Archive for July, 2011

“Don’t Tread On Me… and Don’t Blame Me Either”

Posted in Uncategorized on July 31, 2011 by David 2

(The following commentary is from “Brutally Honest”, hosted by David 2, which airs every Saturday night at 7pm ET on ShockNet Radio.  The transcript is posted here with the author’s permission.)

“Don’t Tread On Me”

It’s a statement, a threat, and a warning.

Continental General Christopher Gadsden used that slogan for his flag during the American Revolution.  The first maritime flag of the US Navy had thirteen stripes, a snake, and the statement “Don’t Tread On Me”.

The people who use that statement are sending a simple message: Don’t cross us.  Leave us alone.  Don’t get us angry, because you won’t want us angry.  Like the snake imagery that often accompanies this statement, the warning is clear… this person is angry… this person is pissed… and this person is ready to strike if they feel the slightest bit threatened.

But underneath that statement is a second one that has manifested itself of late.  A little fine print that also serves as a threat and a warning.

Underneath “Don’t Tread On Me” is the codicil that says “Don’t Blame Me”.

“Don’t Blame Me” when things go bad.  “Don’t Blame Me” when tragedy happens.  “Don’t Blame Me” when people get hurt or when lives are lost.  “It’s not MY fault”, they are quick to proclaim, when their rhetoric leads to tragedy.

These are the groups that talk about revolution.  They talk about the fear of invasion, the fear of an all-powerful enemy LURKING in the shadows, creeping into our neighborhoods, taking over EVERYTHING in society and threatening to destroy EVERYTHING that we hold dear in this world.  They are the ones beating the WAR drums and using the WAR rhetoric.  “We are AT WAR” they proclaim, “and the enemy is all around us… and if you’re not WITH US, then you’re with THE ENEMY!  DON’T TREAD ON ME!”

So last week a little tragedy befell the country of Norway.  A government building was bombed in the middle of Oslo.  Ninety minutes later a gunman dressed as a policeman opened fire in a youth camp in the nearby island of Utøya.  Over seventy lives were lost, many of them teenagers.

And according to the police there, BOTH incidents were done by the same person.  The same TERRORIST by the name of Anders Breivik.

Only this TERRORIST wasn’t Muslim.  This TERRORIST was CHRISTIAN.  This TERRORIST was a CONSERVATIVE that BOASTED through his online postings that he was going to do this to spark a revolution, to start a war AGAINST Muslims, AGAINST liberals, AGAINST multiculturalism, AGAINST the things that he claimed were destroying Europe and destroying his country and destroying everything that he holds dear.  A church-going CHRISTIAN that proudly boasted about the righteousness of the Crusades and used the Knights Templar as his inspirations.

“Don’t Tread On Me!” he shouts, echoing the voices in this country.

And now those same voices that were screaming “Don’t Tread On Me” over here are saying “Don’t Blame Me” for this.

“Don’t blame us” say the conservative and neo-conservative voices in the United States.  The very people that have been opening their sewer holes and spewing an ENDLESS deluge of WAR rhetoric; the very people that have been quick to brand ALL MUSLIMS as INVADERS, TERRORISTS, JIHADISTS, MURDERERS; the very people that have been quick to brand all liberals and all moderates and anyone else who doesn’t agree with them as being TRAITORS, SYMPATHIZERS, ANARCHISTS, and a PLAGUE on society, a CANCER that MUST be excised from the societal body; the very people that talk endlessly about the THREAT of immigrants, the EVILS of multiculturalism, the SCOURGE of anything different; the very people that are quick to paint their adversaries and critics with the BROADEST of a blame brushes as possible, blaming them for EVERYTHING under the sun; those same people are now looking over at Norway and the tragedy that has befallen that nation and they are actually saying…

“Don’t blame us for this.  It’s not OUR fault that this happened.  WE didn’t tell people to blow things up.  WE don’t advocate terrorism or violence or bloodshed.  This guy was a loner.  He was a lone nutcase.  He’s crazy.  HE’S not a part of us, and WE OBJECT to ANYONE painting US with the same broad brush that we use on everyone else!”

“Don’t blame us,” they’re saying.  “Don’t blame us.”

Bullshit.

BULLSHIT!

No… No you conservatives and neo-conservatives DO NOT have the luxury of getting away with saying “Don’t Blame Me”.  Not now.  Not anymore!

For DECADES now, conservatives and neo-conservatives have been painting the world with a broad brush, pinning EVERY wrongdoing, no matter how slight, as being part of some creeping EVIL.  Every TV show or movie or book or magazine or song on the radio that doesn’t reflect THEIR ideals of how society SHOULD BE is branded as being part of some “liberal multicultural conspiracy to destroy society”.  Ann Coulter makes her fortune writing books and columns accusing liberals as being “traitors” and “godless”.  She puts those terms on the front cover of her books!  Conservative and neo-conservative talk show hosts like Michael Savage and Sean Hannity compare liberals and moderates and anyone NOT like them as being “cancers” and “diseases” and out-and-out THREATS to the security of the United States.  Fox News has continually talked about how we are in this “THIRD WAR”, or now it’s a “FOURTH WAR”, against Mexico because of illegal immigrants.  Lou Dobbs, formerly of CNN and now on Fox Business, talked about how illegal immigrants supposedly tried to kill him for talking about them in a negative way.

THEY are the ones that have been chanting “With Us or Against Us!  WITH US or AGAINST US!”

Not only have they painted their opponents and critics with BROAD brushes, but they have actually CODIFIED that brush and they have turned it into a RECOGNIZED LEGAL DOCTRINE called “Negative Secondary Effects”, which allows them to blame ANYTHING THEY HATE with ANYTHING BAD that happens in society.  ANYTHING!

In the minds of a conservative or a neo-conservative, if a man gets drunk and crashes his car into a family of six, it’s supposedly the fault of a strip club in the area because it serves alcohol with skin.  If housing prices go down, it’s not because of the banks screwing over the American people, or because local officials aren’t keeping the roads paved or the streetlights working, it’s supposedly because of an adult book-and-video store that operates in the obscure corner of one of fifty strip malls five miles away.  And they actually WRITE LEGISLATION in cookie-cutter format based ON that assertion and are given the blessings of the judicial system.

Over the past few weeks, every freedom-hating so-called “pro-family” organization out there with a fax machine and a publicist have been waging an endless crusade to get rid of NBC’s upcoming fall show “The Playboy Club” because it celebrates the Playboy Clubs of the 1960’s.  Never mind that the actual Playboy Clubs were about as raucous as a church choir.  Oh, no, it’s because it’s PLAYBOY, and these groups want to blame PLAYBOY and Playboy founder Hugh Hefner for EVERYTHING EVIL.  They want to blame Hefner and Playboy and all the fans of Playboy magazine for all of the child porn and all the sex slavery going on in the world, never mind that the most notorious abusers of children happen to belong to the Roman Catholic Church.

You cannot find a broader brush of blame than that, and that brush is being wielded loudly and proudly by conservatives and neo-conservatives in this country and by their counterparts around the world.

And yet when one of their own takes them up on their war rhetoric, when one of their own gets inspired by Timothy McVeigh and Jim David Adkisson to launch a new wave of violence by blowing up a government building and slaughtering teenagers in a hail of bullets, these same groups then say “Don’t Blame Us” for it.

When James Kopp murdered Doctor Barnett Slepian in 1998, he supposedly was a “lone nutcase”, even though he was linked to a group called the “Lambs of Christ”.

McVeigh and his friend Terry Nichols, responsible for the Oklahoma City Bombing, were both supposedly “lone nutcases”, even though they were linked to militia groups.

When Adkisson went to the Knoxville Unitarian Universalist church in 2008 and killed two people and wounded seven, supposedly following a hit-list based on Bernard Goldberg’s book “100 People that are Screwing Up America”, he was supposedly a “lone nutcase”.

When Eric Robert Rudolph set off a bomb in the middle of the 1996 Olympic Games and then planted bombs at women’s clinics and gay nightclubs, he was supposedly a “lone nutcase”, even though he was connected to a group called “Christian Identity”.

When Paul Hill murdered Doctor John Britton in 1994, he was considered a “lone nutcase”, even though he was connected to a group called the “Army of God”.

When Scott Roeder murdered Doctor George Tiller in 2009, he was considered a “lone nutcase”, even though there were continual calls by a certain Fox News media personality that “SOMETHING must be done” about Dr. Tiller.

Oh, and that SAME Fox News personality says “Don’t blame me for that”, and also he claims that the Norway terrorist can’t POSSIBLY be a Christian Terrorist, because according to him and his so-called “expert opinion”, there is no such thing as a “Christian Terrorist”.

All of those people, those TERRORISTS, and many more that I have listed on the air in previous shows, were all supposedly “lone nutcases”.

