conversion, delusion | No Comments »

I had an entirely different blog post in mind for today, but sadly that will have to wait until next week. Sadly, Christopher Hitchens has died and that is something that needs talking about because he was such a remarkable person.

Late last night, when I heard the news I posted an Examiner article on his death. But after reading it this morning, I am not happy with it. While my writing skill could never match or even come close to Hitchens, I really thought that I could do better and that I should do better. So this morning I wrote a second Examiner article.

But the real tribute to Hitchens didn’t come after he died, but rather while he was still alive to appreciate it. Last month, atheists raised their glasses to Hitchens. Today, atheists all over the world will surely be raising our glasses to the remarkable Mr. Hitchens.

Related articles

• Hitchens dead at 62 (examiner.com)
• Christopher Hitchens: Remembering The Legendary Writer And Orator (huffingtonpost.com)
• Christopher Hitchens is Dead (breakingspells.net)
• Christopher Hitchens, an atheist in a foxhole (blogs.telegraph.co.uk)

Filed under: atheism, Current Events, death, Hitchens | 3 Comments »

Former Star Trek actor, gay activist, and Humanist George Takei has been on fire lately. When a bill was on the table in one of the southern states (I forget which one) that attempted to restrict teachers from using the word, “gay” in the classroom, George Takei stepped up with his, “It’s okay to be Takei” campaign.

The idea of Takei’s campaign is that instead of saying gay, you can say Takei. He created a logo for the campaign featuring the Starfleet insignia and rainbow colors. Last night he posted a contest on twitter to create a new logo. I answered his call and as far as I know, I was the first to do so.

If my logo makes it as a finalist (which I think it might), then voting will be on Sunday, December 18th 2011. George Takei will create a special photo gallery on his facebook page for the contest and the logo that gets the most “likes” wins.

You don’t have to vote for mine, but I hope you will because you all love me so much and I don’t want to brag or anything, but my logo is pretty kickass. Take a look:

Related articles

• “Star Wars” Vs.”Star Trek?” George Takei Reveals The True Enemy! (pinkbananaworld.com)
• George Takei on Shatner-Fisher Feud: ‘Knock It Off, Bash Twilight’ (VIDEO) (blippitt.com)
• Your Daily Moment of George Takei Brokering Galactic Peace (tor.com)

Filed under: culture war, facebook, Gay Issues, humanism, People of Reason, Personal, twitter | 1 Comment »

Earlier this week, I wrote about how religious believers often seem like they are just waiting to die and that this world is just a doorway into the next world. For many Christians, this world only purpose is to serve God by proselytizing until the end comes. But now, when a Christians comes to proselytize to me, I can tell them that I am just waiting to die.

According to most Christians, Jesus saves not by works, out of grace. This means that it doesn’t matter what you do in life as long as you accept Jesus as your savior before your death. So when Christians come to proselytize to me, I can tell them that I am waiting to die… or more accurately right before I die. I can tell them that this way I can sin all I want and not have to worry, but that moments before I die, I plan to accept Jesus’s sacrifice. I can even encourage them to do the same.

Now of course, I have no intention of doing that. That type of Pascal’s Wager just doesn’t appeal to me. But it might get the proselytizer to pause and consider. If I can get them to leave religion until they are ready to die, they might just end up leaving religion all together. At the very least, it might get them to stop trying to proselytize to me.

Related articles

• May I concern troll the Christians? (freethoughtblogs.com)
• How Do You Handle a Possibly Proselytizing Teacher? (patheos.com)

Filed under: death, deathbed conversion, Religion | 1 Comment »

People often have conversations in which we label others into groups. Those group identities can be created by others or the group themselves. Either case, when we talk about the group ambiguity creeps in. The perceiver may make the assumption that the conversation must apply to the entire group rather than the group in general. This is a fallacy I will call the Assumed All Fallacy.

For example, if I were to make the statement, “The English love to tea,” it would be a fallacy to conclude that there is an “assumed all” in the statement. It is probably that there are at least a few English who do not in fact love tea. The statement about English loving tea is a general statement.

Loving tea is not in this case a defining characteristic of being English and so therefore it should be interpreted as a general statement about many or most English rather than “assumed all” statement about every single man and woman living in England.

Now, let’s take this fallacy into a more controversial application. “Christians oppose same-sex marriage.” This again is a general statement and not a statement about every single Christian. To assume that this statement refers to every single Christian and not to Christians in general would be an example of the Assumed All Fallacy.

