Heaving Dead Cats » ignorance

Why Do Christians Hate The ACLU?

Johnny — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:06:47 +0000

Because I’m sure many just see it as a title, or an acronym, and recall their mention in the news involving lawsuits, lets start by answering a basic: What is the ACLU?

American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 by Crystal Eastman, Roger Baldwin and Walter Nelles. It was founded to assist in defending the rights of citizens as granted by the United States Constitution. At the time, the three biggest concerns were freedom of speech (for anti-war protesters), civil rights for blacks (and other minority races), and equal rights for women. On their site, the ACLU proclaims themselves as a “guardian of liberty, working [...] to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country.”

This is the group who has time-and-time again gone to bat for the ‘little guy’ to insure their Constitutional rights as a citizen and a human are upheld. The Christian’s very doctrine urges them to help the weak, the sick, the poor, the unfortunate, the ‘little guy’. So why do so many Christians harbor such vitriol and hate towards the ACLU?

Personally, I think it boils down to two things:

Christian think they are under attack; so they look for that attacker in every action.
It is a common human reaction to fear the unknown; and Christians fail to understand, even refuse to understand what the ACLU represents.

As for the attacks, Christians have read stories and prophesies in the bible about Christians being persecuted; and so they look for persecution and attack everywhere. They seek to self-fulfill prophesy; and they see a potential persecutor in anyone who does not have the same life philosophies as they do. Their need to see these prophesies fulfilled goes so far that they even see persecution from other branches of Christianity. I see no universal way to combat this, especially on a large scale; so I simply look for those opportunities to help an individual see the light.

Ignorance and lack of knowledge can by combated though. I think the root of this ignorance lies in lack of understand of the principle of Separation of Church and state. So many Christians strive to tear down that wall of separation, without a clue to how that wall protects them and their ability to practice their flavor of Christianity as they see fit.

The ACLU has done some great work defending civil liberties and the rights we are given by our Constitution; but all Christians seem to notice today is their involvement with lawsuits that relate to religion (and of that they are really only noticing one side). And without knowing an ounce of the facts, jump to the assumption that the lawsuits are an attack against Christians. Never once stopping to realize that in many of these cases the ACLU is actually defending the ‘little guy’ from Christianity.

Even when the ACLU is defending the ‘little guy’ from Christians, the ACLU is not against Christianity. The majority of their staff and membership are Christians; and they have repeatedly defended Christians when the rights of those Christians were not being upheld. One of the most recent examples, pentecostal minister Howard Thompson Jr. used to preach during worship services at the New Jersey State Prison, until a few years ago when prison officials stopped him. Multiple religious and Christian defense groups stood by and did nothing; it was the ACLU who went to bat for Mr. Thompson’s rights, and it was the ACLU who won the case for him.

This isn’t the only case that the ACLU has gone to bat for a Christian; here is a list of some of the more prominent cases where the ACLU defended the right of a Christian to speak as a Christian or to practice Christianity. Yet few Christians seem to realize this; most Christians have bought into the conservative media’s constant claim that the ACLU is out to bring down Christianity.

The ACLU fights for INDIVIDUAL free exercise of religion (just as the Constitution specifies). The ACLU also fights against GOVERNMENT endorsement, sponsorship, or establishment of religion (again just as the Constitution specifies).

Now to the heart of what brought on this rant. Someone sent me this email not long ago (warning: obnoxious chain email incoming):

Pass this on to your church, co-workers, family, and friends. What do you have to lose but 44 cents, what do you have to gain? More than you will ever know!

What a clever idea!

Yes, Christmas cards! This is coming early so that you can get ready to include an important address to your list.

Want to have some fun this CHRISTMAS? Send the ACLU a CHRISTMAS CARD this year.

As they are working so very hard to get rid of the CHRISTMAS part of this holiday, we should all send them a nice, CHRISTIAN card to brighten up their dark, sad, little world.

Make sure it says “Merry Christmas” on it.