That’s a lot of nutcases.

But there ARE no “lone nutcases” when the terrorist is MUSLIM, are there?  There are no “lone nutcases” in the environmentalist movement.  There are no “lone nutcases” in the animal rights movement.  There are no “lone nutcases” in the feminist movement.  Every wrong move by a porn star or a centerfold model is declared to be part of the problem with the WHOLE business.  Every mistake or misstep committed by individuals that are NOT conservative or neo-conservative is declared a black mark on the WHOLE group.  EVERYTHING in THOSE groups are all declared parts of a MASTER CONSPIRACY of the WHOLE group and EVERYONE connected to that group and EVERYONE supporting that group and EVERYONE that speaks out in defense of that group.

Bullshit.

Let’s get brutally honest here… it is LONG since time that we hold these conservative and neo-conservative groups to the SAME STANDARDS that they impose on everyone else.  If there are no “lone nutcases” in Islam, then THERE ARE NO LONE NUTCASES IN CHRISTIANITY… PERIOD!

Yes, there ARE CHRISTIAN TERRORISTS.  There ARE people who firmly believe that THEIR interpretation of Christianity MUST be imposed onto the world by any means necessary.  They listen to the rhetoric from groups like the Seven Mountains Dominionists and Operation Rescue and Christian Identity and the people that proudly boast of being “Christ Warriors”.  They hear the diatribes from those Fox News media personalities about a so-called “War against Christians” and a “War against Christmas” and the continual talk about WAR and THREATS of WAR concerning their faith, and they decide to follow through on all that talk of WAR, because they are also being told by those same voices that they are LOSING that WAR.

You see… necessity is more than just the mother of invention.  Necessity is also the mother of terrorism, because every terrorist justifies their actions with necessity.

There are NO REAL DIFFERENCES between a Muslim terrorist and a Christian terrorist.  The SAME mindset motivates them, the SAME twisted logic justifies their actions, and the SAME delusions of validation and vindication and cosmic reward inspire them.  Virgins, grapes, pearls, golden crowns, golden scrolls; it really makes no difference.  The only differences between them are SEMANTICS and the DELUSIONS of those whose pompous self-righteous, self-serving ARROGANCE refuses to admit to the existence of the latter while whipping up conspiratorial fantasies of the former, and then blaming the world for not going along with their lies and misdirection.

When a dog is trained and goaded into attacking people, you don’t just blame the dog for being a menace to society, especially when they DO attack and maim and kill.  You blame the dog’s owner.  You put the responsibility on the people that trained that dog to attack, that told that dog to attack anyone it sees, and then rewards that dog for following through.

And while a human being is supposed to be more advanced than a dog and is supposed to know better, history has shown that the same kind of conditioning works for humans as well as dogs.  We make soldiers by the tens of thousands every year and BOAST that we can turn anyone into a killing machine.  All they need is motivation and a target; the two things that the Christian groups and Fox News have been providing in abundance for years.

So if you’re going to sit there with your “Don’t Tread On Me” T-shirt, holding a Bible in one hand and the American flag in the other, and you talk about a “War” on Christians and the “encroaching invasion” of Islam and illegal immigrants, and the “threat” of multiculturalism, and the need for “revolution” and “Second Amendment remedies”, you don’t get to then claim innocence and ignorance when someone takes you up on that kind of message.  You have FOREFITED NOW AND FOREVERMORE the LUXURY of saying “Don’t blame me” when YOUR WAR RHETORIC leads to acts of bloodshed.

And I would also suggest that you put away that huge brush of blame that you like to wield about, lest someone like myself takes that brush away from you and then slaps you in the face repeatedly with it until the lies come out of your brain so the truth can finally sink in.

No Christian Terrorists? Yeah, Right!

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 30, 2011 by RJ Evans

Apparently the ire of FOX news viewers was raised to new heights as they expressed their feelings about the American Atheist lawsuit brought against a cross in the 9/11 Memorial Museum. Multiple comments on the network’s Facebook page were more than telling of the vile, despicable, utterly shameless nature of skydaddy belief.  In the wake of christian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik’s massacre of innocents in Oslo, Norway, and after multiple television and radio personalities and bloggers loudly declared there’s “no such thing” as a christian terrorist… I present to you christian terrorists in training, courtesy of FOX News.  They lie, and then their minions decide.  (American Atheists made the screen captures below before FOX removed them)

Another Seed Is Planted

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 29, 2011 by RJ Evans

(Editorial Comment from  host RJ Evans on his American Heathen® radio show – Air Date 07/29/11)

Weeds.  We all have them.  In many cases even the most beautiful lawn isn’t immune to the inevitable invasion of opportunistic weed seeds as they blow from one yard to another.  Only the most diligent of yard men and women are capable of battling each invasion.  Spending hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of hours carefully trying to manage the onslaught, these landscape warriors still find themselves overwhelmed from time to time.  But, somehow they manage to win most of the battles against their ever evolving foe.  Weeds evolve.  They adapt.  And, so the battle to keep them under control must continue unabated.  This past week, a weed seed found fertile ground in a yard overseas. It rooted in a beautiful green pasture of grass, kept tightly cropped, well fed, watered, and cared for.  For the most part, this yard was weed free. But, this new weed’s seed had been laying dormant, slowly adapting to its environment, waiting for the right opportunity to blossom and then destroy the lawn in which it lay.  When this weed sprouted this past week, it quickly sowed more of its seeds far and wide, carried on the wind to wherever fertile ground was ready to receive it. Could our yard be this weed seed’s next destination?

The weed seed I’m talking about tonight is the most heinous of species.  But, it’s really just a tiny variation of an indigenous species here in the United States.  Unfortunately, this particular invasive species has the potential to be far more destructive, and it comes from a place where the lawn was thought to be untouched by weedy tentacles.  Norway has given birth to a weed that truly has the ability to destroy our lawn.  While we have our own variations of this weed, this new variation will easily cross pollinate and assimilate into our existing species.  The name of this weed?  Christianus Fundamentalus Extremis Ji-hadis.  Or, in layman’s terms… With us or against us… or simply, you’re fucked.

His name is Anders Behring Breivik, 32 years old from Oslo, Norway.  Described by people who knew him as a modest person that seldom engaged himself in political discussions.  Breivik mercilessly blew up a building and then shot and killed scores of people at a youth camp.  In the end, more than 70 human beings were dispatched with ruthless abandon and all in the name of cultural conservatism and a right wing revolutionary movement.  Breivik openly and unabashedly called himself a christian anti-jihadist.  Some officials have claimed that Breivik committed the crimes to call attention to his manifesto, a document that lays out his ideology and reasons for the attacks.  And, indeed, the document does give ample information to that end.  But, what’s striking to me about Breivik’s manifesto is that it echos throughout, almost word for word, the sentiments of many CNP (Christian Nationalist Party – aka Republicans) members, and 2012 candidates for president.  Anti-multiculturalism, anti-Muslim, anti-immigration and pro-free market.  What’s more, Breivik describes how he became involved in the right wing movement of Norway in a couple of very telling paragraphs from his manifesto:

“When I was around 16-17 years old, I joined the Progressive Party’s youth organization (FPU), which was anti-immigration and pro-free market. Every journalist in the country considered the party’s members to be racist because of their anti-immigration platform. The Progress Party was under constant attack from every media organization, from NGOs and all other political parties. They were called racists and Nazis, and were generally labeled “fascist pigs.” The Progress Party appealed to me because I had seen the hypocrisy in society, and I knew even then that they were the only party that opposed multiculturalism.

Around 2000, I realized that the democratic struggle against the Islamization of Europe, and European multiculturalism, was lost. It is simply not possible to compete with democratic regimes that import millions of voters. 40 years of dialogue with the cultural Marxists / multiculturalists had ended up as a disaster. It would now only take 50-70 years before we, Europeans, were the minority. So I decided to explore alternative forms of opposition. But the biggest problem then was that there were no options for me at all. There was no known armed culturally conservative, or Christian, anti-Jihad movement.”

