Heaving Dead Cats » believing problem

God Thinks Like You and He Personally Cares For You, Plus a Video To Cheer You Up

Neece — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 16:40:19 +0000

I have 2 studies to share with you then a video to cheer you up afterwards.

The first paper is titled ‘Believers’ estimates of God’s beliefs are more egocentric than estimates of other people’s beliefs’. It found through a series of 7 studies and surveys that people believe that god has the same beliefs that they have. Here is what they concluded:

The researchers noted that people often set their moral compasses according to what they presume to be God’s standards. ”The central feature of a compass, however, is that it points north no matter what direction a person is facing,” they conclude. “This research suggests that, unlike an actual compass, inferences about God’s beliefs may instead point people further in whatever direction they are already facing.”

Isn’t that convenient? It certainly explains how god can hate all the same people they hate, and basically agree with them about everything. It’s like knowing your dad will let you do whatever you want because he thinks just like you. It’s a license to act any way you like, with your god’s blessing.

Also, are you sure people set their compass according to god’s standards? Maybe instead they set god’s compass to theirs. That would be interesting to find out, although I don’t know how you’d do it.

The second paper is titled ‘Socioeconomic Status and Beliefs about God’s Influence in Everyday Life.’ It used data from two recent national surveys of Americans to examine people’s beliefs about god’s involvement and influence in their lives. Here are some of the findings:

Overall, most people believe that God is highly influential in the events and outcomes in their lives. Specifically:

82 per cent say they depend on God for help and guidance in making decisions;
71 per cent believe that when good or bad things happen, these occurrences are simply part of God’s plan for them;
61 per cent believe that God has determined the direction and course of their lives;
32 per cent agree with the statement: “There is no sense in planning a lot because ultimately my fate is in God’s hands.”
Overall, people who have more education and higher income are less likely to report beliefs in divine intervention.
However, among the well-educated and higher earners, those who are more involved in religious rituals share similar levels of beliefs about divine intervention as their less-educated and less financially well-off peers.

According to Schieman: “Many of us might assume that people of higher social class standing tend to reject beliefs about divine intervention. However, my findings indicate that while this is true among those less committed to religious life, it is not the case for people who are more committed to religious participation and rituals.”

82% depend on god to help them make decisions! That is incredibly disturbing to me. It’s one thing to ask your friend for advice in helping you decide something important. That person is REAL. It’s another thing to ask an invisible fantasy man for help. But according to the previous study, you’re just doing whatever you like because god thinks like you. Right?

Doesn’t this get a person off the hook, decrease their need for personal responsibility, if they can just say it’s all god’s doing? And isn’t it all incredibly delusional? Religious people who think god is personally involved in their daily lives must be the most adept people at cherry-picking information. They are great at seeing only the hits where chance makes it look like the sky daddy is helping them, and ignoring the millions of misses where their furtive pleas to god go unanswered.

So here is a video which might give you a bit of hope.

The internet: where religions come to die (almost 11 minutes). Some of it is exceedingly creepy and depressing, but it has a happy ending.

Don’t Assume I’m A Sensitive Soul

Neece — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:30:27 +0000

I received this email from a woman the other day. After careful thought I replied to it and decided it was worth sharing.

Here is the email in its entirety:

Thank you for sharing “Wild Geese”. After Joe Biden used most of this poem as his reflection upon the anniversary of 9/11, I went in search of the poem. The two of Mary Oliver’s collections I own did not include it. I was happy to find it at your site and amazed, actually. Amazed and delighted, because a poem I find so “religious” is at the same time such a balm for you. I grew up Roman Catholic; I am now an Episcopal priest. I am convinced after 20 years that what most people throw away – the cats they heave – are indeed worth heaving. Sometimes we have to go deeper, below the interpretations of history, to find our own deeper truth.

Yes, a “barbarous” God exists in the pages of the Bible: What all-kind God and Father would will the death of a Beloved Son? How could God command Abraham to kill his son Isaac as a test of faith? Isn’t that sadistic? Yes, indeed. On the face of it. For us in the 21st century these stories are barbaric. They are foreign to our experience. They were not foreign to the persons for whom they were written when the “first fruits” in ancient societies were offered up to the deity – including in some cases, the first born child. In some places in later writings there seems to be a critique of these practices in the Bible itself. The question becomes, it seems to me, is it worth reinterpreting these stories for our own time, or do we jettison them and replace them with our own stories of sacrificial obedience and love? Yes, life does involve sacrifice – we give up our children constantly to the gods of war who exact a savage price. There are no rams in the thicket to take their place …

But the same source of barbarism comments on itself in texts of amazing love and mercy. We cannot hear these texts enough.