“Muslims use fear and terrorism to suppress criticism.” Again, this statement is not a defining characteristic of all Muslims; it is a general statement about many Muslims. In fact, it has become such a common characteristic that the Muslim culture has become known throughout the world for this tactic. Obviously there are Muslims who do not use fear and terrorism to suppress criticism just as there are English people who do not like tea. But the statement in general is true. When people “assume all” in such statements they are being fallacious.

Filed under: context, conversation, logic | 2 Comments »

One of the most common statements religious believers make toward atheists is that without the promise of everlasting life, our lives must be meaningless. Quite frankly, I think it is reversed. It seems to me that most religious believers are so focused on their afterlife that they go around this life just waiting to die.

Now I have talked about the purpose of life before, but I really am curious as to what religious believers think their purpose in life is. It seems like their only purpose in life is to die quickly before they sin too much. The faster they get through this life the better. This life is evil, sinful, and full of temptation to them. The next life on the other hand is an endless paradise of bliss kissing God’s ass for all eternity without free will and without caring about those former loved ones now being tortured for all eternity in Hell.

Of course you would be hard pressed to find a Christian who is so eager to die quickly and just move beyond this evil, sinful world. But they should want that, right? Instead, they come up with this copout that they have to do God’s will here on Earth before they die. In reality, these believers cling to life much more than the most vocal atheists do and yet they are still living life waiting to die.

It really doesn’t make much sense, but neither does religion. You have people claiming that this world is evil and bad and that they are waiting for the next life and yet they cling to this life as if it were the only one that truly matters. For me, this is the only world that truly matters because it is the only world I believe actual exists. So I don’t want to waste a minute of my life.

Related articles

• Dogmatic About Death (dangeroustalk.net)
• Some atheist parents take kids to religious services (examiner.com)
• Religion infects smart people too (examiner.com)
• The problem with the afterlife (whydontyou.org.uk)

Filed under: Alternative Worldview, Belief, Criticism, death, healthcare, Projection, Religion | 4 Comments »

Christians are always claiming that Jesus is the reason for the season and many fundamentalists have started “Keep Christ in Christmas” campaigns. Yet it has been pretty well established as common knowledge now that Christians stole Christmas from the pagans.

The fact is that Christmas doesn’t belong to Christians. It doesn’t even belong to the pagans. While the pagans celebrated the Winter Solstice, that really isn’t the reason for the season either. It is just the excuse.

The reason for the season is obvious. It is fucking cold outside, trees look like they are dying, it gets dark earlier, and people get seasonal depression. People need to be cheered up and the best way to do that is to celebrate with family and friends.

The evergreen tree is a symbol of life because it is the one tree that is still green during this time of year. So we decorate that tree. We give presents to people because that makes people happy in this depressing time of year.

In this cold, dark, and dreary season, it is our humanity that keeps us warm. The spirit of good will toward each other warms our hearts better than any magical births of deities.

Related articles

• Reclaiming the Winter Solstice (witchesofthecraft.com)
• Wisconsin Christmas Tree Prayer? (secularnewsdaily.com)

Filed under: Alternative Worldview, Christmas | 1 Comment »

Thirty-one years ago today, musician and activist John Lennon was shot and killed. I wonder what he would be doing if he were alive today. Aside from the awesome music which might have been made, what would Lennon’s activism look like in today’s world?

For starters, he would almost certainly be a large voice supporting the Occupy Wall Street movement. I think he would make some interesting and unique contributions to the movement. While, some Occupiers have tried to mirror his famous “War is Over” campaign, John would almost certainly have new ideas for getting the world to take notice of the corruption on Wall Street.

Would Lennon be a more vocal atheist in 2011? This is hard to say. He was a fairly vocal atheist back in his day, but he is also someone who seeks to harmony with everyone. So he probably wouldn’t be like Christopher Hitchens. He might however take up a more Humanist angle on the issue and present a very positive face for atheism.

My guess is that he wouldn’t actually identify himself with the greater community of reason, but would be similar to people like Neil deGrasse Tyson in his positioning. Neil speaks out against religious extremism and doesn’t hide the fact that he lacks belief, but he also doesn’t actively encourage people to disbelieve. John would probably be like that too.

Yoko Ono has continued to do some activism over the years, but she lacks the showmanship that John had. On the other hand, it is possible that over thirty years, John’s activism would have become stale. The right-wing could marginalize him as a polarizing figure like Michael Moore and if their campaign was successful, it might diminish Lennon’s impact. Still, even people on the right loved the Beatles.

The world that could have been… We miss you John.  Wish you were here.

Related articles

• John Lennon remembered on his birthday (examiner.com)

Filed under: Current Events, death, Hope, John Lennon, People of Reason, Political Activism | 1 Comment »