Here’s the address, just don’t be rude or crude (it’s not the Christian way, you know):
ACLU
125 Broad Street
18th Floor
New York, NY 10004

Two tons of Christmas cards would freeze their operations because they wouldn’t know if any were regular mail containing contributions. So spend 44 cents and tell the ACLU to leave Christmas alone. Also tell them that there is no such thing as a ” Holiday Tree”! It’s always been called a CHRISTMAS TREE!

Please pass this on to your email lists. We really want to communicate with the ACLU! They really DESERVE us!!

For those of you who aren’t aware of them, the ACLU, (the American Civil Liberties Union) is the one suing the U.S. Government to take God, Christmas or anything Christian away from us. They represent the atheists and others in this war.

Help put Christ back in Christmas!

I’ve already addressed most of the subtle hate and lies from this email; so I’ll let the Executive Director of the ACLU of Texas respond:

And just in case you need further fodder to throw at this spiteful and inaccurate email, Snopes has an article on it. In it they point out that some businesses replacing “Merry Christmas” with “Happy Holidays” or “Seasons Greetings” was NOT done under litigation or threat from the ACLU; but instead did so (proactively) to appeal to a broader customer base. They also point out the logically laughable idea of overwhelming the ACLU office with Christmas cards.

If you receive, or previously received the above letter, I encourage you to reply with a link to the above video. Whichever holiday you and yours celebrate, I wish you well and hope its enjoyable.

Happy Whatever Holiday You’re Weirdly Touchy About!

Sources: here, here, here, here, here,here, here, and here.

Atheists, It’s Time to Stand Up to Jesus

Neece — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:30:40 +0000

By Russell Blackford and Udo Schuklenk, Comment Is Free.

Civility has its uses, but atheists should not be afraid to mock faith to undermine religious power.

Religious teachings promise us much — eternal life, spiritual salvation, moral direction, and a deeper understanding of reality. It all sounds good, but these teachings are also onerous in their demands. If they can’t deliver on what they promise, it would be well to clear that up. Put bluntly, are the teachings of any religion actually true or not? Do they have any rational support? It’s hard to see what questions could be more important.

Surely the claims of religion — of all religions — merit scrutiny from every angle, whether historical, philosophical, scientific, or any other.
Contrary to many expectations in the 1970s, or even the 1990s, religion has not faded away, even in the Western democracies, and we still see intense activism from religious lobbies. Even now, one religion or another opposes abortion rights, most contraceptive technologies, and therapeutic cloning research. Various churches and sects condemn many harmless, pleasurable sexual activities that adults can reasonably enjoy.

As a result, these are frowned upon, if not prohibited outright, in many parts of the world, indeed people lose their lives because of them. Most religious organisations reject dying patients’ requests to end their lives as they see fit. Even in relatively secular countries, such as the UK, Canada, and Australia, governments pander blatantly to Christian moral concerns as the protection of religiously motivated refusals to provide medical professional services demonstrates.

In a different world, the merits, or otherwise, of religious teachings might be discussed more dispassionately. In that world, some of us who criticise religion itself might be content to argue that the church (and the mosque, and all the other religious architecture that sprouts across the landscape) should be kept separate from the state. Unfortunately, however, we don’t live in that world.
When religion claims authority in the political sphere, it is unsurprising — and totally justifiable — that atheists and skeptics question the source of this authority. If religious organisations or their leaders claim to speak on behalf of a god, it is fair to ask whether the god concerned really makes the claims that are communicated on its behalf. Does this god even exist? Where is the evidence? And even if this being does exist, why, exactly, should its wishes be translated into law?

In many situations, it is better to be civil, as Paul Kurtz has pointed out, but satire and mockery have traditionally had a legitimate place whenever absurd ideas are joined to power and privilege. Enlightenment thinkers such as Voltaire often used mockery to show the absurdity of ideological stances — including religious ones — that were considered sacrosanct. Mockery is one way of saying that a view does not deserve to be taken seriously. Religious views are fair game if one can also show, on a more serious level, why the view in question does indeed not deserve serious respect.