I hope the love, mercy is what you kept when you threw away the dead cat of guilt and the burdens of all that teaching that depressed and suffocated you. If you are still seeking a metaphor or metaphors for the love that is the universe and your place in it, Mary Oliver’s poetry surely hints at it in all its complexity. It is worth the search if you are willing to expand your conversation to include persons who have made a transition through the grief and disillusion you have experienced.

You have purified your heart. You have surrounded yourself with friends eager to share what they’ve rejected. Is it time to resume the search for what you seek and share what you have found as a replacement that has enriched you spiritually, given you new life? Perhaps you have done so.

Please forgive me if I’ve “pried” too much or presumed too much. You are obviously a sensitive soul. Thank you again for sharing a favorite poem.

And here is my reply:

Thank you for your email. I’m glad you enjoyed Wild Geese. It’s a great poem. Funny that you find it religious. It seems very anti-religious to me, which is why I like it. I guess it’s down to interpretation. I also think you are very presumptuous with your assumptions of me. My character is not nearly as weak as you suggest. The poem is not a balm to me. I find it inspirational, but I don’t need to be soothed by it. I find it delightful. Perhaps it might be best to not assume what others are thinking and maybe just ask them.

You immediately go into apologetics with your loose, cherry-picked interpretations of the bible. If a caring, loving god inspired the words of the bible, I’m sure slavery would not have been condoned, nor the rape of daughters, nor the hatred of your own family (that was Jesus, by the way. How loving was that?) If it can’t be taken literally, then the whole book is just about how you interpret it, which means it can mean anything, which means it’s completely worthless as a guide. It IS completely worthless as a guide anyway. It was written in the middle east in the iron age by goat herders. It has zero relevance for today. It is filled with hate and murder with the occasional rape. Lovely. How you can find anything worthwhile in there is beyond me.

What little bit of “wisdom” in the bible is not original or new. The Golden Rule? Older than Jesus. He didn’t come up with it. If he even existed, which is highly doubtful.

So no, it isn’t worth reinterpreting those fables into stories for our own time. We don’t need them. They fuel hate in people who interpret them literally, and just confuse good people who think they are the word of their god. They are completely useless to society.

And no, why do we need to replace them with more sacrificial obedience? Why do you need that? How is that healthy to anyone? Love, sure. We can all use love. But the bible is very thin in that department. Give me a book like The Golden Compass. That has love. And even sacrifice for the good of all mankind. A great epic story with no mixed messages to confuse people. It even has god.

Life involves compromise and sometimes sacrifice. But teaching children ethics, critical thinking and basic philosophy while giving them love will give them the structure they need to build their own moral code. Not one based on blind obedience and fear of eternal damnation if they make a mistake. How could a loving god torture his creation for all eternity just because they aren’t blindly worshiping him? He needs some serious psychotherapy. That’s insane.

I kept nothing from the bible or my early indoctrination into christianity. I have jettisoned the guilt and fear. There was no love to be had. There was only that blind sacrificial obedience you mentioned. That is not love. That is sickness.

And you presumed again that it depressed and suffocated me. I find that offensive that you would presume to know me. Do you talk to your parishioners with such condescension? Why not ask someone what they are thinking instead of arrogantly assuming. I did not experience grief. Although of course I was disillusioned by the lies of religion.

Shaking off the lies of the church, ridding myself of that sick pack of lies was the most liberating, uplifting, positive step I’ve ever taken.

Again, you presume that I am seeking some great truth. How patronizing. For me, the completely natural workings of the universe inspire and awe me daily. That is my truth and I am quite happy to explore it often. I don’t need to find some god or false belief in a supreme being, or the ridiculous reward of an afterlife. I am happy to have nature in all its complexity. Science is fantastic. That’s all I need. It’s quite satisfying to rid myself of superstitions and myths. You should try it. It’s quite liberating. Maybe it will help you to ask people their feelings and thoughts instead of filtering what you think they experience through your own worldview.

Oh, and you don’t know who my friends are either. Again with the presumptions. I guess you probably don’t think I”m a sensitive soul anymore. Well, when someone I’ve never met claims to know me so intimately, I get a bit irritated. I don’t have a soul. Neither do you. Live this life for today, not for a future promise which doesn’t exist.

I’m glad you enjoyed the poem. But just because I like it too, obviously for very different reasons, doesn’t mean I think like you or share your delusions.

I hope someday you too can shake off the shackles of blind faith, sacrificial obedience, repression and future rewards for constant servitude.

Have a great day!

Religion Is Evil And Contagious

Neece — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 14:03:05 +0000

But don’t take my word for it. How about an Oxford professor whom you know and love? Richard Dawkins, of course! I found this 2 part video he did for the BBC in 2006. It’s a very good overview of his ideas and concepts of religion, evolution and atheism. See below for the descriptions of each episode.

