DangerousTalk

Yesterday I posted an article on Examiner about an upcoming debate between Dave Silverman of American Atheists and Ann Coulter’s ex-fiancée, Dinesh D’souza. While some atheists feel comfortable writing off D’Souza as a hack, the fact is that he is a very intelligent and skilled hack. So I thought I would help Dave prepare.

D’souza is an experienced debater… possibly even a master (snicker). He is intellectual enough for people to take him seriously and witty enough to not be considered stuffy. Silverman is less experienced and doesn’t have the intellectual credentials that D’souza has. On the other hand, Silverman is also knowledgeable, passionate, and straightforward. He doesn’t take any bullshit either.

First, D’souza will almost certainly use what I call, the Carpet Bomb. He will fire off multiple issues and points of contention and expect Silverman to address them all. If Silverman doesn’t address one of the points, D’souza will call attention to how Silverman ignored his question or point. One way around this is to go first and to preempt the attack by either answering questions not yet made or Carpet Bombing him first.

But if he goes first, then the best way to handle it is in four stages. First, call attention to it. Sam Harris often does this by saying, “My opponent has put a lot on the table.” Second, address what you want to address. Third, refer people to the website for more detail on any issue you didn’t have time to address. And forth, attack back!

While the debate is titled, “Is Christianity good for the world?” D’souza will quickly attempt to change the debate to, “Is atheism good for the world?” I think it is important to point out that atheism is simply a lack of belief. It isn’t good or bad for the world necessarily. Humanism, reason, critical thinking, etc. are good for the world for obvious reasons. But I think it is also important not to get bogged down in this and to keep the focus back on the real question of the debate. It might even be wise to call attention to the fact that he creating a new debate which can be had at another time, but that today’s focus is on Christianity.

D’souza has already hinted at one approach he will likely take. He is going to bring up Stalin, Pol Pot, and maybe even Hitler (despite the fact that Hitler was a Catholic) and hold these people up as the logical conclusion of atheism. Sam Harris had a good response to this type of argument when he said that those people had a religion of nationalism and that no one ever suffered for being too reasonable. But this might also be a good opportunity to talk about how some of the most atheistic nations in the world (Denmark, Netherlands, Sweden, etc.) raked highest in quality of life indicators. Even in America, the states that are the most religious are also the states that rank worst in quality of life indicators.

The final card D’souza is likely to play is the moral monopoly card. This is where Sam Harris’s book The Moral Landscape comes in handy. But Silverman could also use Hitchens here by pointing out how religious morality is actually pretty horrific.

I have written a few short Examiner articles that I think might be useful:
Human Rights: Religion vs. secularism
Atheism 101: Is there moral grounding without God?
Atheism 101: Is atheist morality grounded in evolution?
Atheism 101: The Purpose of Life
Atheism 101: The Problem of Evil
Atheism 101: How atheist parenting differs from religious parenting
Atheism 101: The “No True Scotsman” Fallacy

Related articles

• Vote Atheist! (dangeroustalk.net)
• American Atheists Sue Over World Trade Center Cross (abcnews.go.com)
• Atheist Group Wants 9/11 Cross Removed from Museum (msnbc.msn.com)
• On Evolutionary Atheism (camelswithhammers.com)

Filed under: Alternative Worldview, culture war, debate, Dinesh D'Souza, Evils of Christianity, free will, morality, Religious Manipulation | 1 Comment »

One thing I hate is when Christians attempt to redefine my position and then argue against their newly created position as if that is actually the position that I hold. In philosophy this is called a “strawman” argument. So I thought it might be fun to do the same thing to Christians.

Yeah, this is a dishonest way to argue and all that jazz, but it is also fun and it might actually get Christians to understand what a strawman argument actually is. So in suggesting thing, I am doing so out of humor and not suggesting someone argue this way with in a serious fashion. I hope people will argue this way to make the point clear to Christians who use this argument to show them what they are doing and why it is an invalid way to argue.

Christianity is defined as being a Christ. So Christians believe they are God and need to be worshipped. That’s a pretty narcissistic position to hold, don’t you think? If a Christian doesn’t believe that they are a Christ, then they aren’t really a Christian and should use a different term to describe themselves.

That’s the meme, pass it on.

Related articles

• Jim Wallis’ new strawman (wolfsheep2.wordpress.com)
• Apologetical fallacies about atheism (zaknafein81.wordpress.com)

Filed under: anti-intellectualism, atheism, Atheism NOT Religion, culture war | No Comments »

The other day I was discussing religion with a Christian and he commented that in order for me to be an atheist, I have to prove that life can come from chemicals. This is an attempt to switch the burden of proof while invoking the God of the Gaps argument.

For starters, atheists don’t have to prove anything at all. All atheism is, is the lack of belief in a deity. Why certain people lack that belief in a deeper question the answers of which vary depending on the person. It is not even a given for an atheist just to say, “I don’t believe your claims.” One could be an atheist because one never heard claims about deities or because one never considered the claim about deities. However, most atheists have heard the claims and were not convinced for whatever reason.

One need not have to have an alternative answer to the question of how life began in order to reject the claim that, “God did it.” Personally, I don’t know exactly how a computer works, but I need not have that knowledge in order to reject the claim that a gerbil is inside powering it.

If someone were to make a claim that, “God did it,” the burden of proof in on them to prove that claim. I am perfectly justified to answer whatever the question is with the answer, “I don’t know.” More accurately, I would want to say, “I don’t know yet.” This is the real problem for religious believers. As we learn more about the world around us, their God gets pushed back to the Gaps in our knowledge. As we learn more and those gaps get smaller and smaller, the need for a deity diminishes.

Related articles

• Religion’s Attempt at False Equivalency (dangeroustalk.net)
• Atheism, agnosticism and theism 5: Scope and indexing (evolvingthoughts.net)
• I, the Atheist (nogodz.wordpress.com)

Filed under: Alternative Worldview, anti-intellectualism, Atheism NOT Religion, god of the gaps, Religious Manipulation | 7 Comments »

This morning, I was at the hospital with my wife who was getting an ultrasound to make sure the fetus is developing normally. While there, there was a woman in the waiting room also getting ready for an ultrasound. She was telling me that she believes that she is having a boy do to some old wives’ tale. Her husband thinks that the old wives’ tales are bullshit.

This is the awkward position superstitious people put rational people in. I wanted to tell her that I think her husband is correct and that her beliefs in these superstitions are plain old nuts. But in polite society, that would be very rude. So I just smiled and nodded and wished her luck.