Notice any similarities to the rhetoric coming from the Right here in the United States?  Well, Breivic was heavily influenced by American anti-Muslim bigots like Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, two people among many who are on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hate watch list.  Of course, we know the anti-Muslim mentality is part of the ideology that drives the CNP.  And, most, if not all of it, is echoed in Breivik’s words.  Anti-immigration, anti-Muslim (even though in both Breivik’s words AND the words of CNP’ers here in the States, it’s “nothing personal”), anti-multiculturalism, the use of words like “Marxism” and “Marxist”.  More than that, Breivik openly wanted to be an armed conservative christian, anti-Jihadist.  Can you say Tea Bagger, CNP, “kill’em all and let god sort them out”?  But, there’s so much more that Breivik revealed about himself, and his political and religious affiliation, that run almost perfectly parallel to the CNP’s political platform and aspirations.  First and foremost is Nationalism.  The CNP’s version of Nationalism and Breivik’s are the same.  In this context the word is easily defined as “you’re either with us or against us”.  The CNP thinks in terms of black and white and so does Breivik. If anyone doesn’t support the CNP worldview, they are deemed “socialist”, “liberal”, “marxist”, “communist”, and “unpatriotic”.  Outsiders are considered to be threats.  To quote Breivik, “The operation was not to kill as many people as possible but to give a strong signal that could not be misunderstood that as long as the Labor Party keeps driving its ideological lie and keeps deconstructing Norwegian culture and mass importing Muslims then they must assume responsibility for this treason.”  Now, let’s replace a few words. “The operation was not to kill as many people as possible but to give a strong signal that could not be misunderstood that as long as the Democratic Party keeps driving its ideological lie and keeps deconstructing American culture and mass importing Muslims then they must assume responsibility for this treason.”  Frightening huh? And, how many times have we also heard the word “treason” used against anyone who disagrees with the CNP?

Breivik also alluded to two other “cells” of his religio-political network — which he imagines as a new Knights Templar, the medieval crusaders who protected Christian pilgrims in the Holy Land. At one point, his manifesto briefly referred to an intention to contact two other cells, but no details were given.  Christian soldiers?  Where have we heard this before?  Now, add to all this a very damning piece of evidence that further supports my point. Breivik said his acts were intended to start a revolution to inspire Norwegians to retake their country from Muslims and other immigrants. He blames liberals for championing multiculturalism over Norway’s “indigenous” culture.  He blames liberals?  The CNP has been using this exact rhetoric for quite some time.  And, in fact, has ramped up this type of rhetoric to the point of obstructing and evading compromise on any legislation the Obama administration brings to the table.  The “liberal agenda” must be cleansed. And, we don’t need to get them started on the “indigenous” culture thing!  They’re already screaming “Christian Nation”!!

Fear and intimidation.  Breivik used an extreme form of fear and intimidation to maximum effectiveness.  Not surprisingly, similar methods are the hallmarks of the so-called “conservative” CNP mentality.  Scare the fuck out of everyone until they crumble into Stockholm Syndrome.  And violence has been used by members of the CNP from time to time to accomplish the task. Once their mission is accomplished, however they choose to execute it, the CNP can claim a need for “purity” in our national identity to counter the forces of “evil”.  They can convince everyone that our nation is threatened by multiculturalism, liberalism, secularism, and Separation of Church and State.  Our melting pot of diverse cultures, the richness of our national identity, our openness, our very freedoms and liberties, in the eyes of the CNP, are threats to the manifest destiny of our nation.  And, we can’t have that can we? No!  America’s destiny is to lead the world to jesus, to be ruled by a fictional god that they have created and control.

Our political soil is rich, ready, and more than fertile for a dangerous weed.  Need I call attention to the historical parallels here?  While I firmly support the freedom of speech and the Right Lug Nuts have the right to spew their hate filled filth far and wide,  I must draw the line at incitement to violence.  But, can we question the idea of incitement?  Reluctantly, I have to agree with a paragraph from a blog commentary on Bold Faith Type:

“It would violate basic American understandings of the First Amendment to suggest that Spencer and Geller be held legally responsible for the way violent individuals act on their writings, but that doesn’t mean they should get a free pass. Their rhetoric is still false, incendiary and oriented towards a dangerous ‘clash of civilizations’ paradigm. Just because they have a right to hate speech doesn’t mean their voices should be endorsed or amplified by more ‘mainstream’ actors. These attacks are a good reminder that the political organizations and media outlets who continue to give these extremists platforms deserve more scrutiny. The bigotry they promote isn’t just hateful, it’s dangerous.”

It’s far too early to nail down any real and tangible reason for this tragedy.  Political and religious ideologies have a way of intermingling to such a degree that they are inseparable at times. What is clear is that innocent people died, again,  at the hands of radical, extremist ideology. Innocent people are dead because someone believed that humans should be separate and not equal. Not surprisingly, quite a few CNP lug nuts here in the United States have been quick to defend themselves against criticisms of the ideological similarities they share with Breivik. The whole idea of taking responsibility for the bullshit they spew is unthinkable to them.  But, the fact remains that they can’t distance themselves from the reality of violence inspired by the rhetoric they spew every day.  Facts speak louder than bullshit.  And facts dictate that when the seeds of extreme ideological weeds are left unchecked, bad things happen to the lawn of freedom and liberty for all.  And, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit to see the weed seeds of Norway blow in on the wind and flourish in American soil, right alongside our own native freedom choking species called the CNP.  Fact is, the ground is fertile for such a weed.

______________________________________________

For those who wish to argue that Breivik’s “not a real christian”, I refer you to the following blog posts…

1. What’s The Harm?  (They thought they were real christians!)

2. Christianity vs. Islam: Peace & Dignity?  (And, don’t forget to read the scriptures that are taken directly from the New Testament)

3. Things Change: That’s Not Christian!  (After reading the ENTIRE post, be sure to visit the link in the last paragraph.  God sure loves murder!)

4. The Same Fuckin’ Poison  (A beautiful, comprehensive look at the immense diversity of christian belief! So, who’s really a christian?)

Breivik isn’t a christian when someone provides tangible, verifiable evidence for their version of the christian god.  Oop’s!  There is NONE!

Moderates Rationalizing The Irrational

Posted in Religion on July 29, 2011 by RJ Evans

(The following is a transcript of  co-host 2Buck Chuck’s (Dr. Charles A. Doswell III) segment “Leading Horses To Water” which airs on my American Heathen® radio show.  Chuck is a world-renowned scientist in the field of meteorology.  Air date of this particular segment – 07/29/11)

Ancient Greeks began the way of thinking originally known as natural philosophy but which we now call science.  Science emerged as we know it during the Renaissance, in an age dominated by fear, superstition, injustice, and brutality.  In other words, pretty much like the present.  These musings are aimed at explaining how science works, and how science can serve even nonscientists in their efforts to make sense of the world.  I can try to explain things but it’s up to you to decide whether or not you wish to drink from these waters.

Although there are many thousands of flavors of christianity (to say nothing of other religions), it seems to me that only the christian fundamentalists seem to be consistent with the biblical foundation for their faith.  Either the bible is the inspired word of god, or it’s not.  If it is, then believers are compelled logically to accept the bible literally (including its falsehoods and contradictions).  If a believer finds some parts of the bible to be inconsistent with something else in his or her life (like logic or science), then either the bible wins or it loses.  Many moderates I know, including many of my scientific colleagues, choose to interpret various biblical passages as metaphor or something other than the literal truth, obviously to dance away from any conflict between the bible and the reality they accept – an expedient interpretation.  In doing so, they implicitly deny the authority and credibility of the bible as a foundation for their beliefs.  Most scientists I know who are christians don’t believe the universe (including our Earth) is only 6000 years old, nor do they deny the validity of evolution as a means of understanding how species have come to change over the billions of years of life on Earth.  Thus, they must find a way to resolve the conflict between the bible and their acceptance of evolutionary biology, astronomy, and geology.  Once you begin “cherry picking” which parts of the bible you can interpret in some way other than literally, there’s no limit.  Ultimately, you can see the whole work as simply late Bronze Age and pre-Renaissance mythology as written down over time by a collection of human authors, in which case it can be seen as just another work of fiction.

Although everyone is free to think what they like and even to express those beliefs publicly in this secular nation (the USA), I find it a great puzzle why otherwise intelligent folks feel compelled to rationalize their irrational beliefs.  If you have an unshakable faith, without regard to any questions of evidence, then why bother to seek and accept evidence to support your beliefs?  I take “faith” to mean “belief in the absence of evidence” and so it’s at least logically consistent to deny the validity of any evidence that seems to gainsay your beliefs.  If you do so, however, it’s totally inconsistent to accept any evidence that supports your beliefs, as well!  In science, if you accept the relevance of evidence (as you must, if you’re to be a scientist), you must be willing to accept whatever the evidence reveals, without regard to its possible deleterious impact on your preconceived notions.  You can’t reject evidence simply because it contravenes your beliefs.

There are standards for evidence, naturally.  The most compelling evidence is that which was collected with the express purpose of invalidating some hypothesis.  That is, in science, data collection and laboratory experiments should be designed to provide the most rigorous test possible of any proposed idea – to invalidate that idea, if possible.  An idea that can’t be invalidated by well-designed data collection or a controlled experiment is simply not within the domain of science, but remains in the realm of unsubstantiated speculation.  Real scientists don’t always live up to this ideal, and often are criticized for that (and justifiably so) by their peers.  Scientists engage in speculation all the time, but they also understand that their ideas must be tested before they can become accepted by their peers to provide a basis for claiming increased understanding.  For instance, string theory is a marvelous mathematical construction and many physicists are exploring string theory as I speak, but until there’s solid evidence derived from some rigorous tests based on predictions using the theory, it’s only an idea floating in the realm outside of validated scientific understanding.  Science works in a practical sense when that understanding is applied to some real world problem, because it’s been tested and shown to work!  Quantum theory was mere speculation in the early 20th century, but its survival of many rigorous tests has led to most of the existing electronic technology many Americans take for granted today.