The Root of All Evil? Part 1: The God Delusion. (Richard Dawkins, 2006) – 47:51

The Root of All Evil? – The Virus of Faith (2 of 2) – 47:58

Here’s a description of the first episode:
The Root of All Evil? is a television documentary, written and presented by Richard Dawkins, in which he argues that the world would be better off without religion. The documentary was first broadcast in January 2006, in the form of two 45-minute episodes (excluding advertisement breaks), on Channel 4 in the UK. Dawkins has said that the title “The Root of All Evil?” was not his preferred choice, but that Channel 4 had insisted on it to create controversy.[1] His sole concession from the producers on the title was the addition of the question mark. Dawkins has stated that the notion of anything being the root of all evil is ridiculous.[2] Dawkins’ book The God Delusion, released in September 2006, goes on to examine the topics raised in the documentary in greater detail. The God Delusion explores the unproven beliefs that are treated as factual by many religions and the extremes to which some followers have taken them. Dawkins opens the programme by describing the “would-be murderers . . . who want to kill you and me, and themselves, because they’re motivated by what they think is the highest ideal.” Dawkins argues that “the process of non-thinking called faith” is not a way of understanding the world, but instead stands in fundamental opposition to modern science and the scientific method, and is divisive and dangerous.

Here’s a description of the second episode:
In The Virus of Faith, Dawkins opines that the moral framework of religions is warped, and argues against the religious indoctrination of children. The title of this episode comes from The Selfish Gene, in which Dawkins discussed the concept of memes.

A Rational Chain E-mail

Neece — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:43:17 +0000

My friend Charles composed the following email as a response to a ridiculous christian forward he got call “Untimely Deaths”. He thought I might like to share it with you. So here it is, including the angry christian email reply he already got and his reply to that at the end. His version had the classical large fonts, underlines and bold text that inflammatory emails often have, but for the web, I had to strip most of the formatting. If you decide to send this on to your christian friends, feel free to make them more at ease by using insanely large font sizes, underlines, unreadable colors, etc.

Do you have the COURAGE to Read this whole E-Mail?????

The TRUTH about UNTIMELY DEATHS!

John Lennon (Singer):
Some years before, during an interview with an American Magazine, he said:
“Christianity will end, it will disappear. I do not have to argue about that. I am certain. Jesus was ok, but his subjects were too simple. Today we are
more famous than Him” (1966).
Lennon, after saying that the Beatles were more famous than Jesus Christ, was shot six times.

Is god lazy? Lennon said he was bigger than Jesus in 1966. Mark Chapman shot him in 1980.
Fourteen years later! Was god too busy all those years assassinating other sinners? Is he a procrastinator?
“Oh yeah, that one blasphemous beatle. I really should smite him.”
The next day:
“Crap! I forgot! again!”

And so on, for the next fourteen years!

MARILYN MONROE:
She was visited by Billy Graham during a presentation of a show. He is a preacher and Evangelist and the Spirit of God had sent him to preach to her.
After hearing what the Preacher had to say, she said: “I don’t need your Jesus”
A week later, she was found dead in her apartment.

Of course, the fact that Marilyn Monroe was Jewish is inconsequential!

Now consider:

Saloth Sar, better known as Pol Pot, was the leader of the Cambodian communist movement known as the Khmer Rouge
During his time in power, Pol Pot imposed a version of agrarian collectivization, forcing city dwellers to relocate to the countryside to work in collective farms and forced labor projects, toward a goal of “restarting civilization” in a “Year Zero”.
The combined effects of slave labor, malnutrition, poor medical care, and executions resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1.7 to 2.5 million people, approximately 21% of the Cambodian population.

Also, he was not a Christian. Also, he lived to be 70.

Aleister Crowley, born Edward Alexander Crowley, was an English occultist, writer, mountaineer, poet, playwright, yogi, and possible spy He was an influential member of occult organizations, including the Golden Dawn, the A∴A∴, and Ordo Templi Orientis (O.T.O.), and is known today for his magical writings, especially The Book of the Law, the central sacred text of Thelma. He gained notoriety during his lifetime, and was denounced in the popular press of the day as “The wickedest man in the world.”

And yet lived to be 72.

Donatien Alphonse François, Marquis de Sade, was a French aristocrat and writer famous for his libertine sexuality and lifestyle. His works include novels, short stories, plays, and political tracts; in his lifetime some were published under his own name, while others appeared anonymously and Sade denied being their author. He is best known for his erotic novels, which combined philosophical discourse with pornography, depicting bizarre sexual fantasies with an emphasis on violence, criminality, and blasphemy against the Catholic Church. He was a proponent of extreme freedom (or at least licentiousness), unrestrained by morality, religion or law.
The term “sadism” is derived from his name.

Lived to be 74.