The problem was that she wouldn’t shut up about it. Instead of just realizing my polite indication that I didn’t agree, they kept talking and then tried to rationalize her superstitious beliefs by telling me that these ancient superstitions have been around for a long time so there must be something to them. I really had to restrain myself for openly arguing with her.

That is the problem with superstitions and other ridiculous beliefs. Those who believe in them profess them loudly. Christians are often fond of telling me that, “a fool says in his heart that there is no god.” Well, the way I see it, the real fool professes his or her ridiculous beliefs from the rooftops.

Related articles

• What are the some superstitious belief with scientific explanation (wiki.answers.com)
• Friggatriskaidekaphobia (rushisawant.wordpress.com)
• Superstitous beliefs… (thebloggingpath.com)
• Harold Camping No Different than Other Christians (dangeroustalk.net)
• Superstition and religion (4simpsons.wordpress.com)

Filed under: delusion, Personal | 2 Comments »

Yesterday, I saw a great video on YouTube by Dusty Smith. In the video he talks about the claim Christians often make that atheists believe in nothing. Then, last night I attended my local monthly atheist meetup group. If atheists believe in nothing, then a social group of atheist must have nothing to talk about. Despite that assertion, there seemed to be no shortage of conversation topics.

The thing is that we probably only spend half of our conversations discussing atheism and religion. Despite the fact that we were all there because of our lack of believe in deities, we spent a great deal of time talking about politics, science, education, sci-fiction, and various other topics. The thing that made these conversations interesting, fun, and valuable was that we were all people of reason.

People within the greater atheist community tend to value reason over faith and as a result, our social interactions and conversation tend to reflect that value. As Dusty put it his video, atheists believe in everything that exists in reality. In my view, reality gives atheists a rather large pool of interesting conversation topics.

This is the real value of being part of the greater community of reason. While it is certainly important to discuss how to deal with the absurdities, atrocities, and the pervasiveness of religion in our society, it is perhaps even more valuable to be able to have intellectual conversations with people who actually value reasonably discourse over faith-based thinking. So I want to encourage more people to be socially atheist.

Related articles

• Atheists as a Political Force (dangeroustalk.net)
• Atheists are Sci-fi/Fantasy Fans (dangeroustalk.net)
• Why Atheists Need To Come Out (andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com)
• Why the “5 Myths Atheists Have About Religion” Aren’t Myths (gretachristina.typepad.com)

Filed under: atheism, conversation, discussion, People of Reason | 1 Comment »

Within the gay community there is a taboo around outing other gays although some gay rights activists do it anyway. While there is certainly some gray areas about this especially if the person being outed is anti-gay. My question for the day is whether or not there should be such a taboo in the atheist community?

For example, I have gotten a tip about a congressperson who is a closeted atheist. Looking at this particular person’s biography and profile, it seems pretty likely that my tip is accurate. In this case, I support the efforts of this congressperson in issues of Church/State Separation and other issues. It is unlikely that coming out would hurt this individual’s re-election significantly so the question is why is this congressperson remaining in the closet?

What if someone found a politician who professed religious believe a lot and used their professed believes on anti-reason issues? Would that give us more justification to out them as atheists?

Politicians aside, there are everyday atheists out there who are still going to church and professing religious belief for whatever reason. Should it be taboo to out them as atheists?

The case for not outing people is pretty obvious. Atheists face a variety of negative repercussions in our society. However, as more and more atheists come out, the less negative repercussions there will be in the future. As I discussed in my recent Examiner article, most religious people don’t think they know any atheists and that makes it easier for them to demonize us.

For this reason, outing other atheists might help to show that religious believers do actually know atheists and make them less likely to discriminate and be hostile toward atheists in general. It may even start them down that long road away from superstitious beliefs.

Related articles

• Atheists as a Political Force (dangeroustalk.net)
• The Myth That Atheists are Unelectable (dangeroustalk.net)
• Vote Atheist! (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: Argument by Popularity, atheism, culture war, People of Reason | 17 Comments »

It was just a few weeks ago that a Christian commented to me that, “The internet has actually worsened god’s world because science is spread quicker than the truth.” And now Christian apologist Josh McDowell has pretty much come out and said the same thing… to an audience of Christians no less.

I love these comments from Christians because it is an acknowledgment that the spread of knowledge is a threat to their worldview of make-believe. Yeah, there is a lot of crap on the internet and so it is no surprise that religions like Christianity and Scientology have websites and forums to continue to spread their bullshit. However, there is the difference; they are no longer the only preacher in the room. In fact, not only are there other preachers in the room, but now there are scientists, historians, and actual experts sharing the stage too.

The Christian preacher now has to sound more rational than the Scientologist and the actual rational scientists. As each religion stakes their claim on the Truth, people can compare those claims to other religious wackos and observe how similar they all are and that there is no actual evidence for any of it.

Plus, there are a lot more websites that support unbiased reporting of reality and that only helps the create more atheists. People can doubt privately and research their doubts privately without arousing too much attention from their religious leaders. Then, when they are ready, they can ask their religious leaders well informed questions which their religious leaders don’t have the answers.

McDowell’s advice helps the spread of reason and critical thinking even more when he tells parents to always have an answer to whatever question is raised. He doesn’t however tell parents to have the right answers, just an answer. This of course is a problem for religion which has a hard time admitting that they don’t know an answer (except if it has to do with why God did something obviously immoral).

I am glad Christians are learning that the internet really is where religions go to die.

Related articles

• McDowell vs. the Internet (unreasonablefaith.com)
• Biggest threat to Christianity: Everything (skepacabra.wordpress.com)
• Religion’s Attempt at False Equivalency (dangeroustalk.net)
• Guess what makes Josh McDowell cry? [Pharyngula] (scienceblogs.com)
• Indoctrination and Brainwashing (dangeroustalk.net)
• Google is Killing God (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: Alternative Worldview, Coexist, conversation, culture war, Decline of Religion, education, People of Reason, Skepticism | 2 Comments »

In some parts of the country there has been a lot of drought lately and this has caused some Christians to turn to God for rain. I also noticed a Christian post something on facebook recently about not looking at the weather forecast because the weather is in the hands of God. This got me thinking, can God defy the weatherman?

We all know that meteorology is not an exact science and that often times the weather forecast calls for rain and no rain comes or vice versa. But generally speaking, we don’t see radical departures from the weather forecast. For example, no matter how much Christians pray for snow tomorrow, it is extremely unlikely that we will see snow showers in the summer months (in America at least).