Evidence based on hearsay, the testimony of a small number of untrained eyewitnesses, or documentation in texts by unknown authors, as in the case of biblical “evidence”, is simply not credible evidence.  The bible can’t be used to provide any evidence in support of biblical statements – the evidence must be independent and, whenever possible, repeatable.  No one has provided any body of evidence, to the best of my knowledge, that supports everything in the bible.  Not everything in the bible is illogical or demonstrably false, of course.  That a few nuggets of truth are contained within the vast overburden of myth, falsehoods, and contradictions doesn’t mean that the bible is literally true in all respects, which is a logical expectation if it were the work of an infinite deity.  Such an infinite deity should easily be able to produce a book with no ambiguity (room for misinterpretation), either.

The pseudo-science of creationism, in whatever guise (such as “intelligent design”) seems utterly pointless to me.  Someone has worked very hard to construct something that has a superficial resemblance to science, apparently in order to provide the appearance of a rational basis for the irrational beliefs of fundamentalist christianity.  The very existence of such a pseudo-science is direct evidence of the deep-seated conflict many christians must feel about their faith.  That they attempt to rationalize the irrational reveals their lack of faith!

Science is not a religion but rather a tool for those who wish to think for themselves about the natural world.  Its primary characteristic is its willingness to entertain questions from those who wish to obtain believable answers.

An American Kristallnacht?

Posted in Politics, Religion on July 29, 2011 by RJ Evans

(The following commentary is provided by AH Show co-host Dr. Charles A. Doswell III (aka 2BuckChuck))

With the news that Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik is a fundamentalist christian nationalist, christians world-wide are scrambling feverishly to disassociate him from christianity. It seems to me that this incident makes it all the more clear that every religious believer comes to his or her own interpretation of their religion. This, by the way, is especially true for atheists and agnostics since there are no “sacred” atheist scriptures around which to build a rigid set of beliefs. As rigid as the bible may seem to some to be, it’s apparently quite open to interpretation!

The christians who deny that Breivik is a “true christian” no doubt find it convenient to rationalize the evil of his actions with their pre-conceived notion of christianity. So I ask: were the christians who participated in the Crusades true christians or not? Were the christians who participated in the Inquisition true christians or not? Were the christians who burned witches at the stake true christians or not? I could go on to include more recent examples, but I think the point has been made, here. Much barbarism has been committed in the name of christianity over the 2000 years of its existence, and that barbarism continues to this very day, albeit without government sanction (not yet!).

Christianity, like most religions, is inherently inclined to stimulate its believers to extremism. It taps into the tribalistic tendency programmed into every human by evolution – the “us versus them” mentality that dehumanizes anyone not a “true believer” to the point where it’s but a short step to systematic torture and annihilation for the infidels. If not all christians come to the conclusion that they should go out and do evil acts in the name of jesus, it’s also true that many christians go along passively as evil acts are carried out by their more fanatical christian brethren.

In reality, all believers interpret their religious documents through a personal filter. So-called fundamentalists are supposed to accept every word in their scriptures as literal, word-for-word truth, of course. The large number of “fundamentalist” sects even within christianity suggests that even the fundamentalists generally “cherry pick” the ideas within their so-called faith, to suit their personal vision of what to believe. The bible is full of explicit and implicit contradictions that simply demand some sort of interpretation. For instance, how many “right to lifers” also support the death penalty for certain crimes? How many believers in the Ten Commandments support killing during war? It’s clear that different christians come to different conclusions about how to interpret their scriptures.

If you accept that humans have “free will” (an idea that is logically inconsistent with an omnipotent, omniscient deity) within christianity, this tendency toward individual interpretation evidently is approved by christianity. It seems that christians are indeed free to believe whatever they choose. But there’s a catch! Whose version of christianity is the right one? I can virtually guarantee that every christian believes that their version of christianity is the one true religion, and all the others are simply misguided. Why adhere to a denomination you don’t believe to be the one true version, after all? For some, nonchristian beliefs are assumed to be heresy or inspired by satan, and to be heretical or working on behalf of the devil is tantamount to a death sentence in their eyes. Wiping out the unbelievers would be doing the work of god, not an evil deed!

Many “moderate” christians believe firmly that they would never commit the actions of a terrorist, so they can say from their self-righteous perch above the rest of humanity that a terrorist can’t be a true christian. But if the theocracy that some christians desire becomes a reality here, what’s to prevent the leaders of that theocracy from committing terrorist acts on unbelievers? The history of christianity makes it very clear that this possibility is not just paranoia – fear with no foundation in reality. Just ask the Germans who went through the agonies of Nazi facism how many of them stood up for the rights of the Jews and other persecuted minorities. How many muslims in the middle eastern theocracies are standing up and denouncing the terrorist misdeeds of their islamist brethren? Not all christians advocate a theocracy here in the USA, but many of them maintain that our laws and history make us a de facto “christian nation” despite the real history being just the opposite of that (separation of church and state!).

Are all those misguided unbelievers truly doomed to death and eternal damnation? So it must seem to christian believers. It’s just not that big a step from seeing others as fated to damnation to acting on that vision and hastening the process of their extinction. Especially when there are passages in the sacred texts of these religions that call for brutal deeds to be visited upon unbelievers. It’s only a matter of individual interpretation by “believers” that prevents christians from becoming a barbaric mob of murderers and torturers, visiting their god’s wrath on the heathen multitudes. As an atheist in a predominantly christian nation, I find that rather worrisome. We have yet to have our “kristallnacht” here in the USA but I don’t know for sure how much it might take for such a thing to happen.

I simply don’t believe those who say, “It could never happen here in the USA!” Germany was arguably the most civilized of nations before they went down the Nazi path. They were swayed by the seductive arguments of a demagogue who tapped into their tribalism and used the difficult economic circumstances of financial collapse to cause many of their people to unite behind a christian nationalist vision of their ultimate superiority, giving them the right to rule the world. Does this sound familiar to us here in the USA? It should!

This Week in Freethought History (July 23rd – 29th)

Posted in Uncategorized on July 29, 2011 by RJ Evans

(Special Thanks goes out to Ronald Bruce Meyer for continuing to provide this valuable historical information)

Here’s your Week in Freethought History: This is more than just a calendar of events or mini-biographies – it’s an affirmation that we as freethinkers are neither unique nor alone in the world, no matter how isolated and alone we may feel at times.

1. Last Saturday, July 23 – It was on this date in 1995 that Comet Hale-Bopp was discovered by Alan Hale and, independently, by Thomas Bopp. Hale worked at The Space Center in Alamogordo, New Mexico, before founding the non-profit Southwest Institute for Space Research in 1993, two years before he observed the comet that bears his name. “Few sights in the nighttime sky can be more awe-inspiring than that of a bright comet,” Hale wrote in The Skeptical Inquirer (March 1997). But he warns that, contrary to the beliefs of our forbears, and to many modern religious believers, there is nothing supernatural or prophetic about comets, and it is useless to “invoke mythical beings for which there’s no evidence” on account of them. Comet Hale-Bopp stirred its own “comet madness,” recalled Hale. Hale-Bopp came nowhere near the earth at its closest (on 22 March 1997) – 122 million miles (197 million kilometers) from Earth. But the most dreadful effect of “comet madness” took place in Rancho Santa Fe, California: 39 members of the Heaven’s Gate religious cult, each covered across the face and chest with a triangular shroud of purple cloth, committed suicide, “so that their ‘inner beings’ could rendezvous with another group of ‘beings’ on an alien spacecraft traveling alongside Comet Hale-Bopp.” Agreeing with science writer Carl Sagan, that science is the only useful candle in this dark, demon-haunted world, Hale asked, “How many more Rancho Santa Fes are we going to have before we finally say ‘Enough!’ to ignorance and superstition? How many more of these types of reports are we going to have to listen to before we finally decide that we are going to use the candle of science, and the reasoning skills that we have, to take back the darkness from the ignorance and superstition that is enveloping us?”