Idi Amin Dada, The military dictator and President of Uganda from 1971 to 1979.
Amin’s rule was characterised by human rights abuses, political repression, ethnic persecution, extrajudicial killings, nepotism, corruption and gross economic mismanagement. The number of people killed as a result of his regime is estimated by international observers and human rights groups to range from 100,000 to 500,000.
A polygamist, Idi Amin married at least six women, three of whom he divorced. He married his first and second wives, Malyamu and Kay, in 1966. The next year, he married Nora and then Nalongo Madina in 1972. On 26 March 1974, he announced on Radio Uganda that he had divorced Malyamu, Nora and Kay.
Kay died on 13 August 1974, Her body was found dismembered.

Lived to the ripe old age of 78.

Finally, the REAL TRUTH comes out!

UNTIMELY DEATHS?

Every day, almost 16,000 children die from hunger-related causes–one child every five seconds.
In the time it takes you to read one E-mail full of “little lies for Jesus” at least 200 people will have died of starvation.
Over 4 million will die this year.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh EVIL?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

- Epicurus (Greek philosopher, BC 341-270)

Use Your Brains.

Charles already got an angry response and replied:

On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 5:35 PM, (unnamed Christian) wrote:

Man is where evil dwells not God. Don’t blame MAN’S shortcomings, cruelty, greed, racism, etc,,, on God!. Man has a choice….all of us have a choice. What we do with that choice is up to us. Our hand is not being forced by any being including God….use you brains!!!!!!!!!!

Charles’ reply:

An intelligent man would never blame god for any of those things, because he understands that god is but a creation of man.
Don’t devalue all humanity by blaming all the world’s injustice on them. You do not only the world, but yourself a disservice.
It is ludicrous to claim that the people who died in the earthquake in Haiti choose that to happen. As ridiculous as claiming that children choose to die of starvation.
Saying that “all of us have a choice” is the biggest “blame the victim” pile of steaming… well you get the idea, that religion ever propagated.

If you believe in god then you already believe in a place god created that is without suffering and yet all the people there still have free will, it is called heaven.
There is no reason an all powerful god couldn’t have made earth the same way. Unless he is just a dick?

But again, that would be silly to blame the world’s problems on an imaginary being. As silly as blaming people for things that they have no control over.

Things just happen, good and bad. It is a result of living on an imperfect natural world we have by chance evolved to live on.

Maybe someday you can see reality without the “Jesus glasses”. Good luck with that.

25 Blasphemous Quotes From Atheist Ireland

Neece — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 09:09:51 +0000

From Michael Nugent in Ireland, I found the following and thought I’d spread the blasphemy around and share it with you. Here’s to hoping Ireland gets a bit of sense and repeals this dangerous and ridiculous law. It’s a giant step backwards for human progress, as is the UN blasphemy movement that’s been going on for awhile now. I’ve added some nice religious imagery for eye candy.

From January 1, 2010, the new Irish blasphemy law became operational, and those in Atheist Ireland began their campaign to have it repealed. Blasphemy is now a crime punishable by a €25,000 fine. The new law defines blasphemy as publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted.

This new law is both silly and dangerous. It is silly because medieval religious laws have no place in a modern secular republic, where the criminal law should protect people and not ideas. And it is dangerous because it incentives religious outrage, and because Islamic States led by Pakistan are already using the wording of this Irish law to promote new blasphemy laws at UN level.

We believe in the golden rule: that we have a right to be treated justly, and that we have a responsibility to treat other people justly. Blasphemy laws are unjust: they silence people in order to protect ideas. In a civilised society, people have a right to to express and to hear ideas about religion even if other people find those ideas to be outrageous.

Publication of 25 blasphemous quotes

In this context we now publish a list of 25 blasphemous quotes, which have previously been published by or uttered by or attributed to Jesus Christ, Muhammad, Mark Twain, Tom Lehrer, Randy Newman, James Kirkup, Monty Python, Rev Ian Paisley, Conor Cruise O’Brien, Frank Zappa, Salman Rushdie, Bjork, Amanda Donohoe, George Carlin, Paul Woodfull, Jerry Springer the Opera, Tim Minchin, Richard Dawkins, Pope Benedict XVI, Christopher Hitchens, PZ Myers, Ian O’Doherty, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor and Dermot Ahern.

Despite these quotes being abusive and insulting in relation to matters held sacred by various religions, we unreservedly support the right of these people to have published or uttered them, and we unreservedly support the right of any Irish citizen to make comparable statements about matters held sacred by any religion without fear of being criminalised, and without having to prove to a court that a reasonable person would find any particular value in the statement.

Campaign begins to repeal the Irish blasphemy law

We ask Fianna Fail and the Green Party to repeal their anachronistic blasphemy law, as part of the revision of the Defamation Act that is included within the Act. We ask them to hold a referendum to remove the reference to blasphemy from the Irish Constitution.

We also ask all TDs and Senators to support a referendum to remove references to God from the Irish Constitution, including the clauses that prevent atheists from being appointed as President of Ireland or as a Judge without swearing a religious oath asking God to direct them in their work.