According to the weather forecast, the drought in Oklahoma will continue at least for the rest of the week. While it is possible that the forecast might be off a little, it is unlikely that there will be a massive storm in Oklahoma this week. Still, people are praying for rain there. So let’s see who wins, God or the weatherman.

If God loses, then Christians have to admit that prayer doesn’t work and/or that God doesn’t exist. If the weatherman loses, atheists have to admit that we don’t know as much about the weather as we should and that we should learn more about it so that we can make better predictions.

Filed under: Current Events, Disproving God, global climate change, miracles, prayer | 4 Comments »

Over the weekend, I was in my car and turned on the radio. I started listening to a re-broadcast of the Tom Hartmann program from earlier in the week. Apparently atheists have been calling in and rightfully giving him a hard time over his interview with Rick Wingrove. Hartmann continued to assert that atheism is just as much a religion as Christianity. I also received a comment from a Christian this weekend claiming that atheism is dogmatic. Both of these claims are attempts to make a false equivalency.

Basically, when religious believers make these claims, they are basically making the argument that they are rubber and we are glue and whatever we say bounces off them and sticks to us. To put it another way, they are saying, “I know you are, but what am I?”

All these attempts at false equivalency are childish and stupid. No, atheism is not a religion any more than off is a radio station. No, atheism is not dogmatic because there is no dogma. All atheism is, is a lack of believe in a deity. It is the default position. The burden of proof rests with anyone making a claim. “I don’t believe your claim” is not dogmatic. And no, it does not take more faith to be an atheist than it does to be a believer. All these popular arguments are really all the same. They are just an attempt to make a false equivalency.

Related articles

• Organization Does Not Equal Religion (dangeroustalk.net)
• Liberal Host Thom Hartmann Takes On Atheist Leader Over July 4th ‘Evangelical’ Campaign (mediaite.com)
• What is Atheism? (dead-logic.blogspot.com)
• Paula Kirby on Atheism (tuibguy.com)
• Be ye not unequally yoked (Amen!) (new.exchristian.net)

Filed under: anti-intellectualism, Atheism NOT Religion, culture war, ignorance, Religion | 5 Comments »

I once heard it said that the internet is where religions go to die. This is pretty accurate and as religious believers become less lazy they will soon realize that any question they have for atheists has already been answered. All they have to do is Google their question and pick a fairly reputable website to find their answer.

Some Christians will almost certainly use this as evidence for the validity of the Bible. You see, in the Book of Genesis, there is the story of the Tower of Babel. In the story, people work together to build a tower to heaven (implying that heaven could actually be reached by building a tower). God didn’t approve so he destroyed the tower and made it so people spoke different languages so that they couldn’t work together any more.

Now we have Google. Through Google, it is easy to translate one language to another. So some Christians will draw the parallel and no doubt claim that God predicted the rise of Google in Genesis. The problem is that Google defies God.

So for religious believers, the question isn’t that they believe, it is how long will they continue to believe in light of the accessibility of information to the contrary of their beliefs. How can they continue to believe when all their arguments for belief have been countered on the internet and can be found through Google?

Filed under: conversation, culture war, Disproving God, god, Religion, truth | 8 Comments »

Yeah, you heard me; I can prove that the Easter Bunny is real! You see that tree outside? There you go. People live in houses, right? So if you see a house, that is proof that people exist. The Easter Bunny lives in a tree, so if you see a tree that is proof that the Easter Bunny is real. You are just closing your eyes to the Truth.

That is the type of ridiculous arguments I get from Christians every day. These arguments don’t make sense and that are completely unconvincing and yet so many Christians use this shit.

From the obviously stupid and possibly retarded red neck interviewed on TV to well established evangelicals like Ray comfort, this argument is probably the go-to argument for Christians. So I guess my question of the day is, “what is our go-to argument?” If you could make only one argument to start a religious believer down the path of doubt, what would it be?

Filed under: anti-intellectualism, Argument by Design, culture war, ignorance, Religion | 10 Comments »

A while ago, I posted an open letter to fundamentalist Christian evangelist and actor, Stephen Baldwin. I remember watching an episode of Saturday Night Live in which Stephen’s brother, Alec actually joked about how he isn’t as religious as his brother. But a few days ago, Alec made it clear that he was religious and that he doesn’t understand atheism. He posted this on his twitter:

Dear Alec Baldwin,
You have asked why I don’t believe in God and would like to answer you. First, I am going to assume that you are referring to the Abrahamic God as opposed to the gods, Zeus, Thor, Ra, etc. Before I answer your question, I am curious if you believe in any of those gods and if not, why not?

My guess is that you don’t believe in any of those other gods. There is a great quote from Stephen Roberts, “I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”

This opens up the question as to why you believe in the one god you do seem to believe in. The fact is that the burden of proof in on you to prove your claim that your deity of choice exists. Personally, I don’t believe anyone has made a sufficient case for such a claim. Through science and reason, God has been forced into the gaps of existence. The more we know the less necessary God becomes.

I do think that the Judeo-Christian God is particularly ridiculous. The character of God in the Bible seems to me to be particularly poorly written. Some days he is angry and hateful and other days he is the God of peace and love and there seems to be no rhyme or reason to his mood swings. Plus, a look at the history of that particular God shows that he has evolved over time from one of the many gods in the Canaanite pantheon of gods.

But let’s assume that you have no particular god in mind, but simply believe in some kind of vague higher power type of entity. Why? The process of evolution via natural selection explains how we got here and the Big Bang and M-Theory explains how the universe got here. Morality doesn’t come from any vague higher power either. It comes from our empathy, compassion, and sense of wellbeing. Our purpose isn’t some divine mandate, but rather an existential journey.

Alec, who are you praying to and why? Instead of praying for a savior maybe we should work to be the saviors ourselves. I don’t believe in God, I believe in people. I don’t have faith in a God, I have faith in humanity. I don’t pray to a God, I ask for help and I answer the help of others. I think John Lennon put it best in his song Imagine.
In Reason,
-Staks

Filed under: atheism, conversation, Disproving God, twitter | No Comments »

Once again a particular Christian has tried to equate organized atheism with religion in an attempt to dirty atheism by lowering it to the level of religion. We must be doing something right when religion practically admits to being dirty. In this case it is liberal radio host, Thom Hartmann.

I don’t think Rick Wingrove did a good job in this interview but I don’t think he was prepared for this type of attack from the left. He might have expected a friendly experience instead of loaded questions like, “When did you get saved through the religion of atheism.”

He probably should have spent a lot of his time rejecting Hartmann’s attacks much more. Saying that atheism is a religion because we are organized is like saying that political parties and special interest groups are religions too. The NAACP is a non-profit group does that make it a religion?