Perhaps some rationalist or humanist organisations, such as Kurtz’s venerable Center for Inquiry, do have good reason to maintain a scholarly and dignified brand image. But there is also room for the younger, brasher atheists whom Kurtz inaccurately brands as “fundamentalists”, and, in any event, there is a world of difference between appropriate civility and keeping quiet.

In the US, unfortunately, some atheists appear to have concluded that even civil and thoughtful criticism of supposedly “moderate” religion (i.e., almost anything that does not dispute evolutionary theory) should be discouraged.

These “accommodationist” atheists tend to be focused on science advocacy, particularly the teaching of evolution in public schools. In seeking public support for their positions, they think it prudent to take the various American demographics as they are. Since they want to sell evolutionary science to very large numbers of pious Americans, the last thing they want is to see it linked with atheism.
Once you think in that way, from a kind of marketing perspective, it can take over your approach to what you think you ought to say. Sincerity goes out the window, and everything must be “framed” to please the audience. We doubt that this strategy can work.

Religion cannot be eradicated — that is not a realistic goal — but the many problems with religious dogma can and should be highlighted. As atheists, we should state clearly that no religion has any rational warrant, and that many churches and sects promote cruelty, ignorance, and civil rights abuses.

There are harmful consequences to real people in the real world if the views of churches and sects are enshrined in law or given undue social deference – the acceptance even in liberal secular societies of conscientious objection as a legitimate reason for health care professionals and even civil servants to refuse to provide professional services to certain citizens is a case in point. For these reasons it is important that we should speak out and publicly contest the special authority that is accorded, all too often, to pontiffs, imams, priests, and presbyters. Religious leaders are not our moral leaders, much as they clamour to be, and however much the politicians flatter them. These spiritual emperors have no clothes, and we shouldn’t flinch from saying so.

Found at AlterNet.

Thanks to Bill for sending this to my Morgantown Atheists group. While I’ve been guilty of being overly accommodating regarding religion, I find myself agreeing with this argument. Sure, there’s a place and time for civility, but in general, I think this article, and my awesome husband Butch, are right. Religion should be heartily mocked for its unfulfilled, ridiculous promises and stories that people eat up like candy.

Atheism at a glance- BBC Style

Neece — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:51:31 +0000

I thought I’d share this with you. The BBC has a page for each religion where they give a bit of information at a glance, and one for atheism too.

Atheism is the absence of belief in any gods or spiritual beings. The word Atheism comes from a, meaning without, and theism meaning belief in god or gods.

Atheists don’t use god to explain the existence of the universe.

Atheists say that human beings can devise suitable moral codes to live by without the aid of Gods or scriptures.

Reasons for non-belief
People are atheist for many reasons, among them:

They find insufficient evidence to support any religion.

They think that religion is nonsensical.

They once had a religion and have lost faith in it.

They live in a non-religious culture.

Religion doesn’t interest them.

Religion doesn’t seem relevant to their lives.

Religions seem to have done a lot of harm in the world.

The world is such a bad place that there can’t be a god.

It is possible to be both atheist and religious. Virtually all Buddhists manage it, as do adherents of other religions, such as Judaism and Christianity.
But many atheists are also secularist, and are hostile to any special treatment given to organised religion.

Atheists and morality
Atheists are as moral (or immoral) as religious people.
In practical terms atheists often follow the same moral code as religious people, but they arrive at the decision of what is good or bad without any help from the idea of god.

What does it mean to be human?
Atheists find their own answers to the question of what it means to be human.

What are your main reasons for being an atheist? Mine are:

There is zero evidence of the supernatural in any shape or form. (except the Invisible Pink Unicorn, may you die an honorable death, trampled under her holy pink hooves!)
Religion is harmful if swallowed. It survives and thrives on indoctrination/brainwashing, especially in early childhood when a person has no defense for its insanity.
Religion has caused more death, murder, destruction, harm, repression, ignorance, destruction of knowledge, etc, than anything else.
I live in a religious culture and I see the hypocrisy and harm it causes.
The morality of the religious is twisted and usually extremely hypocritical. As an atheist I have my own moral code that doesn’t rely on 2,000 year old rules from desert goat herders who liked to stone people for wearing 2 different fibers at the same time.
Life does not appear to be sacred to the religious, despite their constant braying about the issue. The religious seem desperate to control everyone’s life but their own. (More hypocrisy). The religious subjugate themselves in this life (at least they pretend on the surface, while breaking their rules in secret often) because they want eternal life that doesn’t involve roasting forever in hell (so it’s based on fear of suffering, not on being good for goodness sake).As an atheist, this the the only life I have. It is natural, amazing, awe-inspiring, and precious beyond measure. Every moment is to be treasured and lived fully.
Religion is based on faith, which by definition, has no proof. Religion abhors such free thought. I embrace reason, critical thinking, logic, observation, experimentation, facts, science, intelligence, freethought and skepticism. Basically I believe in using your brain, and thinking for yourself.

That’s my short list. I’m sure I have other reasons for being an atheist but I can’t think of them offhand. So what are yours?

Psalm 137:9 and Dealing With Religious Relatives – EDITED

Neece — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 01:03:24 +0000

The other day, a friend of mine left the following quote on her Facebook page, in the info section of her profile:

“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones” Psalm 137:9
(Gotta love the fricken “good” book)

This is one of my favorite bible quotes as well, mainly because it shows the “good” book as the charming, moral, loving guide that it is. Meaning it is none of those things.

Anyway, a relative of hers sent her a private message on Facebook, saying the following:

This book that you so malign is so important to me and to many whom I love. I do not understand why you feel such contempt and hatred for Christianity and ‘the fricken”good” book’. For many of us it is the foundation on which we base our lives. It is a history book, a poetry book, and to us, a divinely inspired book – one that shows us how to live and to love and attempts to explain the mystery of life and creation. Some take it literally, most do not.

This upset my friend a great deal. She has been an atheist for a very long time, and her relative knows this. This was posted in her profile info, not in anyone’s face. My friend was just expressing herself, not attacking anyone. So why did her relative have to go out of her way, all of a sudden, to be openly offended?

My friend sent a reply to her, which unfortunately I don’t have. It was polite and loving. Her relative answered with the following:

Apparently the unknown person who wrote it was in captivity and despondent after the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem. Apparently the psalmist was crying out that the Babylonians should be treated as they had treated the Israelites.

This woman goes to bible study classes all the time, so we can see what she is learning there. Classic Apologetics which is: the branch of theology concerned with the defense or proof of christianity. Because, it seems, if you believe in the bible, you have to prove the only book you’ve got has something special in it, and when it is shown to be inaccurate, you have to defend it to the bitter end, clinging to your indoctrination in your desperation. Her comment is apologetic, wishful thinking, cherry-picking, selective and downright delusional. I’ve read the bible. It’s not poetic, loving, kind, thoughtful, generous, helpful, divinely inspired, or even accurate in its history.

The bible, and christianity, is full of hate, murder, rape, stoning, killing, sacrifice, fear, anger, jealousy, ridiculous laws and bigotry. It encourages slavery; rape; murdering others; war; blindly worshiping a hateful, jealous god who is neither omnipotent, omniscient nor omnipresent; misogyny and retribution, among many other amoral activities and traits. It is not historically accurate throughout, and steals heavily from neighboring, competing religions of the time.

The bible, and christianity, is inflexible and close-minded, especially against any contradiction to it. So we went through millennia of repression and the Dark Ages because the church destroyed or hoarded all books and learning. Where would we be if we had never experienced the fear and ignorance of the Dark Ages? Much further along than now, that’s for sure.

In my opinion, religion is brainwashing: evil and harmful.

My friend is very upset. She doesn’t want to argue with her relative because she doesn’t want to get in a no-win fight. So what is the best way to respond? It isn’t like she wrote this quote on her relative’s wall, or anything aggressive.

Yet it seems that religious people feel they are superior and right above all others, giving them the right, nay, the duty, to force their beliefs down the throats of everyone else. To me this is unacceptable.

Have you been confronted by a close friend or relative regarding your lack of faith? How did you feel about it and how did you react? What was the outcome?
If you’d like, you can reply by email at heavingdeadcats@gmail.com or comment below.