2. Last Sunday, July 24 – On this date in 1783, South American liberator and president Simón José Antonio de la Santísima Trinidad Bolívar – Simón Bolívar – was born in Caracas, Venezuela. Bolívar inherited a fortune that assured him of a quality education, partly in Spain. He traveled Europe, and briefly in the United States. Bolívar found the writings of Rousseau particularly compelling, along with other writers of the 18th-century European Enlightenment. On his return to Venezuela, on fire with democratic and anti-clerical ideas learned in Europe, in 1810 Bolívar joined a group of revolutionists bent on overthrowing the Spanish throne and church. Eventually he won independence from Spain for Panama, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Venezuela. In 1819 he became President of the Republic of Colombia. Four years later, at the age of 40, he was chosen Dictator of Peru, after its liberation. Upper Peru was organized into a separate Republic, called Bolivia in his honor. He became Bolivia’s first President and drew up its constitution. By 1825, Bolívar governed an area extending from the Caribbean to Argentina. Bolívar was aware of the weaknesses and limits of liberal democracy, which is why he insisted on the necessity of a strong, republican form of government, with emphasis on the common good over individual rights. Sadly, his vision of a United States of Latin America was not to be: Clericals, who resented his atheism, united with Republicans, who resented the sternness of his government. He resigned the presidency in 1828 and exiled himself. Simón Bolívar died from tuberculosis on 17 December 1830, poor and unpopular, in Santa Marta, Colombia.

3. Last Monday, July 25 – It was on this date in 1368 that the foremost surgeon of medieval Europe, Guy de Chauliac, died in Avignon, during the exile of the Papacy in that French city on the Rhône. He studied medicine in Toulouse, Montpellier, and Bologna, where he learned to eliminate astrology and mysticism from surgery. He was the most celebrated surgeon in the 14th century. At Avignon Chauliac was physician to Popes Clement VI, Innocent VI and Urban V. The underpinning of surgery is, of course, a knowledge of human anatomy. Yet it is this study that the Christian Churches stopped dead in its tracks for a thousand years – until the 16th century. Christianity, of course, absorbed the worst ideas from paganism, such as the Ancient Egyptian and Greco-Roman aversion to dissection of cadavers, and incorporated them into a theology endorsed by Tertullian (who denounced the anatomist Herophilus as a butcher) and St. Augustine. The medieval argument against anatomical study, that “the Church abhors the shedding of blood,” would be laughable if the Churches themselves had not spilled oceans of blood from the bodies of other Christians to enforce orthodoxy. 16th century Flemish anatomist Andreas Vesalius, who is claimed by the Catholic Encyclopedia, was in fact cruelly persecuted by the Church, and eventually driven to his death by the Inquisition, chiefly because he practiced human dissection. Vesalius lived one step ahead of the Inquisitors, especially when his dissections failed to find the “resurrection bone.” But for courageous surgeons like Chauliac and anatomists like Vesalius, medical science might still be called medieval.

4. Last Tuesday, July 26 – On this date in 1856, playwright George Bernard Shaw was born to Protestant parents in Dublin, Ireland. It is said the young Shaw attended a revival service by Dwight Moody and Ira Sankey in Dublin, and in one of his first critical notes wrote, “if this sort of thing is religion, then I am an atheist.” A vegetarian who neither smoked nor drank, Shaw saw human society as reformable. In 1884 he co-founded the Fabian Society, on the belief that capitalism had created an unjust and inefficient social order. He promoted Socialism instead. Shaw was a freethinker, but he equally despised Rationalism and religion. His idea of God was as another name for the cosmic Vital Principle, an idea he learned from Samuel Butler. He rejected the idea of immortality.

Shaw addressed many of his social causes in the prefaces to his 50-plus plays. The Preface to Androcles and the Lion (1912) runs over 36,000 words, and has its own Table of Contents. In it, Shaw thoroughly dissects Jesus and Christianity, saying, “The fact that a believer is happier than a sceptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one.” Shaw considered the purpose of the Eucharist laughable, the miracles of Jesus irrelevant to his mission, and thought Pilate was right for agreeing to his execution because Jesus was mentally unbalanced: “… It is not disbelief that is dangerous to our society, it is belief.”

5. Last Wednesday, July 27 – It on this date in 1835 that Nobel-winning Italian poet Giosuè Alessandro Michele Carducci was born in Valdicastello, a small town in the Province of Lucca in the northwest corner of the region of Tuscany. He studied philosophy at the University of Pisa, was professor of literature at Bologna University, and became a leader of the realistic school of Italian letters. In 1865, Carducci published a notorious poem called “Hymn to Satan,” which won him derision as a “praiser of Satan.” But by co-opting what the corrupt clerical forces in Italy were going to call the reformers anyway, he shook up the anti-clerical movement which eventually won Italy back as a republic. Carducci was not only a poet but also a politician, winning election to the Italian Senate in 1890. Though somewhat nervous at rewarding an Agnostic, Carducci won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1906 – the first Italian to receive such an honor. Anti-clerical to the end, Carducci said, “I know neither truth of God nor peace with the Vatican or any priests. They are the real and unaltering enemies of Italy.”

6. Last Thursday, July 28 – On this date in 1902, British philosopher Sir Karl Popper was born in Austria. He studied and taught in Vienna until the rise of the Nazis forced this son of Jewish parents to emigrate. He was sympathetic to the Vienna School of philosophy, though he was never a member. A professor of logic and the scientific method at the London School of Economics for 20 years, Popper insisted that since nothing can be absolutely proven true, the test should be whether a proposition is falsifiable. His chief works were political as well as philosophical: The Logic of Scientific Discovery, The Open Society and Its Enemies, The Poverty of Historicism and so on. In a 1969 interview, reprinted 29 years later in Skeptic magazine, Popper admits his agnosticism and the reasons for his disbelief. In discussing his attitudes toward Judaism and Christianity, he also admits a respect for the moral teachings of both religions. Popper was knighted in 1965. He died on 17 September 1994 at age 92.

It was also on this date in 1804 that the German philosopher Ludwig Andreas von Feuerbach was born in Landshut in Bavaria. As a young student of Hegel at Heidelberg, Feuerbach wrote to a friend, “Theology I can bring myself to study no more. I long to take nature to my heart, that nature before whose depth the faint-hearted theologian shrinks back; and with nature man, man in his entire quality.” At Berlin University he was a professor of Hegelian philosophy, but lost his position after publishing his 1830 book, Thoughts on Death and Immortality, in which he followed Hegel in rejecting the idea of personal immortality. Undaunted, he went freelance and followed up his first book on philosophy and religion with The Essence of Christianity in 1841. This book, said anthropologist and ethnographer Robert H. Lowie, “won him a place amongst the foremost advanced thinkers of the day.” It also helped promote Rationalist ideas in Germany. Feuerbach died on 13 September 1872 at age 68.

7. Today, July 29 – It was on this date in 1644 that the pope who will be remembered throughout history as the persecutor of Galileo, Urban VIII, died at Rome. It had been 18 months since his victim had died in Florence, while under a house arrest, which Urban did nothing to mitigate. Born Maffeo Barberini in Galileo’s ancestral home of Florence, on a date uncertain in April 1568 (four years after Galileo’s birth), the future pope was reared among the wealthy and privileged. On the death of Gregory XV, Barberini was elected pope in 1623 at age 55. He took the name Urban VIII and immediately, while the Thirty Years’ War raged between Catholics and Protestants in Europe, canonized Ignatius of Loyola. Ignatius, of course, founded the Jesuits, who incited the Thirty Years’ War. As for Urban and Galileo, the Catholic Encyclopedia can barely begrudge a mention of the savaging of the scientist, for which Urban is directly responsible. Where Galileo was accomplished, Urban was a dilettante in art and science – which everyone knew but were too polite to point out. Far from being a friend to Galileo, Urban directed his every punishment. This “haughtiest of pontiffs” took great offense at having his arguments against the Copernican system annihilated by Galileo (Dialog, 1632). The “imprudent” Galileo showed the world that those who agreed with Urban were clueless about astronomy and mathematics.

Urban ended his days in failure by pouring the papal treasury into his corrupt family’s coffers, rather than financing the Catholic powers in the Thirty Years War. Even the Catholic Encyclopedia has to admit that “Urban’s greatest fault was his excessive nepotism.”

We can look back, but the Golden Age of Freethought is now. You can find full versions of these pages in Freethought history at the links in the American Heathen blog, which take you to the blog by Ronald Bruce Meyer, FreethoughtAlmanac.com.

Oh Really O’Reilly?

Posted in Politics, Religion on July 29, 2011 by hewhay

(The following commentary is part of a weekly series called “Yahweh Speaks” by Yahweh.  Yahweh is an assumed name to protect his identity on-line.  He is a noted  free thought advocate and Constitutional attorney.  His series airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show. Airdate 07/29/11)

Bill O’Reilly recently critized the “media” for describing Anders- Breivik the man who has admitted committing the mass murders in Norway, as a Christian, saying that such a thing was “impossible.”