Related articles

• Liberal Host Thom Hartmann Takes On Atheist Leader Over July 4th ‘Evangelical’ Campaign (mediaite.com)
• Is atheism a religion? (atheistdave.wordpress.com)
• Ye Olde “Atheism is a Religion” Canard [EvolutionBlog] (scienceblogs.com)

Filed under: Ad Hominem, Atheism NOT Religion, culture war, ignorance, Progressive Christians, Religion | 2 Comments »

Yesterday, I was reading the Huffington Post Religion Section (always a good time) and I saw an article from my favorite Rabbi, Adam Jacobs. For those unfamiliar with him (which should be almost everyone), he is a fundamentalist Christian… I mean Jew.

I have actually written a few Examiner articles responding to his craziness (Links down below). I have also had some e-mail conversations with Rabbi Jacobs. This current article was all over the place, but one of the claims he made I found interesting. He claims that the Bible predicted that the  mathematical representation for Pi is equal to 3.141509 and that it is too great of a coincidence and therefore must have been divinely put in the Bible by God.

Here is the catch, the Bible actually got Pi wrong! You see according to I Kings 7:23-26, Pi is equal to exactly 3. So since this obviously doesn’t match with mathematics as we know it, the good Rabbi takes this verse and adds II Chronicles 4:2 to it to come up with a complex equation which surprise, surprise equals 3.141509. So now, instead of the Bible getting the number for Pi wrong, it actually gets it exactly right to 6 decimal places thus proving that God wrote the Bible or that when the Bible gets something wrong we can make it right by jumping around the Bible to find other verses from other books of the Bible to twist around in our minds to the get it right.

This is what religious literalists do. It is what Harold Camping did to get all his failed End of the World dates and it is what his religious critics did to prove him wrong when reality was surprising not sufficient. It is what Young Earth Creationists do to get their dates and what other religious literalists do to explain away all the things that don’t match up to modern science. In fact, it is the very tool used in the creation of the Bible Code used by some religious wackos to predict… the past.

The way the Bible Code works is that you feed a page of the Bible into some calculations and it will reveal predictions of the future that are currently in the past. For instance, when they did the Bible Code before 2001, they saw that the Bible actually predicted the JFK assassination and the Challenger explosion. And when they did it after 2001, they found that it predicted 9/11 too. Surprisingly they didn’t figure that out until after it already happened. This same calculation also showed that any book of significant length could predict the same things; thus proving that Moby Dick was also divinely inspired.

Examiner Articles Responding to Rabbi Jacobs:
Atheist responds to open letter
Atheist continues dialog with Rabbi Adam Jacobs
Rabbi Adam Jacobs reasonable argument for God’s existence
Atheist attempts to educate Rabbi Adam Jacobs on morality

Related articles

• Rabbi Adam Jacobs: The Cult of Coincidence (huffingtonpost.com)
• In Defense of Harold Camping (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: anti-intellectualism, Creationism, Religious Manipulation | 2 Comments »

I know, we are all sick of this topic but it seems that the elevatorgate situation is a symptom of a larger issue. As a point of fact, there are more men in atheist groups, meetups, conferences, etc. then there are women. So how can we as a community get more women engaged in the community?

As I have read a lot of people’s opinions on this whole elevatorgate thing and had discussions with several people over the last few days it has occurred to me that the longer this goes on the more people are going to forgo logic and reason and start attacking each other’s gender stereotypes.

Not all men are the same and not all women are the same. The more we start treating each other as our gender stereotypes merely the more we loss focus on the fact that we are all on the same side. We all want to be treated fairly and equally with respect, compassion, and empathy.

Being involved in politics, I have noticed that whenever I have been to a political meeting it usually also had far more men than women engaged. This is a problem with our society and there is nothing any single person can do to change it overnight. But if any community of people can change it, it will almost certainly be the atheist community of reason.

We tend to be pretty progressive and humanistic and as rational thinkers, we are much more likely to step back from our emotions and work together to solve a problem. So what is going on here? Well, conversations across the blogosphere have gotten everyone emotionally hyped up and cause people to be careless with their language. This in turn has made some people act in a very defensive manner and has further enraged other people’s emotions.

Both men and women are equally at fault here. Women are not all man-haters and men are not all part of the evil white privilege conspiracy. We all need to treat each other as individuals and try to understand each other’s point of view. Most men have not considered the concerns that women face in society and most women don’t realize the expectations placed on men by society. So we all need to take a breath and think about this stuff rationally.

Now, let’s try to solve the problem together. How do we get more women engaged in the community? Let’s get some ideas on the table in a rational and non-judgmental manner. Let’s be constructive here.

Related articles

• Elevatorgate Belongs on TNT (dangeroustalk.net)
• Gender Differences in Emotional Health (everydayhealth.com)
• Guys, listen. That? Stop Doing That. (aafwaterloo.wordpress.com)
• On the moral purity of skeptics and fallacies (evolvingthoughts.net)

Filed under: atheism, Coexist, humanism, People of Reason, Self-Help | 4 Comments »

It seems that the drama around Skepchick Rebecca Watson’s elevator encounter has escalated and people are starting to leave the greater community of reason over this. If you don’t know what I am talking about, Rebecca summarizes it HERE.

On the plus side, this drama is getting a lot of attention and since all publicity is good publicity, it got me thinking. Over the years there have been a few of my fellow atheists that I had some strong differences with and have taken issue with. I usually just let them do their thing and continue to do my thing without doing the whole drama thing. I tend to leave the drama to TNT… They know it.

Seriously, should I me more vocal in my feuds with other atheists? Does that help the community? Does that help fight against the Religious Right? It might get some new readers though.

Okay, I’m not a huge fan of Greg Epstein (the Humanist Chaplin at Harvard). I think he acts like a silver spooned rich kid who is too full of himself. His book reads like he is bragging about how smart he is with quotes that don’t really add to the narrative and I resent his book cover which seems to have been an attempt to latch on to UnitedCoR’s billboard campaign. Plus, he ignored my question in a Q&A and was kind of rude to me afterward. However, I still agree with him on 99.9% of the issues and think that he does a great job creating a community for Humanists. I support his efforts to put a friendlier face on atheism even though I tend to be more the bad cop sort. In short, I think he is a giant douche, but I wish him luck and if he needs any help I would be more than happy to support his efforts.