EDIT: An atheist friend of mine IM’ed me to share the following story. He didn’t want for the people to find out, since they’re christian, so he didn’t want to leave a comment:

We were over at a friend’s house, drinking. He says the kids have to go to bed soon so they can go to church Sunday morning. Because church teaches morals and manners. Meanwhile their kids (three girls) were screaming at each other, sassing each other (Hanna Montana style?), while one parent was sneaking off to do coke in the bathroom, and the other was telling us how she stole a bunch of stuff out of the salvation army drop off bin. My wife and I were like “wtf?” Meanwhile my two daughters were angels with real manners.

Kingsville: King of Ignorance

Johnny — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:00:33 +0000

Kingsville Texas is the county seat of Kleberg County; in January of 1997 county commissioners unanimously designated “heaven-o” as the county’s official greeting.

Okay, I know that’s not really breaking news; but I’ve been on a bit of a separation of church and state kick, so when I stumbled on this I thought I’d share.

So what is wrong with using “hello?” Well it turns out that Leonso Canales Jr. thinks “hello” is a negative greeting due to its association with “hell.” What?!

According to Canales “The ‘O’ is not enough to hide the most negative word (hell) printed in every dictionary” and speaking the word is even worse. So in 1988 Canales (with assisted insight from his brother) coined the greeting “heaven-o.”

There is no etymological link at all between the words “hell” and “hello”, the latter deriving from older forms such as “hallow” and “hullo”. Ironically, this common greeting probably has its oldest origins in the Germanic word “hailæn” (or Old English “hælan), which means to heal, to cure or to save, either in the physical or religious sense.

What’s worse is that this shining example of ignorance somehow managed to convince the Kleberg County commissioners of the link between “hello” and “hell.” And subsequently persuaded them “heaven-o” was better. Then with a direct violation of the first amendment the county designated “heaven-o” as their official greeting; instructing chamber of commerce and courthouse employees to answer the phone “Heaven-o.”

As far as I can find, this policy still stands.

The Nicest Compliment Ever

Neece — Tue, 26 May 2009 09:39:20 +0000

So, I got an email from a nice man yesterday. He read my de-conversion story and told me something I have never been told before, at least not this way. He told me I need to reconsider and have a child! Now, I’m 40, so I really don’t see that happening for a myriad of reasons, but the sentiment was so honest and forthright that I was taken aback.

This nice man found HDC and my story and just thought that atheists like me and my husband should have more children. You know, he’s right, in a way. I mean, if you can do it, and you’re a freethinking atheist, then yes, you should consider having a kid or two. Like he said, it would bring a bit more sanity into the world.

Unfortunately people who are more educated, intelligent and rational might think it’s a bad idea. But the movie Idiocracy does make a good point. Mostly people who are sheep, who follow the crowd, who think having unprotected sex is ok because, if they get pregnant it was “meant to be“! (my idiot neighbors told me this… they can’t afford their meager bills and the wife told me she doesn’t even like her husband, but he is “hers” so they might as well have a kid.. OMFG don’t even get me started on those two idiots… they believe drinking Mountain Dew is a good method of birth control! Seriously, WTF!)

I don’t have any specific numbers, but it seems that educated, intelligent people are having less children in Europe and America. While less educated, (more religious?), lower income people (I don’t know a politically correct term that would be better to use. So try not to be offended, ok?) are having more kids. I know that Europe has been dwindling in population, especially in Germany, Italy and other countries. And muslim people are filling up the ghost towns, then immediately going on the Dole over there. That’s what I’ve heard, but I don’t have hard data. (that’s from NPR, from a year ago, so maybe things are different now. But I don’t listen to NPR anymore). Pat Condell is always talking about such things too.

I never saw the movie, Idiocracy. It looked really dumb, but the concept is what I’m talking about. It’s more about I.Q. though, and I’m also talking about education and belief systems. If more atheists raise their children to be freethinkers and critical thinkers, imagine what the next generation would be like instead of what I see when we go out these days?