If you run a website, blog or other media publication, please feel free to republish this statement and the list of quotes yourself, in order to show your support for the campaign to repeal the Irish blasphemy law and to promote a rational, ethical, secular Ireland.

List of 25 Blasphemous Quotes Published by Atheist Ireland

1. Jesus Christ, when asked if he was the son of God, in Matthew 26:64: “Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.” According to the Christian Bible, the Jewish chief priests and elders and council deemed this statement by Jesus to be blasphemous, and they sentenced Jesus to death for saying it.

2. Jesus Christ, talking to Jews about their God, in John 8:44: “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.” This is one of several chapters in the Christian Bible that can give a scriptural foundation to Christian anti-Semitism. The first part of John 8, the story of “whoever is without sin cast the first stone”, was not in the original version, but was added centuries later. The original John 8 is a debate between Jesus and some Jews. In brief, Jesus calls the Jews who disbelieve him sons of the Devil, the Jews try to stone him, and Jesus runs away and hides.

3. Muhammad, quoted in Hadith of Bukhari, Vol 1 Book 8 Hadith 427: “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of their prophets.” This quote is attributed to Muhammad on his death-bed as a warning to Muslims not to copy this practice of the Jews and Christians. It is one of several passages in the Koran and in Hadith that can give a scriptural foundation to Islamic anti-Semitism, including the assertion in Sura 5:60 that Allah cursed Jews and turned some of them into apes and swine.

4. Mark Twain, describing the Christian Bible in Letters from the Earth, 1909: “Also it has another name – The Word of God. For the Christian thinks every word of it was dictated by God. It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies… But you notice that when the Lord God of Heaven and Earth, adored Father of Man, goes to war, there is no limit. He is totally without mercy – he, who is called the Fountain of Mercy. He slays, slays, slays! All the men, all the beasts, all the boys, all the babies; also all the women and all the girls, except those that have not been deflowered. He makes no distinction between innocent and guilty… What the insane Father required was blood and misery; he was indifferent as to who furnished it.” Twain’s book was published posthumously in 1939. His daughter, Clara Clemens, at first objected to it being published, but later changed her mind in 1960 when she believed that public opinion had grown more tolerant of the expression of such ideas. That was half a century before Fianna Fail and the Green Party imposed a new blasphemy law on the people of Ireland.

5. Tom Lehrer, The Vatican Rag, 1963: “Get in line in that processional, step into that small confessional. There, the guy who’s got religion’ll tell you if your sin’s original. If it is, try playing it safer, drink the wine and chew the wafer. Two, four, six, eight, time to transubstantiate!”

6. Randy Newman, God’s Song, 1972: “And the Lord said: I burn down your cities – how blind you must be. I take from you your children, and you say how blessed are we. You all must be crazy to put your faith in me. That’s why I love mankind.”

7. James Kirkup, The Love That Dares to Speak its Name, 1976: “While they prepared the tomb I kept guard over him. His mother and the Magdalen had gone to fetch clean linen to shroud his nakedness. I was alone with him… I laid my lips around the tip of that great cock, the instrument of our salvation, our eternal joy. The shaft, still throbbed, anointed with death’s final ejaculation.” This extract is from a poem that led to the last successful blasphemy prosecution in Britain, when Denis Lemon was given a suspended prison sentence after he published it in the now-defunct magazine Gay News. In 2002, a public reading of the poem, on the steps of St. Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square, failed to lead to any prosecution. In 2008, the British Parliament abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel.

8. Matthias, son of Deuteronomy of Gath, in Monty Python’s Life of Brian, 1979: “Look, I had a lovely supper, and all I said to my wife was that piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah.”

9. Rev Ian Paisley MEP to the Pope in the European Parliament, 1988: “I denounce you as the Antichrist.” Paisley’s website describes the Antichrist as being “a liar, the true son of the father of lies, the original liar from the beginning… he will imitate Christ, a diabolical imitation, Satan transformed into an angel of light, which will deceive the world.”

10. Conor Cruise O’Brien, 1989: “In the last century the Arab thinker Jamal al-Afghani wrote: ‘Every Muslim is sick and his only remedy is in the Koran.’ Unfortunately the sickness gets worse the more the remedy is taken.”

11. Frank Zappa, 1989: “If you want to get together in any exclusive situation and have people love you, fine – but to hang all this desperate sociology on the idea of The Cloud-Guy who has The Big Book, who knows if you’ve been bad or good – and cares about any of it – to hang it all on that, folks, is the chimpanzee part of the brain working.”

12. Salman Rushdie, 1990: “The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas – uncertainty, progress, change – into crimes.” In 1989, Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran issued a fatwa ordering Muslims to kill Rushdie because of blasphemous passages in Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses.