I also have an issue with BionicDance on YouTube. Awhile back, I disagreed with her in the comments section of a video she did on the Westboro Baptist Church court case and she went irrationally ballistic on me and started to call me names. The next day, I attempted to smooth things over on another social media outlet and she again went irrationally ballistic. So I unsubscribed to her channel and left it at that. I didn’t tell everyone else to unsubscribe because I think some of her videos are actually pretty good (and I told her so). While I can never take anything she says seriously again after her super emotional and irrational discussion, I am sure other people might find her stuff interesting and useful and the more voices out there the better it is for our community.

That is where Rebecca Watson lost me in this whole elevator drama. Yeah, Richard Dawkins was a big douchebag to her and he was wrong. But she was wrong to encourage people to disengage from the community and to Dawkins’s efforts on other fronts. It is fine to take issue with someone’s personality, but don’t drag everyone else into your drama. Leave the drama to TNT or your favorite drama television network.

Related articles

• Atheist Drama (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: atheism, People of Reason, Personal | 22 Comments »

I would say that the single most common message I get from Christians is usually in two parts. The first part is an expression of love and the second part is a threat of eternal torture.

This is of course not the first time I have written about this however, the title of my Atheism 101 article on this subject seems to give people the wrong impression. I think I said it best is a sort one line response to a comment a Christian left on one of my articles recently:

“I wouldn’t worship a deity under the threat of eternal torture even if I believed such a deity existed… and I don’t.”

That’s even less than 140 characters, but it doesn’t really address the passive aggressive tone of the Christian’s message. It also doesn’t really address the false expression of love. I say that the expression of love is false because I think that anyone who truly loved me would stand up to the deity who threatened to torture me for all eternity simply for not believing in his existence because he failed to present adequate evidence to convince me that he actually exists.

The way I see it (and I expressed this in a video) is that God would know what would persuade me of his existence and he would be able to present that persuasive evidence. So if God loves me, then he would present that evidence and I would be persuaded by it. Therefore, either God desired to torture me for all eternity, doesn’t know how to convince me, is unable to convince me, or he just flat out doesn’t exist.

No matter how you slice it, it doesn’t look good for the Christian. Besides, what kind of sadistic deity would even put “torture non-believers for all eternity” on the menu? That is fucking ridiculous and that is why I think that anyone who really loves me would call this shit out.

If you are a Christian and you want to offer a prayer to your God on my behalf, pray that he stop with this eternal Hell thing. Because even if God did prove persuasively that he existed, I still wouldn’t worship any deity that thought it was okay to torture anyone for all eternity without the possibility for parole. That’s not justice that is sick and twisted hate. So don’t tell me you love me because your words don’t match your beliefs and actions.

Dear Christians, I love you and I want you to stop believing this twisted shit and start living your life free from religious bullshit. You will be happier and you will make others happier too.

Thanks.

Related articles

• Religious Forgiveness vs. Secular Forgiveness (dangeroustalk.net)
• Shouldn’t My Hell Be Your Hell? (dangeroustalk.net)
• Beware of Christian Hell (atheistrev.com)

Filed under: Authority, conversation, culture war, delusion, Disproving God, forgiveness, Love, Religion, Religious Manipulation | 3 Comments »

A lot was going on this past weekend. Americans celebrated our independence from England, American Atheists flew banners over half the nation, and atheists celebrated our independence from gods. Yet despite all of this, most of the e-mails I got this weekend were asking me my opinion on Rebecca Watson’s 4am elevator encounter.

Let me be clear here, I respect Rebecca and support her right to blog about her experiences. I don’t think every atheist blogger needs to comment on her experiences. I recently wrote about my thoughts about the death of Ryan Dunn because I met him and lived in the same town as he lived in and died in for many years. That was my experience, but I don’t think Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers, or Hemant Mehta (among others) should comment on my experience.

In short, I wasn’t there and I really don’t care. So I want to take this opportunity to talk about drama. Sure, everyone loves a good drama. But it really isn’t productive. I am glad Rebecca talks about her experiences and feminism within the atheist movement and if atheist bloggers want to discuss feminism in more detail and perhaps come up with suggestion on being more welcoming to women within the greater community of reason, I am sure Rebecca would be thrilled and that would be worth writing about. But the drama just gets in the way.

Let’s be rational and leave the drama to reality television. Now, I am still taking suggestions for tract ideas (see previous blog post).

Related articles

• Why Can’t Atheists Get Along? (dangeroustalk.net)
• Atheist Advice (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: atheism, Offensiveness, People of Reason, Personal, Skepticism | 9 Comments »

Atheists often joke about how Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses go door to door pushing their religion. Yes, it is incredibly annoying and no one likes it. But even though it annoys people, it also gets their message out there. People don’t even have to listen to what they say, the fact that they are there reminds people of their message. Maybe atheists should start putting some boots on the ground too… but in our own way.

One of the great things about the door to door evangelists is that they give you literature (if you can call it that) which has their church address and meet times listed on the back. I don’t like annoying people who don’t deserve to be annoyed. So I don’t support going to random houses to talk about atheism the way Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses do to talk about God. But since churches love to spread their message using these means or other annoying tactics, maybe we should pay them a visit… about ten minutes into their services.

“Knock, knock, anyone here? Oh, you are in the middle of something. Can I take a moment of your time to tell you a little about reality?” Or, if you don’t want to be rude the way religious people like to be rude, you can wait until right after or right before the service. Or my personal favorite is right when they start passing the collection plate. 😉

Seriously though, we need to start engaging the religious in everyday life. There are many atheist tracts available online. The Freedom From Religion Foundation has a lot of them. However, most of them are rather wordy and it might be tough to get religious believers to actually read them. So I was thinking of creating some tracts of my own.

I want to create a series of tracts. Some should be very polite and friendly while others should be harsh. Some should be humorous while other should be direct and to the point. But they need to be easy to read (i.e. not wordy) and invoke thought. Because the fact is that no one reads a tract and then instantly de-converts. The idea is to get people thinking. I am open to ideas. In the mean time, here is an old video that I love dealing with door to door atheism:

P.S.
Godless banners to fly on Independence Day
Independent from gods on Independence Day
Happy Independence Day Weekend!

Related articles

• Vote Atheist! (dangeroustalk.net)
• The Myth That Atheists are Unelectable (dangeroustalk.net)
• Atheists as a Political Force (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: atheism, culture war, humanism, Jehovah's Witness | 3 Comments »

My fellow atheist blogger over at Atheist Revolution recently posted a blog entry on why he chose the name he did for his blog. So today I thought I would do the same with mine. Why is my blog called Dangerous Talk?