Since when did it become “cool” to be ignorant? That makes me stark raving crazy mad. I know of only 2 teenagers who seem to value intelligence and they are in my family. Maybe I sound old and crotchety, I don’t know. It just seems that teenagers are having babies, and that everyone is purposefully embracing ignorance and mindlessness.

In my day… (just kidding… but seriously, in my day, it wasn’t like this!)

Ok, it’s getting a bit late, the weekend has been really long, and I’m tired. But I wanted to thank the man for thinking I’d make a good parent. I know I’d raise my kids to be freethinking individuals, even though it’s not very cool.

Maybe you out there can chime in. Are you raising your children to be critical thinkers? How is that going? I imagine with the societal influences and poor education system it must be tough. Then again, am I just out of touch since I’m not a parent? Or did you do what my husband and I did? Did you decide for whatever reason that it would be best not to have kids? As always, I look forward to your thoughts!

A Happy, Frustrated Atheist

Neece — Sat, 09 May 2009 03:06:44 +0000

Hey everyone! First, let’s catch up.

Comments: Thanks for the great comments recently! I promise to reply to each of them but I am falling behind. I realized some of them really require a post devoted to them instead of just a reply. So please don’t think I’m ignoring you. I will comment soon.
Computers: It’s true. Ask my poor long-suffering husband Butch, I am missing the Patience gene. My computer has been doing strange things since I reinstalled windows (which I do every 6 months to a year to keep things fresh and in working order, as every past geek friend of mine has recommended) and I found out through Lifehacker that Windows 7 beta is freely available for download. Well, of course I had to do it. I have waited as long as possible, but the ADD, Shiny-Loving Geek in me had to have it. I’m such a sucker for the shiny when it comes to geek stuff. (Luckily for Butch, I couldn’t care less about diamonds and that kind of nonsense. Unfortunately though, I need gadgets and computers and stuff like that.) It’s my kryptonite, I guess. So I just had to have windows 7, and now, of course, I’m having problems with the virtual memory. Sigh. So bear with me, it’s taking me quite some time to try to figure out the issue and see if I can find a fix. On a completely unrelated note, I’m interviewing geeks to be my new BFF. Please apply within.

Ok, now, I want to talk to you briefly about happiness. Are you an atheist? Are you happy? This lingering idea keeps wandering around that all atheists are curmudgeonly, grumpy, miserable, fatalistic and depressed.

I’ve been an atheist for 9 years, and for many years before that I was basically an agnostic. I have to say, I think discarding religion was a huge relief. I think I felt better. Once I finally learned to think critically, I think I started really seeing rationally and really appreciating the natural wonders of the universe. If anything, this process has left me more happy, more fascinated by the world of science and discovery. I think I’m happier and calmer, yet always eager to learn and grow.

But I think I probably come across under certain circumstances as a furious cynic. Why would that be? Which is the real me? The happy atheist is who I think I’d identify with best. But my bullshit meter has become increasingly sensitive. So when someone says something that screams of ignorance and a total lack of thinking for oneself, I just tend to get irritated, frustrated and grumpy.

It seems that wherever I go I’m surrounded by sheeple people who let others think for them. They spew forth the rubbish and lies that had been told to them by people in some strange version of authority (whether that be their minister, the pope, the government, or a slick marketing campaign) and that’s good enough for them. They wallow in their ignorance like it was some sort of universal remedy. Thinking is endangered and that pisses me off, and worries me.

Anyway, other than that, I’m quite a content person overall. Are you an atheist? Or a believer? Are you happy and content? Or are you angry and bitter and curmudgeonly? If you’re happy, do you still get really angry over certain things? I look forward to your comments! Oh,and have a great evening!

Heaving Dead Cats » ignorance

Why Do Christians Hate The ACLU?

Related posts

Atheists, It’s Time to Stand Up to Jesus

Related posts

Atheism at a glance- BBC Style

Related posts

Psalm 137:9 and Dealing With Religious Relatives – EDITED

Related posts

Kingsville: King of Ignorance

Related posts

The Nicest Compliment Ever

Related posts

A Happy, Frustrated Atheist

Related posts