13. Bjork, 1995: “I do not believe in religion, but if I had to choose one it would be Buddhism. It seems more livable, closer to men… I’ve been reading about reincarnation, and the Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fuck the Buddhists.”

14. Amanda Donohoe on her role in the Ken Russell movie Lair of the White Worm, 1995: “Spitting on Christ was a great deal of fun. I can’t embrace a male god who has persecuted female sexuality throughout the ages, and that persecution still goes on today all over the world.”

15. George Carlin, 1999: “Religion easily has the greatest bullshit story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time! But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!”

16. Paul Woodfull as Ding Dong Denny O’Reilly, The Ballad of Jaysus Christ, 2000: “He said me ma’s a virgin and sure no one disagreed, Cause they knew a lad who walks on water’s handy with his feet… Jaysus oh Jaysus, as cool as bleedin’ ice, With all the scrubbers in Israel he could not be enticed, Jaysus oh Jaysus, it’s funny you never rode, Cause it’s you I do be shoutin’ for each time I shoot me load.”

17. Jesus Christ, in Jerry Springer The Opera, 2003: “Actually, I’m a bit gay.” In 2005, the Christian Institute tried to bring a prosecution against the BBC for screening Jerry Springer the Opera, but the UK courts refused to issue a summons.

18. Tim Minchin, Ten-foot Cock and a Few Hundred Virgins, 2005: “So you’re gonna live in paradise, With a ten-foot cock and a few hundred virgins, So you’re gonna sacrifice your life, For a shot at the greener grass, And when the Lord comes down with his shiny rod of judgment, He’s gonna kick my heathen ass.”

19. Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion, 2006: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” In 2007 Turkish publisher Erol Karaaslan was charged with the crime of insulting believers for publishing a Turkish translation of The God Delusion. He was acquitted in 2008, but another charge was brought in 2009. Karaaslan told the court that “it is a right to criticise religions and beliefs as part of the freedom of thought and expression.”

20. Pope Benedict XVI quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor, 2006: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” This statement has already led to both outrage and condemnation of the outrage. The Organisation of the Islamic Conference, the world’s largest Muslim body, said it was a “character assassination of the prophet Muhammad”. The Malaysian Prime Minister said that “the Pope must not take lightly the spread of outrage that has been created.” Pakistan’s foreign Ministry spokesperson said that “anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence”. The European Commission said that “reactions which are disproportionate and which are tantamount to rejecting freedom of speech are unacceptable.”

21. Christopher Hitchens in God is not Great, 2007: “There is some question as to whether Islam is a separate religion at all… Islam when examined is not much more than a rather obvious and ill-arranged set of plagiarisms, helping itself from earlier books and traditions as occasion appeared to require… It makes immense claims for itself, invokes prostrate submission or ‘surrender’ as a maxim to its adherents, and demands deference and respect from nonbelievers into the bargain. There is nothing-absolutely nothing-in its teachings that can even begin to justify such arrogance and presumption.”

22. PZ Myers, on the Roman Catholic communion host, 2008: “You would not believe how many people are writing to me, insisting that these horrible little crackers (they look like flattened bits of styrofoam) are literally pieces of their god, and that this omnipotent being who created the universe can actually be seriously harmed by some third-rate liberal intellectual at a third-rate university… However, inspired by an old woodcut of Jews stabbing the host, I thought of a simple, quick thing to do: I pierced it with a rusty nail (I hope Jesus’s tetanus shots are up to date). And then I simply threw it in the trash, followed by the classic, decorative items of trash cans everywhere, old coffeegrounds and a banana peel.”

23. Ian O’Doherty, 2009: “(If defamation of religion was illegal) it would be a crime for me to say that the notion of transubstantiation is so ridiculous that even a small child should be able to see the insanity and utter physical impossibility of a piece of bread and some wine somehow taking on corporeal form. It would be a crime for me to say that Islam is a backward desert superstition that has no place in modern, enlightened Europe and it would be a crime to point out that Jewish settlers in Israel who believe they have a God given right to take the land are, frankly, mad. All the above assertions will, no doubt, offend someone or other.”

24. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, 2009: “Whether a person is atheist or any other, there is in fact in my view something not totally human if they leave out the transcendent… we call it God… I think that if you leave that out you are not fully human.” Because atheism is not a religion, the Irish blasphemy law does not protect atheists from abusive and insulting statements about their fundamental beliefs. While atheists are not seeking such protection, we include the statement here to point out that it is discriminatory that this law does not hold all citizens equal.

25. Dermot Ahern, Irish Minister for Justice, introducing his blasphemy law at an Oireachtas Justice Committee meeting, 2009, and referring to comments made about him personally: “They are blasphemous.” Deputy Pat Rabbitte replied: “Given the Minister’s self-image, it could very well be that we are blaspheming,” and Minister Ahern replied: “Deputy Rabbitte says that I am close to the baby Jesus, I am so pure.” So here we have an Irish Justice Minister joking about himself being blasphemed, at a parliamentary Justice Committee discussing his own blasphemy law, that could make his own jokes illegal.