In 1995, my friend Jeff brought me on the air during his disco radio show on the campus radio station that literally no one but those at the station could hear. I hate disco, but I enjoyed talking in between songs. In fact, the general manager was there and he liked what I had to say. He offered me a show… that no one could hear. The Great Staks’s Radio Show was born.

My friend Jeff got tired of doing a show that no one could hear, so he put together the equipment to broadcast out of his dorm room. He called the station “pirate” to get more people to listen to him, but his stations was under the power limit so it was actually perfectly legal. In any case, we worked out a system where I recorded my show at the campus station and then gave him the tape to play at the same time every week. As a result, my show got popular.

I started putting up signs for the show. Each week, I put up a new sign with the topic we were discussing so that people could call in and discuss it despite not actually being able to hear the show for a few days. The topics were generally edgy and not always about religion or atheism. But as an open atheist who regularly went to religious groups and made a general nuance of myself to the religious leaders on campus, the topics often touched on religion. In any case, one of the tag lines for the show that I put on the posters was, “The Great Staks’s Talk Show: It’s Dangerous Talk.”

Later, when the station switch to the FM frequency so that people could actually listen live, I changed the name of the show to just “Dangerous Talk.”

Years later when I started the show back up at a small local station and also started podcasting I kept the name Dangerous Talk. Then when I transitioned it to the blog it just seemed natural.

Related articles

• Atheist Advice (dangeroustalk.net)
• Atheists as a Political Force (dangeroustalk.net)
• Vote Atheist! (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: atheism, Media, Personal | No Comments »

Once again I am on my rant about taking the fight to the religious and playing their games on them for a change. This time, I think we should force Christians to stop calling their blood kin “family.” They can use some other name, but I don’t think they can call it “family.”

According to the dictionary, a family is “a basic social unit consisting of parents and their children, considered as a group, whether dwelling together or not: the traditional family.” There is nothing about Gods in that definition. If a God is the head of your home, then that cannot be called a family. I don’t think we should have to change the traditional definition of family to include deities just because 80% of the country belief in that a deity rules over them.

So in the spirit of separate but equal, I think Christians need to use some other name for their blood kin if they want to hold that their deity is the head of every home. We have to push for an Amendment to the Constitution that will protect the definition of traditional family (which does not include deities). Christians should have to be forced to fight legal battles in every state in order to be recognized as having a family.

This would be great for business too. No family plans for Christians means that they would have to pay more for services that offer such plans. Cell phone would make much more profits and according to religious right mentality, would obviously trickle those profits down and expand their companies and hire new people. It’s a win/win.

Related articles

• Dear Christians: You Are Not a Real Christian! (dangeroustalk.net)
• Sincere Prayer To God (dangeroustalk.net)
• God’s a Whiny Bitch (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: church/state, culture war, family values, Gay Issues, Political Activism, Religion | 1 Comment »

I am tired of churches lobbying to pass laws that force schools to teach their religion in science classes. Sure we can fight their efforts again and again, but it is time we go on the offense. It is time we start pushing laws that force churches to teach the science  at least once a month.

I know there is a separation of church and state and that this would be a clear violation of that principle, but most of these religious believers don’t accept this principle. So I don’t see the problem.

We can push this law on the federal level, the state level, the county level, and even on a township level. Could you imagine what would happen if some small town passed an ordinance in which all the churches in that town had to bring in a qualified science educator to teach evolution or climate change one Sunday a month?

If a bully keeps punching you in the face, sometimes it only takes one punch back to make the bully stop being a bully. I am tired of Creationists bullying the public schools. It is time to give them a taste of their own medicine.

Related articles

• Creationists Win Big in Tennessee (atheistrev.com)
• 7 Science-Education Battlegrounds of 2011 (wired.com)
• Church-State Battles Are Erupting in Legislatures Around the Country (alternet.org)

Filed under: atheism, Church, church/state, culture war, education, evolution, global climate change, science | No Comments »

On Friday, New York passed and signed into law a gay marriage bill. The interesting thing is that the bill almost didn’t pass. It seems that religious groups led by the Catholic Church were lobbying pretty hard against allowing gays to marry. It has never been clearer that religion is the primary force against equal rights for gays. Religion is the elephant in the rainbow room.

With that in mind, I really can’t understand how anyone who supports equal rights for gays can possibly be religious. It isn’t like these are some religious extremists that were lobbying against gay marriage. No, these were the mainstream religious institutions that were putting pressure on lawmakers.

In fact, these mainstream religious groups put so much pressure on lawmakers that attached to the gay marriage bill is a provision that will all religious institutions and even religious believers to be able to continue to discriminate and be hateful toward gays. This religious exemption is lays bare the evil that is religion.

How is it that these religious institutions have become so involved in politics that they can put so much pressure on lawmakers and still not be taxed as the corporate lobbyists that they are? The Catholic Church has even threatened to bar all politicians who supported equal rights for gays from going to their churches and from going to Catholic schools to educate children.

That last part is important to think about. The Catholic Church feels so strongly in their hate of gays that they would use children’s educational opportunities to blackmail politicians. That strategy was effective enough to get the religious exemption bill passed. Make no mistake religion is a force of evil in the world. Anyone who supports equal rights for gays should not support the Catholic Church or any other religious institution that has become an obstacle to equal rights.

Personally, I can’t understand how anyone can support the Catholic Church in light of their pedophile priest problem. Even dollar that goes to the Catholic Church is a dollar toward the legal defense fund of pedophiles.

Related articles

• Gay marriage the new red menace, according to New York archbishop (therainbowpost.com)
• The Religious Exemption to the New York Same-Sex Marriage Bill (friendlyatheist.com)

Filed under: Catholics, Church, church/state, culture war, Current Events, Evils of Christianity, Gay Issues, Religion | 3 Comments »

It has occurred to me that in the Bible, the character of God is always telling people what to do and complaining about various things. One of his biggest issues is that the Hebrews don’t love him enough. In the New Testament Jesus whines about how people don’t love God enough. So I just gotta know: Why is God such a whiny bitch?

Think about it for a moment, here is a deity who is all-powerful, all-knowing, etc., and what does he do? He complains that people aren’t worshiping him enough. Hell, he destroys whole cities of people and floods the entire world because humans weren’t “good enough” for him. Well shit, whose fault is that for making us so flawed in the first place?

Seriously though, I think that the character of God as portrayed in the Bible is deeply flawed. He is like a spoiled brat with superpowers. He gets offended at nearly everything human beings do and every time he gets offended he smites people or orders people to smite in his name. And that is just laziness if you ask me.