O’Reilly singled out the New York Times, which called Breivik a “Christian extremist” in an article. Breivik also described himself as a Christian, as did the Norwegian police, and his 1,500 page manifesto has been described as coming from a Christian perspective. In the manifesto, he said that he does not have a “personal,” religious relationship with Christ,  but that he believes in Christianity “as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform,” which he says “makes [me] Christian.”  But O’Reilly said it was “impossible” that Breivik is a Christian.  “No one believing in Jesus commits mass murder,” he said. “The man might have called himself a Christian on the net, but he is certainly not of that faith…we can find no evidence, none, that this killer practiced Christianity in any way.”  O’Reilly said  the reason the media described Breivik  as a Christian was because “the left wants you to believe that fundamentalists Christians are a threat just like crazy jihadists are.” O’Reilly called this notion “dishonest and insane,” saying  the media “is pushing the Christian angle [because] they don’t like Christians very much because we are too judgmental…”     O’Reilly, of course, is a proud Catholic. Too bad  he doesn’t know , or doesn’t want to acknowledge that, in fact, many “believing in jesus(do) commit mass murder.”

The  Crusades were nothing but wholesale murder in the name of Jesus.

After the Reconquest of Spain by the Christian Spaniards,they sought to unify the country into a strong nation. Ferdinand and Isabella chose Catholicism to unite Spain and in 1478 asked permission of the Pope to begin the Spanish Inquisition to purify the people of Spain. They began by driving out Jews, Protestants and other non-believers.  In 1483 Tomas de Torquemada became  inquisitor-general. He was responsible for establishing the rules of inquisitorial procedure and creating branches of the Inquisition in various cities. He remained the leader of the Spanish Inquisition for fifteen years and is believed to be personally responsible for the execution of thousands of Spaniards.  Those deemed heretics were identified by the general population and brought before the tribunal. They were given a chance to confess their heresy against the Catholic Church and were also encouraged to indict other heretics. If they confessed their heresy and turned in other non-Catholics  they were either released or sentenced to  prison. If they would not admit their heresy or indict others the accused were publicly introduced in a large ceremony before they were publicly killed or sentenced to a life in prison.  Tens of Thousands were disposed of.

Lest anyone think this murder for je-zeus is an atavistic trait no longer practiced by xtians, one only need look at the  American political/military scene of the 21st century:

King George Dubya said he was on a mission from god. He described the  Wars in the Middle east as the apocalyptic battle of “Gog and Magog” referred to in the Bible. Some branches of the military are actively recruiting “xtian soldiers, and promote and support xtian revivals.  Sarah Palin has said the Iraq war was a mission from god. Many other politicians, who favor various wars and actions in the Middle East, claim to talk to god and/or be at god’s direction. Many  21st century fundamentalist xtians are calling for “holy war”.

Oh Really O’Reilly?!!? No murders by those believing in jesus? No Mass Murders by xtians? No state sanctioned murders by xtians. Get REAL O’Reilly.  Moreover, central to Catholic dogma, central to Catholic ritual is the “Eucharist”, the “Holy Communion” whereby “true believers” take the “holy sacrament” NOT as a symbolic gesture , but as a LITERAL EATING of the ACTUAL body of Christ, a LITERAL DRINKING of the ACTUAL blood of Christ. That’s right, “true believers”, “true Catholics” must twist and dement their minds to such an extent that they ACTUALLY believe they are EATING the ACTUAL flesh and DRINKING the ACTUAL blood of jesus.

Oh REALLY, O’Reilly?

We’re supposed to accept at face value—because YOU say so— that true xtians have not, do not, will not “committ mass murder”? Oh Really, O’Reilly? If you and your cult can WARP your own brains to believe you are REALLY eating the flesh and drinking the blood of your own god—– can there be ANY doubt you and your cult members would not just as readily, in the name of that blood-thirsty cult, twist your minds so as to rationalize the blood letting upon others who do not share your delusions?

Oh REALLY,O’Reilly?

“But is does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

Doing God’s Work

Posted in Religion on July 22, 2011 by RJ Evans

(Editorial Comment from  host RJ Evans on his American Heathen® radio show – Air Date 07/22/11)

There’s a phrase that is used by christians quite often.  In fact, the phrase is considered to be a large part of the foundation of christian belief.  “Doing God’s work”.  What exactly does this phrase mean?  What is “God’s work”?  Well, being a former christian, I can shed a little light on this subject.  So, tonight I’m going to break it down for you, and also show just how ridiculous the phrase is.

“Doing God’s work” is simply a way of doing what YOU think a god wants you to do.  YOU pick and choose your way through a myriad of things that YOU believe a god would want you to do on his behalf.  But, YOU are careful to choose based on what YOU feel most comfortable with at the time. How YOU feel at any given moment determines the type of “God’s work” you’re likely to pick. However, there is another important factor that plays a role in choosing “God’s work”, and that is peer pressure.  The peer pressure is exerted by your church, your skydaddy contemporaries. Whatever the church’s agenda is, it likely plays heavily into your decision-making process. In the end, once a decision is made, “God’s work” begins. Some folks choose to feed the hungry.  Others choose to provide clothing to the poor.  And yet, others may choose to provide shelter for the homeless.  Some folks choose to spread the gospel, while others choose to fight for biblical interpretations of what THEY perceive as social injustices.  There are infinite ways the christian can claim to do “God’s work”.  But, in the end, the idea is to do something that makes YOU feel good about YOU, and in many cases, something that YOU think has the most potential in affecting a positive outcome in your final judgment before the skyking.  But, doing “God’s work” isn’t just a matter of deeds.  It’s also a state of mind.  It is a form of self-righteousness gleaned from the idea that the most powerful entity in the universe has a plan for YOU, and for YOU specifically.  YOU feel you have been charged with an important purpose on behalf of the sky daddy.  YOU  lay claim to divine authority, to have been appointed by this skyking to act on his behalf.  Therefore, it is imperative that YOUR authority is never questioned because YOU consider that an assault, an attack, on your skyking.

“Doing God’s work”.  It’s not just a phrase to christians, it’s a way of life.  In fact, some christians take this phrase so seriously that the “God’s work” they have chosen can involve violence, or the threat of violence, in order to successfully fulfill the work at hand.  This type of “God’s work” is best illustrated by the reprehensible treatment of abortion providers and homosexuals by christians of many different denominations.  But, even violence, or the threat of violence, isn’t enough when doing “God’s work”.  Lying, cheating, stealing, ignoring facts and evidence, bearing false witness… the list of ways “God’s work” is being done to further the christian agenda, at all costs, is mind-boggling.  And, amidst all of this, the one question that no one seems to ask is, ‘If god is so powerful, why does he need lowly humans to do his work?’

It never ceases to amaze me at how ignorant christians are when it comes to doing “God’s work”.  They remind me of a wife in a seriously dysfunctional marriage.  You know, the one where the husband is always sitting in front of the TV yelling at the wife, telling her she’s worthless without him and that she’ll never amount to shit?  The wife simply smiles and says, “You’re right sweetheart” and then cowers on her knees, scrubbing the floor after a long day at work.  She obediently jumps when her husband bellows for another beer and then begs for mercy when he threatens to beat her for random transgressions, some she never even knew were considered bad.  I always wonder why christians don’t see how tyrannical, controlling, and cruel their skydaddy creation is.  At some point you’d think they’d get tired of being trivialized and beaten.  Anyway…

Hearing the phrase “God’s work” reminds me of the numerous times I have been accosted by believers damning me to hell and/or praying for my salvation from the wreckage of my happiness.  Apparently the skydaddy is incapable of personally salvaging me from the wreckage of my happiness because I fail miserably at falling for delusions.  Or, maybe there’s a bit more to this?  First of all,  where’s the sky king, the all-powerful, all-knowing being?  Secondly, where are the works by which ALL mere mortals can find evidence for the glorious power ascribed to this deity?  The fact is that there is no such evidence. None.  What’s more, the very FACT that believers MUST do the work FOR a being that, they claim, has infinite power is EVIDENCE AGAINST the existence of the deity.  Add to this the FACT that any deed done in the name of a sky king ALWAYS bears the indelible mark of human failings.  Indeed, every characteristic assigned to a God and “God’s work” are delineated by the best and worst of human characteristics. Human qualities are assigned to this being, a dead giveaway to the fallacy of its alleged existence.  When it comes to supernatural qualities, these can easily be falsified.  For instance, it is false that a god is all-powerful, for the human condition is such that innocent lives are lost each and every day without supernatural intervention to prevent it.  It is false that a god is all-knowing, for those that worship it are constantly trying to communicate with the deity through prayer and never receive an answer outside of yes, no, or wait. Answers like these have been shown to be easily attained by praying to any god or inanimate object.  It is false that a god created man, for science has, is,  and will continue to provide an evolutionary record as evidence against any scripture in any holy book of any religion.