Finally, as a bonus, Micheal Martin, Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs, opposing attempts by Islamic States to make defamation of religion a crime at UN level, 2009: “We believe that the concept of defamation of religion is not consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights. It can be used to justify arbitrary limitations on, or the denial of, freedom of expression. Indeed, Ireland considers that freedom of expression is a key and inherent element in the manifestation of freedom of thought and conscience and as such is complementary to freedom of religion or belief.” Just months after Minister Martin made this comment, his colleague Dermot Ahern introduced Ireland’s new blasphemy law.

A Thought Experiment With Your Religious Friends

Neece — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 02:41:49 +0000

I am reading several books right now (I have them all listed in the left sidebar). One is called The God Virus and I just started it the other day. On page 18, Darrel W. Ray describes an experiment. I think I’ve heard of it before, but I thought I’d share it with you because it shows how religion attacks the critical thinking skills of the mind. As Mr. Ray says, it leaves the skill intact for other religions but disables critical thinking about one’s own religion. It really is like a virus of the mind.

Here’s the experiment as explained in the book:

You have a serious conversation with a deeply christian friend. Your friend is intelligent, well educated and knowledgeable. You agree to record the session. The topic is islam. During the session, you discuss that mohammed was a self-appointed prophet and that he claimed he talked to allah and the angels. He wrote a book that he claimed was infallible, and he flew from Jerusalem to heaven on a horse.

During the conversation, you agree that mohammed was probably delusional to think he could talk to god. You agree that the koran was clearly written by mohammed and not allah. It is ludicrous for him to claim that he is the last prophet and that all others are false. Neither you nor your friend can believe that he flew to heaven, let alone on a horse. It all sounds too crazy, and you both agree it is difficult to see how someone could believe such a religion. At the end of the conversation, you say that muslims did not choose their religion; they were born into it. Anyone who was exposed to both christianity and islam would see that christianity is the true religion.

Over the next few days, you transcribe the recording onto paper. Then you change all references to mohammed and make them jesus. Now the document reads something like this:

During the conversation, you both agree that jesus was probably delusional to think he could talk to jehovah. The bible was clearly written by men and not jehovah. You both agree it is ludicrous for jesus to claim that he is the last prophet and that all later ones are false. Neither of you can believe that he rose from the dead, nor flew to heaven. It all sounds too crazy, and it is difficult to see how someone could believe such a religion. At the end of the conversation, you both agree that christians did not choose their religion; they were born into it. Anyone who was exposed to both christianity and islam would see that islam is the true religion.

Now, tell your friend, “I made a transcript of our conversation about islam and would like to go over it with you.” As you read it, watch her reaction. How does she respond to each statement? How soon does she get defensive? How quickly does she start making elaborate arguments that have no more factual basis than the first conversation? If you persist in this line of parallel reasoning, how long before she gets angry or breaks off the conversation? Could this conversation damage your friendship?

You can do this experiment with other prophetic religions. For example, substitute Joseph Smith for mormonism or moses for judaism.

Have you ever tried an experiment like this? Have you ever questioned your friend’s religion? Did it damage your friendship? Or a family member? Does that person still talk to you? How far did your religious friend go to make excuses and explain away his religion in the face of reality?

The Secret Divides Part 2

Neece — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 06:40:16 +0000

The other day I wrote about a woman named Ruth who emailed me asking for some advice. Ruth’s sister Esther (not their real names for their privacy) had been introduced to The Secret by her husband and now avoided Ruth because she said she is toxic. The first post is called The Secret Divides and I gave my initial opinion, then asked Ruth for some clarification, as well as asked you for your take on the situation.

Ruth said the following:

My sister and I are 5 years apart, she is in her late 30s I am in my early 30s. We live on opposite sides of the country.

[Esther and I] talked on Christmas – but only if I agreed to be play nice. We did exchange gifts. As long as I am willing to play along, she will speak to me – but it is obviously strained and only to make my mom happy. I have always had issues with hypocrisy or injustice – and I hate the fact that she doesn’t have the respect for me and my feelings that she expects for herself – but I try.

Is there anything within the teachings that I can use to help her see my even a tiny bit of the pain that we feel when she says Dad, Grandma or I got what we asked for? I don’t want to destroy her belief – she has a right to it and I can respect that – as hard as it is for me to refrain from argument.

I am not the kind to sit and let people wallow in ignorance. I take serious exception when someone comes to a conclusion based on erroneous fact or assumption – that is my job. It is my job to present evidence and arguments and win. I can’t do that here – and that alone throws me so off balance I am unsure how to proceed.