You don’t even have to do something bad like murdering someone to offend God. All you have to do is mock him in some way and that counts as blasphemy. Mock his holy spirit and there is no forgiveness. Did you have a tough week at work and have to work some extra hours on the weekend? Well, you just pissed off God. Did you eat some tasty shell fish for dinner? Sorry, but this whiny deity hates Red Lobster and will torture you for all eternity if you ever eat there. Wearing a shirt made of a cotton/polyester blend? Have sex before marriage? Make fun of a bald guy? Masturbate?

Let’s face facts if God were real he would be one whiny deity. He gets offended at the stupidest things and lashes out with extreme punishments to those who offend him. How can Christians seriously expect anyone to worship such an ass-clown?

Related articles

• Ban the Bible (davidscommonplacebook.wordpress.com)
• I’m Offended (yahwehssong.com)
• Offending and Offenders (biblicalpreaching.net)

Filed under: Blasphemy, god, Offensiveness, Religion | 2 Comments »

Sam Singleton, Atheist Evangelist is Coming to DVD… with your help. If you are not familiar with Brother Sam, he is a character played by Roger Scott Jackson. Rosco travels around the country performing a one man comedy show. His main show is called Patriarchs and Penises.

I have seen the show twice and it is extremely funny. Brother Sam has a lot of interesting things to say about Christianity and the Bible. While I am sure that he will be coming to a city near you are some point so that you can see his show live (and you should), he is trying to put together the show for a DVD. This is where he needs your help.

He needs to raise a little over $3000 in 17 days to get the DVD produced. In order to do that, he has created a page on Kickstarter.com. If you pledge money to the effort, you will be compensated with prizes. For example a pledge of $25 will be rewarded with the DVD (when it is produced – about 2 weeks after the funds are reached). There are other prizes as well. They are all laid out on his kickstarter page.

I consider Rosco to be a personal friend and he needs to raise the full amount in order to get the DVD produced. I know that everyone is in need of money lately (I’m no exception) but I really do think that Sam Singleton Atheist Evangelist is a unique comedy act and that it is well worth your support.

I often talk about how atheists need to help fund each other. We need to support each other as best as we can. There are a lot of atheists in the country and around the world and if just half of us started funding atheist projects, websites, political candidates, etc. we could really turn the tide of religious belief.

A $5 donation gets you two anti-proselytizing stickers. No amount is too small, please support Sam Singleton, Atheist Evangelist. Go to his kickerstarter page right now!

Related articles

• Vote Atheist! (dangeroustalk.net)
• Atheists as a Political Force (dangeroustalk.net)
• The Myth That Atheists are Unelectable (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: atheism, Blasphemy, culture war, free speech, People of Reason, Personal, Preaching | No Comments »

While most people know Ryan Dunn from his association with the Jackass movies, I know him from his staring role in a small film called Haggard. Haggard was a film made by Bam Margera. The movie was filmed in West Chester, PA where both Bam and Ryan live.

At the time the movie was filmed, I also lived in West Chester. In fact, I remember waking up on a Sunday morning noticing a great deal of traffic as I was driving to the radio station to host the Dangerous Talk radio show then on WCUR 91.7 FM. The traffic was due to the filming of Haggard at a local coffee shop.

After seeing the film Haggard, I ran into Bam and Ryan at a local bar (Kildares). I remember telling them that I enjoyed the film and both were extremely nice. Bam even went into a small speech about how the best part of the movie for him was that it was filmed right there in West Chester.

I bring this up today because for those who haven’t heard, Ryan Dunn died in a car accident early Monday morning in West Chester. He was apparently driving ridiculously fast and it is probable that he was drunk at the time. Both he and his passenger Zac Hartwell died in the crash.

Some people have said that it is no big loss because he shouldn’t have been drinking and driving. I take exception to that line of thinking. While I agree that he shouldn’t have been drinking and driving and that he certainly shouldn’t have been driving 110 mph, I still think it is a big loss. I can’t speak for the drinking and driving thing, as I rarely if ever drink and have never been drunk. But as someone who is a little bit of a speed demon (but not nearly 110 mph on that section of 322) I can empathize.

As part of the Jackass team, Ryan has done some pretty stupid things in his life (most of which was for the entertainment of others). When you are known as part of the team who does wacky stunts that often involve pain and injury, one might get a sense of invulnerability. This might have been a contributing factor. But the fact is that millions of Americans drink and drive all the time and the vast majority don’t have hit films involving wacky stunts.

Despite what religious believers believe, there is no afterlife and so while we ought to live life to the fullest (the way Ryan did) we should also be thoughtful about our choices. In this case, the choices to drink & drive and to drive ridiculously fast. We only have one life to live. I remember Ryan Dunn as an entertainer and I hope that he is remembered for his entertainment rather than his unfortunate death.

Filed under: Current Events, death, Personal | 2 Comments »

Yesterday, I attended my third gay marriage. While it wasn’t legal, no police came in to break up the festivities either. But since the couple have a baby daughter, it would be nice if they had the legal protection that straight couples have for our children.

Currently, gay marriage isn’t legal in the state of Pennsylvania (where this wedding took place). In the state of New York, gay marriage is on the cusp of becoming legal, but one of three New York State Republican Senators have to move from undecided to supporting marriage equality.

Personally, I am tired of this state by state battle. I think the President should have put some serious pressure on the House and Senate and pushed an Amendment to the Constitution. Now that Democrats no longer control the House, it seems unlikely that would happen now. It was a wasted opportunity on the President’s part (one of many).

Still, I think it would be a valuable step in the right direction for the House to push such an amendment even now. While it would probably lose, it would put people on the record and in a nation in which a majority of the public now support marriage equality, it would be interesting to see who stands against the force of the public and of history.

That’s right I said the force of history. We have come to the point in which gay marriage has become inevitable. The issue has now become when, not if. So we are at that point where politicians have to choose if they want to be on the winning side of history or if they are going to stand in the way of progress and be labeled as standing in the way of freedom by history. This perspective alone could change the votes needed to create a Constitutional amendment. But something like that needs leadership and our President is just not that kind of leader.