“Doing God’s work”.  If you are a believer and have to do the work for your god, then you must concede that your god is impotent. You must also concede that it is your choice to follow an impotent, incapable, inept, and powerless myth who demands compliance with archaic, barbaric, primitive, human contrivances on behalf of human despots.   But, you won’t concede.  And you know why?  Because you have faith.  And faith is the ultimate crutch.  Dan Barker, former evangelist preacher turned atheist, said, “Faith is a crutch.  It is intellectual bankruptcy.  If the only way you can accept an assertion is through faith, then you must concede that it can’t be taken on its own merits”.  But, of course, you already know that.  Why else would you have to do “God’s work” for him?

Science and, by inference, rationalism, under attack

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , on July 22, 2011 by RJ Evans

(The following is a transcript of  co-host 2Buck Chuck’s (Dr. Charles A. Doswell III) segment “Leading Horses To Water” which airs on my American Heathen® radio show.  Chuck is a world-renowned scientist in the field of meteorology.  Air date of this particular segment – 07/22/11)

Ancient Greeks began the way of thinking originally known as natural philosophy but which we now call science.  Science emerged as we know it during the Renaissance, in an age dominated by fear, superstition, injustice, and brutality.  In other words, pretty much like the present.  These musings are aimed at explaining how science works, and how science can serve even nonscientists in their efforts to make sense of the world.  I can try to explain things but it’s up to you to decide whether or not you wish to drink from these waters.

In the midst of a blistering summer heat wave in many parts of the USA, the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) deniers are, not so strangely, mostly silent.  It’s a lot easier to deny global warming when temperatures plunge and the snow flies, although in both cases (a heat wave or a cold wave) what people are seeing is the weather, not the climate.  This is simply another tactic that AGW deniers use to cast their spell of confusion on the American public.

Emotion-laden pandering to public ignorance has been characteristic of the AGW deniers now for several years.  They aren’t carrying out their denials in the refereed scientific literature, where any real scientific debate is conducted.  Rather, they use the media to trumpet their message through the blogosphere and other public media, including journalists who duly and solemnly report “both sides” of this pseudo-debate as if the two sides carry equal weight.  Right-wing stooges for the corporate elite continue to accuse the climate scientists of engaging in a conspiracy to misrepresent climate science for their personal gain.  No matter that no substantive evidence for misrepresentation of the science has ever been found.  Just a lot of warped interpretation of such non-events as “Climategate” – which has been called the most important scandal in the history of science by some these AGW denier zealots, even though the reality is that no significant misdeeds have been established in any of the several investigations into the case.

The worst part of all of these histrionics is that it taps into a deep undercurrent of anti-intellectualism that always has run just below the surface here in the USA.  The attack on climate science is simply a manifestation of the growing ignorance of many Americans when it comes to science.  They didn’t take to the subject in school and they simply don’t trust those “pointy-headed intellectuals” whom they accuse of elitism and arrogance, spurred on by know-nothing spokespersons for corporations who are unhappy with the scientific findings of climate science.  Those findings make it clear that humans are  influencing the global climate through their vast outpourings of greenhouse gases.  That looks like bad publicity for many of those corporations (especially including the extremely wealthy “energy” sector, which is primarily about the consumption of fossil fuels).  What better way to undermine the credibility of those findings than to discredit the scientists and to spread lies, innuendos, accusations of misdeeds, and misrepresentations far and wide.  Politics has shown the vulnerability of the American public to such underhanded tactics, and the AGW deniers have become quite adept at the process.  These deniers are conspicuously absent from the scientific journals and conferences where the vast majority of climate scientists conduct their science via well-proven pathways of peer review and frank, honest interchanges between people operating on the cutting edge of their science.  If one wants to find a conspiracy, it’s not at all likely to be among the vast majority of climate scientists.  Better to search for conspiracy within the AGW deniers and their corporate sponsors.  It’s a common tactic of demagogues to accuse their opponents of the very tactics and misdeeds that they themselves are using.

The AGW deniers have even gone so far as to try to undermine the very notion of scientific consensus.  Dictionary.com defines consensus:

–noun,
1. majority of opinion,
2. general agreement or concord; harmony.

So when AGW deniers scream the mantra that “Consensus science isn’t science!” without any comprehension of what consensus represents in science, what they’re evidently saying is that anything that most scientists agree upon is no longer science!  The reason they attack consensus science, of course, is that they need to deny the consensus, since that consensus is overwhelmingly in favor of AGW.  If they are climate scientists (most AGW deniers aren’t scientists of any sort, of course), then they’re taking a position on the fringes of that science.

So what does consensus science look like?  Ever buy a freshman level college science textbook?  Virtually all of the content therein is “consensus science” – it’s the formal, intellectual basis for the entire topic under consideration.  It’s in that textbook because virtually everyone in the field agrees that it’s an accurate representation of what scientists in that field consider to be the core of their understanding.  You likely can find a few individuals who might disagree with some parts of that textbook, perhaps with good reasons or perhaps not with good reasons.  In any case, the consensus in science isn’t immutable, but changing it requires a substantial effort.  No one likes to have to change their core principles, so scientists will be very hesitant to change the consensus just because someone disagrees with some of it.  But, over time, that consensus does evolve.  New ideas supplant some of the former consensus as the consensus changes.  That’s the way science moves forward and that’s how scientists make a name for themselves – by contributing something that forces a change in the consensus.  Therefore, no true scientist has a vested interest in the consensus.  The slow evolution of science is punctuated by occasional major revolutions within the core, such as the relativity and quantum mechanics in physics, plate tectonics in geology, or numerical solutions for the otherwise unsolvable mathematics of atmospheric science.

Science at the cutting edge, on the other hand, is much more volatile and laced with disagreement.  Despite their agreement with the consensus, scientists on the frontiers of knowledge clash often and heatedly at times over issues on those frontiers.  This lack of agreement about new ideas is normal in science, not a sign of something going wrong.  But if you ask the participants in such clashes about the core, they would agree on the vast majority of the consensus.  Without that consensus as the basis, their disagreements would be futile!  If an argument is to be fruitful, there must always be an extensive basis of agreement on fundamental principles.

The American public, already being victimized by various assaults on public education, is increasingly vulnerable to the anti-intellectual smearing of people who stand for a rational, scientific approach to understanding and problem-solving.  Ignorance seems to be expanding, even as science moves forward.  Slogans and anti-science mudslinging work because many people choose not to think for themselves, choosing instead to follow demagogues who promise the world but will deliver something very different if they win the day.  The attacks on climate science are attacks on all of science, and in fact on all rational, empirical thinking.  AGW deniers can be seen as a portent of a new Dark Age that could descend on the USA.

Science is not a religion but rather a tool for those who wish to think for themselves about the natural world.  Its primary characteristic is its willingness to entertain questions from those who wish to obtain believable answers.

This Week In Freethought History (July 16th – 22nd)

Posted in Politics, Religion on July 22, 2011 by RJ Evans

(Special Thanks goes out to Ronald Bruce Meyer for continuing to provide this valuable historical information)

Here’s your Week in Freethought History:  This is more than just a calendar of events or mini-biographies – it’s an affirmation that we as freethinkers are neither unique nor alone in the world, no matter how isolated and alone we may feel at times.

1.  Last Saturday, July 16 – It was on this date in 1821 that Mary Baker Eddy was born near Concord, New Hampshire into a Congregationalist family. A sickly youth, Eddy studied alternative medicine, alongside the Bible, in search of a mind-body-Bible connection. Prompted by her supposed recovery from a life-threatening accident in 1866 through Biblical insights, in 1875 Eddy published the first edition of Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures.  In 1879, she founded her Christian Science church in Boston, Massachusetts.  Eddy’s system rejects the germ theory of disease, seeing sickness as the medieval Church did – as a manifestation of incorrect faith; as an illusion.  But Christian Science is both logically and ethically flawed.  For adults, it’s a free choice, but what of children subjected to prayer over medicine?  Christian Science is not science, and may not even be Christian, but it is definitely dangerous.

Also on this date but in 622, by tradition and on the Western calendar, Muhammad’s Hegira occurred – that is, his flight from Mecca to Medina (then called Yathrib) in order to escape persecution and found a community of believers.  Muhammad and his followers from Mecca set up a community in the more hospitable Medina, with himself as political and spiritual leader – but for the express purpose of waging war and acquiring booty.  Conversions to Islam, most often by threat of the sword, usually followed.  This was especially tragic in Muhammad’s treatment of the Jews in Medina and elsewhere. Muhammad slew them by the thousands.  Most non-Muslim scholars are highly skeptical of the tales that started tall and acquired details through succeeding generations.  Clearly, there were alterations in the Prophet’s story following his death in 632. What is just as clear is that it was conquest and loot, more than religion, that was the engine of Islamic progress across Arabia.