I have been thinking about this for 2 days. I’m afraid I can’t really give Ruth what she’s after. I don’t have a copy of The Secret but I am quite familiar with the law of attraction as I spelled out awhile ago in a post called The Law of Attraction, and the Secret, are Bullshit. For your convenience, here are the basic rules for the law of attraction again:

Thoughts have an energy that attracts like energy (sometimes borrowed from Quantum Mechanics, minus any evidence). You must control this energy by practicing four things:

Know what you want.
Ask the universe for it.
Feel and behave as if the object of your desire is already with you, or is on its way to you.
Be open to receiving it.

Of course, if you think negative thoughts, the universe will manifest those negative thoughts in your life as well. So you must think positively at all times so that the universe will manifest all of your desires.

You might notice a few things when you read over the basic concept. Namely, the narcissistic and egocentric worldview, devoid of thinking about the needs and desires of our fellow man. The whole universe magically follows your every thought, tallies them up and does your bidding if you concentrate those thoughts. So the sun doesn’t revolve around the earth, the universe revolves around YOU. It’s sort of like having your own personal genie or god.

Where in all of this can you find compassion for our fellow man? Nowhere, especially if those less knowledgeable about the petty workings of this busybody universe are normal humans who worry and have negative thoughts. Whatever misfortune befalls those poor saps had it coming to them. That is an extremely harmful worldview, not to mention devoid of reality, common sense and compassion.

So Ruth is feeling the full sting of The Secret. Her sister has deemed her toxic because she has had physical problems since she was in her early teens. According to Esther, Ruth has attracted her ailments to her, that she asked to be sick.

This is the farthest concept from empathy I can think of when it comes to someone who is suffering. Instead of showing compassion for her sister, she avoids her, presumably to avoid the magical negative vibes. That’s pretty heartless and uncaring.

So how can Ruth get through to someone who is so cold and self-centered? Esther demands that Ruth play nice, but does she do the same? Esther can make the universe bend to her will, yet she can’t show compassion to her own sister who has health problems, that Ruth’s real-life situation makes her toxic? It has nothing to do with anything based in reality. A book tells her to avoid the negative so she disposes of her sister.

There’s just no way to reason with, or appeal to the emotions of, someone who is willing to do that for her own gain through the manipulation of the universe through her thoughts. It’s self-serving. It’s a belief that is extremely appealing, and easy to confirm whenever the slightest positive thing happens. And if something negative happens, it’s easy to make excuses and use that as a confirmation as well. Cherry-picking extraordinaire!

You can’t make people see the world the way you do. We are all in our own head in that sense. While Ruth can try to gently win her sister over and show through example that life is full of happy and sad, negative and positive, ups and downs, and it’s what you make of it all, well, maybe someday she might change her mind. But Esther seems to have embraced this magical thinking at any cost.

And when you have a false belief based on nothing but a silly book (ahem, religion, anyone?), people who don’t believe the same way are actually a threat to you. They threaten your constructed worldview with facts, reality and conflicting evidence. You are in danger of your belief system falling like a house of cards. It seems like it’s in your best interest to avoid or attack those “others”, even if they are family.

Well, actually it’s in your best interest to seek out differing philosophical perspectives, ask a lot of questions, read and study real science and the actual workings of the universe. The real world is so achingly beautiful. It’s so fascinating and complex. We understand but a small drop in the bucket of nature. There is so much out there that is real and true and interesting and exciting. Why do people feel the need to search for a supernatural answer? That is so lazy. Nature itself will blow your mind if you observe it. There is so much to learn. And it’s all natural. No accountant genies or gods needed.

I have to say a few more things. In talking this over with my friend and my husband, we all agreed that if our sister treated us like Esther, we would probably take a cue from her and think it was a good idea to avoid her for awhile. Why try to have a relationship with someone who doesn’t want one in return? I know, that’s not how we are raised in society. But in my life, my friends and husband are much more important to me than my blood relatives who are all crazy, dysfunctional and dare I say it, toxic. I make my own family with great friends and my husband. True empathy, affection, love and respect are more important to me than similar genes and a childhood history together. But that’s not for everyone.

I also have to say that my opinions are probably a bit more pragmatic and less optimistic than other people might have. If you have differing opinions for Ruth on her situation, please feel free to comment. Or if you want, you can email me privately and I’ll forward it on to Ruth. Also feel free to share any experiences you’ve had with law of attraction. It might be helpful.

Heaving Dead Cats » believing problem

God Thinks Like You and He Personally Cares For You, Plus a Video To Cheer You Up

Related posts

Don’t Assume I’m A Sensitive Soul

Related posts

Religion Is Evil And Contagious

Related posts

A Rational Chain E-mail

Related posts

25 Blasphemous Quotes From Atheist Ireland

Related posts

A Thought Experiment With Your Religious Friends

Related posts

The Secret Divides Part 2

Related posts