Related articles

• Where the gay marriage debate is headed next (salon.com)
• Gay Marriage Bill In New York Comes Down To The Wire (huffingtonpost.com)
• Celebrities weigh in on gay marriage (greensboring.com)

Filed under: Coexist, culture war, Gay Issues, Law, morality, Political Activism, Politics | 1 Comment »

So this weekend, I went to Wizard World. Wizard World is a comic book/sci-fi/fantasy convention. Before I went there, I was thinking about how most atheists are fans of this type of thing. Don’t get me wrong, theists tend to be fans of fantasy too. The difference is that they don’t realize it is fantasy. Okay, that was a cheap shot. 😉

Seriously though, I have found that pretty much every atheist I know is a fan of superheros/sci-i/fantasy. In fact, many sci-fi themes tend to even be anti-religious themes. There are at least two episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation that are direct attacks against religion at pretty much all of Stargate is a direct attack on religion. Superman at first seems to have religious overtones, but upon careful inspection it too has a decidedly humanist message (at least that was the case with the film Superman Returns). Batman is walking preacher for education, learning, and skepticism.

I guess my point is that these types of conventions are prefect places to reach out to other atheists and bring them into the greater community of reason. At the end of July, the Philadelphia Coalition of Reason is having our annual Unity Picnic and so I thought I would drop off some fliers for the event at the Wizard World convention. I think that is the perfect place to advertise and I hope it helps to get new members for some of the Philly atheist groups.

I think in the future, it might be fun to even staff a table at the convention or something. I am curious to know I other atheists have found a similar correlation as I have between these the sci-fi/fantasy world and atheism. Let me know.

Related articles

• Atheists Enjoy Sex Better Than any Other Group of People (socyberty.com)
• Wizard World Philadelphia has more international flavor than most comic cons (preternaturalpost.com)
• Entertaining Atheists (aafwaterloo.wordpress.com)
• Vote Atheist! (dangeroustalk.net)

Filed under: atheism, humanism, People of Reason, Star wars | 2 Comments »

On Thursday, Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner resigned from the House of Representatives over some crotch photos he tweeted. Why did he resign? Well, it was a whole scandal. What was the big deal? Why was it a scandal? The way I see it, it is because religion has skewed our priorities as moral agents.

Yeah, I know people are going to say that I blame religion for everything. Well that’s not true. I only blame religion for the attitudes encouraged by religious holy books. I can’t help it if that seems to be negative. Perhaps the character of God shouldn’t have been an asshole in those holy books.

Let’s face facts, the Abrahamic religious are pretty uptight when it comes to sexuality and the idea that Anthony Weiner tweeted out photos of his crotch would hardly even be news if it weren’t for this nations obsession with the puritanical philosophy of western religion.

Sex and sexuality are often thought of as being dirty and as a result, our culture has become overly obsessed whenever something of a sexual nature takes place. Who cares that Anthony Weiner took photos of his weiner and tweeted them? Does that really affect the way he represents the people in his district? Does it make him less correct when he goes onto the floor of the House and exposes what his Republican colleagues really want to do? Does it make him wrong on healthcare reform, or on saving social security and medicare?

On the other hand, we have a Supreme Court Justice alleged to be taking bribes and Congressmen around the nation (Democrats and Republicans alike) being bought off by large corporations and Wall Street bankers to reduce regulation on those industries putting the American public at risk. No one’s forcing any of those people to resign.

The really odd thing is that Weiner wasn’t even being hypocritical on the issue of sexuality like so many of his Republican colleagues. The reason why it is a scandal for Republicans and not for Weiner is because Republicans run their campaigns on being sexually pure and Christian “family values.” They often attempt to pass laws condemning homosexuality and try to regulate sexual activity in the bedroom. Then they are caught in gay bathhouses and with prostitutes. Their hypocrisy becomes their scandal. Anthony Weiner on the other hand is alleged to have an open relationship with his wife and doesn’t push any of the religiously inspired sexual purity in speeches or in legislation.

Did Anthony Weiner do anything illegal? No, but sexuality is so evil that tweeted crotch photos are much more scandalous than deregulating the insurance, credit card, banking, and oil industries so that they can rip off the public and pollute our air and water to make a few extra billion dollars to just sit around in their already bloated back accounts and not stimulate the economy.

My point is that instead of caring about the real corruption in Washington and scandalizing the greed and carelessness of those in political office who abuse their power, we are more concerned about scandalizing Anthony Weiner over sending crotch photos to consenting adults on twitter.

For more on how religion demonizes sexuality, check out my atheism 101 article: Why has Christianity demonized nudity, sex and sexuality?

Related articles

• Anthony Weiner resigns over lewd photo scandal (independent.co.uk)
• Anthony Weiner Photos Scandal: House Democrats To Meet About Controversy: AP Sources (huffingtonpost.com)
• Weiner Resigns (aphilosopher.wordpress.com)

Filed under: culture war, Evils of Christianity, family values, Politics, sex, twitter | 5 Comments »

It really bothers me that we can’t come together to form a strong voter block. I keep hearing excuses why we can’t do it and that just seems silly and lazy to me.

Atheists are a very diverse group and we are fiercely independent. Yeah, I get that and yes, the only thing we have in common is our lack of belief. I get that too. But I think those within the greater community of reason have other things in common too. We tend to be humanistic, we support reason over faith, education, critical thinking, science, and surprise, surprise most of us are pretty liberal and even down right progressive.

While we are independent thinkers and organizing atheists is comparable to herding cats, I think most of us are smart enough to realize the advantages of electing reasonable atheists to public office. This alone should be incentive enough to work together and get reasonable atheists elected to public office.

I am tired of the excuses. I know that many atheists groups can’t endorse candidates, but as the religious people have shown, there are ways around that. There really is no excuse for the inaction of the greater community of reason.

I am calling for all atheist bloggers, facebook uses, twitter uses, reddit uses, etc. to join together and help to get Cecil Bothwell elected. Leaders of atheist organizations can help too just by using their e-mail list to let people know an atheist is running. They don’t have to endorse a candidate. In fact, they can even talk about the other candidate and let their members choose for themselves who the reasonable candidate is.

In politics, money matters. If we all can donate a little bit to his campaign and that of other reasonable atheists running for office, we can show that we are a political force. Other politicians will start to think twice about invoking religion and some politicians might even come out of the closet and try to get our support.

What we can’t have is this negativity. No more excuses! No more of this “atheists can’t win” nonsense. We have to spread the meme that we can win and that we will do it together. So if you really want to change the overly religious politics in this country, then you have to put in some effort. Not praying is not enough.

Related articles

• The Myth That Atheists are Unelectable (dangeroustalk.net)
• Vote Atheist! (dangeroustalk.net)
• Why Aren’t We a Bigger Political Force? (friendlyatheist.com)
• Atheists Thrown Under the Bus By Progressives (atheistrev.com)
• Where are the progressive atheists? Right here. (kazimskorner.blogspot.com)

Filed under: atheism, church/state, culture war, People of Reason, Political Activism, Politics | 4 Comments »