2.  Last Sunday, July 17 – On this date in 1917, the comedienne and actress with the distinctive laugh, Phyllis Diller, was born Phyllis Ada Driver in Lima, Ohio.  She was a San Francisco housewife with five children when her under-employed husband suggested she try to make a career of the comedic skits she exploited at PTA functions.  Diller got her first national exposure as a contestant on the Groucho Marx gameshow “You Bet Your Life” around 1950.  Diller announced her retirement from nightclub/stage tours at age 84 in May 2002.  Diller was interviewed for the November 2001 AIDS magazine A&U, which appeared just months before her retirement announcement.  Asked how she visualizes the hereafter, Diller replied, “There isn’t any, you dingbat!” After her famous hacking laugh, Diller continued, “This is it, baby! Enjoy, carefully!  Religion is such a medieval idea.  Don’t get me started.  I have thought about every facet of religion and I can’t buy any of it. … So God made man in His own image? It’s just the other way around.  Man made God in his own image. … [I]t’s all about money.”

3.  Last Monday, July 18 – It was on this date in 1870, at the first Vatican Council, that the Pope was declared Infallible.  Although the most powerful of the medieval Popes, Gregory VII and Innocent III, claimed to be infallible, it is little remembered that the Church hierarchy resisted making the claim official for over sixteen centuries.  Even in 1870, there was much opposition among the bishops and theologians.  The drafting of the doctrine had nothing to do with the lamb of God and everything to do with the sausage-making of politics, with a little patronage thrown in for seasoning.  The infallibility doctrine passed by bribery and intimidation and after a long and very heated struggle.  Atheist historian (and former priest) Joseph McCabe interviewed participants in the 1890s, who writes “The Pope was declared to be infallible only when he speaks ex cathedra – when he addresses a message on faith or morals in his official capacity to the universal Church.”  In the 140-plus years since its articulation, although there have been ample opportunities for popes to speak out ex cathedra, it seems the only pope bold enough to actually do so was Pius XII, “Hitler’s Pope” (aka Eugenio Pacelli), in 1950, proclaiming the harmless dogma of the virgin Mary’s assumption into heaven with body and soul.  One would think the Holy Ghost, through his infallible agent on earth, could have been more helpful to humanity by, perhaps, directing Pius to speak out boldly, if not infallibly, against the greatest mass murderer of the 20th century!

4.  Last Tuesday, July 19 – On this date in 1649, Edward Winslow, governor of Plymouth Colony (in what is now Massachusetts) helped to organize the Society for Propagating the Gospel in New England.  The purpose of the Society was to Christianize the native people who had helped the beleaguered colonizers through their first winter, in which Winslow lost his own wife.  Winslow’s band of Separationists had sailed on the Mayflower, via the Netherlands, whose atmosphere was not quite repressive enough. Their destination was the New World, where they established their own theocratic settlement at Plymouth in 1620.  No doubt they thought they were doing their American Indian friends a favor.

The principal drive behind Christianizing the native people, aside from the cover story of saving their souls, has been to steal land for white settlements.  This was ruthlessly accomplished through forced relocation (such as in the 1838 Cherokee “Trail of Tears”), suppression of tribal cultures and languages (for which at least the United Church of Christ apologized in 1991), and shipping Indian children to boarding schools for re-education (where stories of physical and sexual abuse eventually surfaced).

In propagating their Gospel, Winslow and his fellow Christians – down to the 1978 American Indian Religious Freedom Act – were behaving in a conspicuously Christian manner toward heathens… with predictably disastrous results.  “If you take the Christian Bible and put it out in the wind and the rain,” said one Native American woman, “soon the paper on which the words are printed will disintegrate and the words will be gone. Our bible is the wind.”

5. Last Wednesday, July 20 – It on this date in 1910, the Christian Endeavor Society of Missouri began a campaign to ban all motion pictures that depicted kissing between non-relatives – coincidentally on the same year and month that sultry silent screen actress Theda Bara turned 20.  Movies were only just beginning to become a form of mass entertainment: the first couple filmed kissing for the general public was John C Rice and May Irwin in the 1896 film called The Kiss.  The Christian objection is hard to fathom: kissing in public, especially kissing between men, is not only mentioned but commanded by the Bible. “Greet ye one another with a kiss of charity” says 1 Peter 5:14.  “And the LORD said to Aaron, ‘Go into the wilderness to meet Moses.’ And he went, and met him in the mount of God, and kissed him,” says Exodus 4:27. This is definitely kissing between non-relatives.  The reticence about kissing between men and women really stems from the early Christian belief that the body and sexuality – especially female sexuality – are evil, an idea Christians borrowed from the Zoroastrians and perhaps the Essenes.  As a matter of fact, the Christian battle against public displays of sexuality is far from over: as late as 1999, church groups in middle America claimed that pictures of Britney Spears printed in Rolling Stone magazine – showing Britney in her bedroom, scantily clad – encouraged child pornography.  Both Christian Endeavor and the anti-Britney campaign seem to have failed.

6.  Last Thursday, July 21 – On this date in 1925, a court in the tiny mining town of Dayton, Tennessee, handed down a guilty verdict against 24-year-old high school teacher John T. Scopes for for teaching the theory of evolution in a public school classroom.  Everyone knows the principal combatants in the courtroom, but it is not as well known that the case was sought by the American Civil Liberties Union to turn back a string of state laws forbidding the teaching of science rather than religion in science class, but also as a publicity stunt to bring world attention onto Dayton.  That part was engineered by Dayton promoter George W. Rappelyea.  Through Rappelyea’s persuasion and the backing of ACLU lawyers, including trial lawyer Clarence Darrow – who was a famous agnostic known for defending political and labor radicals – the reluctant Scopes agreed to be defendant.  His friends promptly had him arrested.  The trial began on July 10, 1925, and the post-World War I Daytonians suffered a media multitude in order to hear their favorite pastor, William Jennings Bryan, defend the faith.  Though he was no scholar, Bryan had been waging a pitched battle against teaching the evolutionary theory, which he considered the inimical to Christian belief.  Judge John Raulston began the trial by reading the first 27 verses of Genesis!  Then he ruled to exclude the science experts and their testimony because, he said, neither religion nor Evolution was on trial.  So Darrow called on Bryan as an expert witness and the court could hardly disagree.  In his questioning, Darrow reveal Bryan for the incurious, unlearned bigot he was.  In spite of Darrow’s drubbing, Bryan won the case and Scopes was fined $100. The verdict was overturned in early 1927 on a technicality, much to the relief of many in Dayton. Rappelyea’s publicity stunt had succeeded only too well!

7. Today, July 22 – It was on this date in 1822 that Moravian monk and amateur botanist Gregor Johann Mendel was born in Heinzendorf, a tiny village in Austrian Silesia, which was then under Hapsburg rule. He entered the Augustinian Monastery in Brno, which allowed Mendel to study mathematics and science at the University of Vienna.  It was in the monastic garden that Mendel made the first experiments in cross-breeding pea plants, combining botany with his mathematical knowledge to produce predictions about dominant and recessive traits.

Popular Christian writers say Freethinkers forget to mention, among scientists, “Christians whose faith supported them in their scientific endeavors, like Blaise Pascal, Louis Pasteur and Gregor Mendel.”  This is a truly bizarre criticism: Pascal was seriously ill all his life and the work on which we judge his religious beliefs was published only after his death with modifications to make him appear orthodox.  Pasteur was a Rationalist all his life.  As for Gregor Mendel, this so-called “devoted monk,” and “great Catholic scientist” is not even claimed by the (new) Catholic Encyclopedia.  His biographer, Hugo Iltis, was a relative, and in the German original of his 1924 Life of Mendel he gives evidence that Mendel was seriously anti-Christian in his youth and remained skeptical all his life. Mendel wrote an aggressively Rationalist poem, speaking of “the gloomy powers of superstition which now oppress the world,” two years before entering the monastery.

How did he end up in a monastery?  Iltis shows that Mendel became a monk only to get leisure to study.  He shirked his priestly duties whenever he could, and remained a skeptic (that is, a Deist).  Even after he became abbot, however, he read and annotated Darwin’s Origin of Species and accepted evolution, something no orthodox Catholic was allowed to do at the time.  Mendel’s researches supplanted the dominance of Darwin’s idea that evolution occurred by random mutation, complementing it with the theory of inheritance of dominant characteristics. It is one of the ironies of science history that Darwin was never aware of Mendel’s discoveries – which would have provided a much-needed “missing link” of support for evolutionary theory!

We can look back, but the Golden Age of Freethought is now. You can find full versions of these pages in Freethought history at the links in the American Heathen blog, which take you to the blog by Ronald Bruce Meyer, FreethoughtAlmanac.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 160 other followers

%d bloggers like this: