It’s like arguing with Fred Phelps.
Man, the things you can learn from angry atheists. Valuable life lessons such as: if you ignore them, then you’re scared and insecure in your beliefs. If you engage them, as they so clearly and very badly want you to do, then you’re attention-seeking and a whiner. I can’t decide whether to be scared or a whiner! It sucks to only have those two choices but listen people. The atheists have everything figured out, they really do, so don’t blame me if I restructure my life to reflect their superior intelligence.
Another much-needed lesson for all of us here: it is apparently one of the worst things you can possibly do to ever use that foxhole quote. I know this because, obviously, since atheists have everything figured out, if there were more horrible things going on in the world that could be helped by the time and energy these atheists have put into their own personal battle against that quote, they’d be doing those things instead.
…
So. In all seriousness, it’s been an interesting discussion and more than a little illuminating. Nicki and Instapunk have joined in, and the angry atheists are already on Nicki’s site, comparing me to a racist for using the foxhole quote. Yep. I’m exactly like a racist. Damn, these people are GENIUSES. A fool such as me could never hope to stand up to their ironclad grasp of logic, context, and meaning of everything.
Anyway. I’ve been writing back to a few of my friends this morning and have told them that I keep thinking of that line, “life’s tough - get a helmet”, and that it seems to me that friends are, in fact, your helmet.
I profoundly appreciate every single comforting thing anyone has said about Rupert’s dad, all the well wishes, all the kind words. It’s unspeakably gratifying to have so much moral support.
Forget what the angry atheists say about prayer (”magical thinking, you fools!”), the fact of the matter is that when you are in emotional pain and someone kindly says to you, “I hope you feel better and I wish you all the best,” it does make you feel better. When a person you care about is in critical condition in a hospital and someone kindly says to you, “I have your loved one in my thoughts and prayers and I hope you will all come through this happy and healthy,” IT MAKES YOU FEEL BETTER.
And it will make the sick one feel better when he wakes up and hears that thousands of people are wishing him well. No, it will not heal his wounds. It will not repair his foot or make anything less physically painful materially. But it just might make his emotions more positive, it might cheer him up, it might distract him from some of his agony, and it might improve his psychological outlook to be reminded that there is such a thing as the kindness of strangers.
That’s why people say these things to each other, because they know if they were in the same situation, it might make them feel better. They care about you as a human being and they try to help the only way they can from a distance, and it does make a difference. So I really appreciate it.
…
The subject of the sick one in question is finished being associated with this “debate” about atheism. End of the line with that shit. If any comments left on any future post regarding his medical situation are about the foxhole issue, atheism, or anything controversial related thereto, they will be moved to the appropriate threads, which would be this one and the last one.
The angry atheists did a bang-up job making my boyfriend’s family tragedy about them because they just felt so incredibly INSULTED, and that’s fine. I learned my lesson: never say anything that might insult atheists while talking about sick loved ones. That’s my end of the deal. The angry atheists’ end of the deal is to behave like decent human beings and respect those same boundaries, because once more with feeling: this is my blog and I own it. Comments are open because I like hearing what people have to say and they like saying it, and usually everybody’s happy even when we’re in-fighting like angry chimps, because we keep it in context and usually remarkably civil, given some of the subject matter we’ve covered, like abortion.
But it’s a privilege to comment on someone else’s personal blog, not a right. I pay money for the bandwidth every commenter uses, so I get to maintain control of it and there’s not a damn thing wrong with that. Nor is there a damn thing wrong with using that control to keep comment threads contextual and free from trolls and assholes if that’s what I feel like doing.
…
I can’t help but wonder how these exact same angry atheists would have reacted were all of this flipped. Say there’s some random blog out there by an atheist. She posts about a family member who is in a coma, and titles her post, “There are no Christians in a foxhole.” She says that she does not want anyone to pray for him because that is a waste of time. She writes that at this moment, during the fear and worry, she cannot possibly believe there is a kind and loving God that gives a crap about humans.
I would like to know exactly how “tolerant” and “fair-minded” she and her friends/commenters would be if a Christian immediately left a condescending comment saying that, in fact, there ARE Christians in foxholes and that it was unfortunate that she didn’t find the contributions of Christian veterans worth much.
And say that comment was quickly followed by several other comments from Christians detailing precisely how, in point of fact, people can be in frightening situations and still believe in God, to say otherwise is an outrageous lie, and that therefore her post title claiming otherwise is incredibly insulting and bigoted and even just like racism. Say these commenters mocked and belittled the atheists there, explaining in careful detail how silly and naive it is to believe there is no God. All of this on the thread to her post about a loved one in a coma.
Whether they are correct or incorrect factually is not the question. The question is, anyone want to take bets on that not exactly going over very well in that particular context and on that particular blog? Maybe the blogger might even feel compelled to tell those Christians to get bent and shut the fuck up with their agendas and their dogma?
…
I am never going to apologize for using the foxhole quote, and here’s why: I have no reason to. If we all apologized every time we said something that someone somewhere might find “insulting”, we’d never get anything else done. If people want to be insulted by something an emotional person said, even after she clarified that it was simply a quote that applied to HER at THAT TIME and was NOT A STATEMENT OF FACT, then that’s just the way it’s going to have to be. Even if I apologized, you’d still feel insulted, wouldn’t you? I will say with all sincerity that I did not mean it to be offensive or insulting. The fact you think I did is not something I am going to apologize for.
I felt insulted that people were using a comment thread about a man in a coma to push their own personal agenda - and that is exactly what these atheists were doing - and it hasn’t even occurred to me to ask for an apology for that. It wouldn’t make me feel better and it wouldn’t prove any points. I have no need for an apology because even though I felt insulted and offended, that’s what happens when you have open comments. They said what they wanted to say and everyone looking on can decide what they think about it.
One last thing. It’s funny how differently this played out than it did when I used to bait Christians into defending their faith. I said some pretty flippant and borderline-offensive things about Christianity and the Bible, and actually ASKED Christians to fight me on it. They did. And maybe 1% of them were even remotely hostile. The rest found it in themselves to answer my questions with a calm and civil tone, and it turned into a couple of really productive debates.
But this? I make one offhand reference to a quote from long ago to describe the way I was feeling in a time of stress, and Jesus Wilford Christ, you’d have thought I said atheists are dirty festering hemorrhoids on the ass of humanity and should all be wiped out. The reaction - to something that wasn’t even remotely a bait - was damn near perfectly inversely proportional to the reaction I got from Christians when I actively baited them. The vast majority of the angry atheists went completely ballistic and concluded that I have very poor character and am a liar and a bigot, while a mere few from that forum said basically, “while that quote may insult me, I’m not gonna lose my shit over it. Ease up.”
Instructive, is what I’m saying it is. Especially now as someone who’s gotten it from both sides. The thing about arguing with Christians is that you always have a trump card. The minute they get nasty, insulting, or hateful, all you have to do is mention that this isn’t what Jesus would do. That either shuts them down or proves their hypocrisy and their own personal failure to live up to what they’re endorsing.
Atheists, on the other hand, particularly the angry variety, well you’re just screwed. Not because they’re right or because their argument is superior, but because there is no overarching moral standard that they claim to adhere to and that you can use to prove to them their own hypocrisy. And some of them ARE hypocrites. Giant, flaming, outrageous hypocrites.
…
And this concludes the Great Foxhole Insult Debate. Well, your comments will conclude it. I won’t be mentioning it again for a very long time because amazingly, I have more important things to agitate about for the next few weeks, like Rupert’s dad, who’s having surgery on his foot this morning and is still in a coma, and Rupert himself, who is going through an extremely rough time right now. And on a lighter note, this blog. It’s become a real downer and that’s not what I have ever envisioned for it.
Thanks again, to all of you with your kind words and also for your defenses of me in the other threads. I’ve always considered my commenters to be my own personal community support system and you haven’t failed me yet. I appreciate you.
At the core of the debate, you only had good intentions in your heart. That’s good enough for me. Anyone else? Mweh. Fuck ‘em.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:59 pmESTRachel -
I’ve never been so ashamed to say I’m an atheist; nor have I been as embarrassed by the actions of a few dipshites that I share some views with. Sometimes there’s not enough grownups in the room.
Best of wishes to your family and Rupert’s dad.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:00 pmESTYou’re still my favorite scared whiner Rachel.
P.S. Don’t tell the others.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:07 pmESTI’ve debated both sides, the theist and the atheist, and after so much debating it eventually ends up looking very silly. Or in the case of college religious students, you see the sun rising over the horizion and you discover you have two hours until your first class and you haven’t done your homework. I just hope that atheist and theist can put aside their differences and come together when Muslims start insisting on Sharia, ‘cuz that’s going to ruin everyone’s day.
Best wishes for Rupert’s dad’s recovery.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:11 pmESTI think you have a couple more banner headings!
Best wishes to Ruperts dad, I hope he pulls through. I ride and I know the risks from stupid cage drivers.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:11 pmESTCan I take a moment to apologize to all of the bent out of shape atheists?
I’m sorry you’re all a bunch of thin-skinned douchenozzles.
Much love-
-Naughtius
June 10th, 2008 at 3:12 pmESTIt’s really sad that it had to come to the gigantic flame war that it did. People, regardless of religious creed (or lack thereof), should just learn to behave themselves. We will always be here to offer a sympathetic ear, some friendly advice, and to laugh with (or at!) you whenever needed.
My thoughts and prayers are with you and your family, especially the in-laws!
June 10th, 2008 at 3:15 pmEST… be Democrats.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:19 pmEST“Jesus Wilford Christ”? Rachel, are you telling me that God is really Wilford Brimley?
Life makes so much more sense now! So THAT’s how those old people in Cocoon were able to turn young again…
June 10th, 2008 at 3:20 pmESTWhat og said.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:24 pmESTOh Rachel, I’m so sorry all this happened– all this crap piled upon crap. How rotten for you. I wish you peace, lots of dog kisses, a good hug from Rupert, and a good night’s sleep. It sounds like you could use them. And also a good stiff drink, if you go for that sort of thing. You and yours are still in my thoughts and prayers. Take care.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:25 pmESTJustin Buist Says:
If we all apologized every time we said something that someone somewhere might find “insulting”, we’d…
… be Democrats.
I thought it was the rethuglicans that were always bullied into apologizing?
Either way - Best thoughts, wishes and prayers for Joe.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:25 pmESTNo relation.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:26 pmESTDrink alert! My poor computer would be fried right now if I had been drinking anything.
Rachel, thanks for blogging; you bring out the best in everyone (except the flaming asshat atheists, obviously, but I’m not sure who could bring out the best there; I think even Jesus on His Amazing Muffin would have a difficult time pleasing that crowd).
Again, best wishes and prayers to Joe, Rupert, you, and anybody else in your family who is having a hard time.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:29 pmEST“That either shuts them down or proves their hypocrisy and their own personal failure to live up to what they’re endorsing.”
Would you believe it actually prompts some (probably most) of us to repentance and self-examination? It’s not always hypocrisy, you know. Sometimes we just screw up.
That comment the person made earlier about you being a bigot? I don’t get it. You’re extremely open-minded. You’re one of the most intellectually honest people I’ve encountered here in la-la land. Don’t let it get to you. I think you’re lovely.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:30 pmESTHappy to move on, and wish Joe well - but I have to say that the worst day on Rachel’s blog is still better than everyone else’s on their best day.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:30 pmESTLooking forward to your take on Obama’s next stupid move - should be coming along any minute now…
Rachel,
Been reading you for a while now. Only commented a couple of times.
Even though I am a fundamental, Bible believing Christian, I still DIG YOU and think Rupert is one helluva of lucky man.
Love your writing,
MG
P.S. Keep up your prayers for Rupert’s Dad. God is listening.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:33 pmESTJust hit the tip jar. Hope that makes you feel better.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:34 pmESTBest wishes, prayers and greetings to your “future in laws.”
Damn.
Well, even if you go on hiatus again, we’ll be out here at the bus stop, ready when you are!
For now, this ‘praying type’ will just keep praying for you and Rupert and his Mom and, especially today, Joe.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:36 pmESTHmmmmm, seems to me that any atheist who has a problem with the foxhole quote WHO HAS NEVER BEEN IN A FOXHOLE UNDER HEAVY ENEMY FIRE should shut the hell up until the foxhole/enemy fire situation actually happens to them. Until they have some actual experience in the matter, they have no perspective. Personally, I don’t give a rat’s smelly brown ass if a person is an atheist or not, the problem I have is with people spouting off about shit that they have not actually experienced first hand.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:37 pmESTI’ve always found it evident that there is very little difference between the “true believer” and the “true unbeliever.”
June 10th, 2008 at 3:37 pmESTIn either case you’ll be excommunicated for varying from their orthodoxy.
Well with all the heathen traffic, I hope your ad revenues improve.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:38 pmESTThe odd thing to me about the debate is that I never thought the ‘atheist in foxhole’ quote was ever about religion. It has always struck me as a comment on how we humans when faced with a horrible situation will respond with emotional searching, not intellectualization, e.g. injured older men calling for their mother; or parents seeking ‘a greater good’ in the death of a child; or Frankl’s ‘Man’s search for meaning’ after his holocaust experience.
How about this one to keep thing going.
There will always be prayer in schools, as long as there are tests!
June 10th, 2008 at 3:38 pmESTRachel,
I have read your blog for quite some time. I love your writing, dog pics, rants etc. Thanks for blogging for us, it is much appreciated. I always turn to your page when I need a good laugh or some good entertainment.
I would like to point out one thing… The key word in this is asshole not atheist. I am upset that a couple assholes created such a bad name for atheists. I am also sorry that a couple assholes made this difficult time in your life even more difficult.
I have no need to defend myself (as an atheist) but I just wanted to say one thing to all your readers who made negative comments about atheists: the acts of a small few do not represent the group as a whole. Please do not group all atheists into this category of angry or asshole atheists. I am not angry or an asshole, just simply an atheist.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:41 pmESTMy electricity went out for 24 hours and this is what I come back to. I am alternately bemused and angry that this was piled on you during a time of tragedy, Rachel.
I desperately want to go to WAR [metaphorically, you hair-trigger nitwits] because there is something so despicably familiar about these hard-core evangelical atheists [I'm not talking to the rest of you - I'm talking to the ones who have crapped in Rachel's living room]…they remind me of professional Phelps-like haters/fanatics:
There’s only one other people group on the planet that you could say this about: MUSLIMS. Some atheists are as zealous and rabid in their convictions as any jihadist I’ve ever heard about. They circle like hyenas at the slightest insult - real or imagined - and attack in cowardly packs. There’s no reasoning with them, there’s no logic, and certainly no fairness. You may as well be discussing women’s rights with the Taliban for all that’s worth.
For some [note the emphasis], atheism is as much a religious belief as a political movement. They are incredibly intrusive, aggressive and evangelical, and above all - they are intolerant.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:41 pmESTI wonder about the proportional response of comparing the outrage so many atheists felt to your use of that quote compared to any Christians being outraged by the homorous creation of the Rachel Lucas Prayer Book from a few weeks back, which would essentially be blasphemy.
I know which way I would be betting on that.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:52 pmESTBest wishes and positive thoughts (and yes, prayers) continue here for Rupert’s dad and Rupert and Rupert’s mom and the rest of the family, including Rachl Sunnysmom and Sunny and Maggie….
When you have time, updates would be good. Venting too. We’re right here if you need us.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:55 pmESTI left you an email.
I hope you are feeling better!
My sincere best wishes for Joe and Rupert’s surgery.
May God be with them.
And I will defend you anytime, I abhor abuse, especially if it’s against someone enduring rough times.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:59 pmESTSome people, be they Christians, atheists, Jews, Muslims, or Hindus, are like land mines—step on one, no matter how inadvertently, and they explode.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:03 pmEST“Logic and reason aren’t enough: You also have to be a dick to everyone who doesn’t think like you.” *
You have my prayers for, and best wishes to you, Rupert and family.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:04 pmESTRachel–
Like most of the stuff you write, your response to this latest dust-up was very well said.
I don’t know if anyone else has ever used the term, but I’ll coin it right here…
It seems that you’ve angered a pack of Fundamental Atheists, and just like their brothers-in-arms, the fundies from the other major religions, they sound like a bunch of shit-flinging monkeys once they get worked up by basically hearing something they disagree with.
Damn, whatever happened to live and let live? If these retards were so fucking offended by stuff they read on your site, wouldn’t it be easier to just LEAVE AND DON’T FUCKING COME BACK?
I doubt they convinced many people of the accuracy of their views or the fallacy of those they disagree with.
Me, I’m cool with celebrating Christmas, using Kosher salt on my popcorn, and not going to church. I don’t pray, but I’m happy to send best wishes along for a speedy recovery.
Illegitimis non carborundum. Don’t let the bastards grind you down…
June 10th, 2008 at 4:04 pmESTRedheaded Infidel
yeah…what she said.
Still praying for Joe and all those that love him.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:04 pmESTHugs to Rachel…Don’t let the bastards get you down.
Hurricane Mikey…
June 10th, 2008 at 4:07 pmESThaha GMTA
Rachel,
You don’t know me, or even most of us, but we’ve-in a metaphorical, but likely a real sense if the need ever arose- got your back.
I waited a long time for you to resume blogging. I couldn’t bring myself to remove you from my blogroll because I missed your style, sass and good humor. Paid off, too, because, well, here you are blogging again. I’m just sorry that the humor has evaporated due to some self-important pricks. I’ll toss a few bad jokes into the comments to try and help. They will probably offend someone, but as long as that someone isn’t you, I’ll be okay with it:
June 10th, 2008 at 4:11 pmESTBesides the dog pictures, it is writing like this why I come back to this blog over and over again:
Rachel, I’m really glad you didn’t say atheists are dirty festering hemorrhoids on the ass of humanity and should all be wiped out. Because they’d probably get all upset and I’d have to say prayers for them so that God would lessen their anger.
Best wishes and prayers for Joe and wife, Rupert, you, and your puppies.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:12 pmESTFirst, my best wishes for Rupert’s dad, his whole family, and you. And I’m a small “a” atheist.
Second, a quote I ran across some time back that I really liked:
I found it here.
The link is still good. And the anti-theists need to get a life.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:14 pmESTMs. Lucas, you are a patient woman
Angry Atheists: Get a grip, learn some manners. You’ll find it’s amazing how good manners makes people more likely to listen to you than rudely and loudly decrying & hectoring them for trivial (to them) matters. Which - EVEN IF - you are correct, gets you dismissed as boorish oafs.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:16 pmESTI think I just came up with a new term for a fundamentalist atheist who’s insulted by all this; a “foxhole”! As in “Shut yer trap, you raving foxhole!”
June 10th, 2008 at 4:16 pmESTRachel:
I’m sorry that the blog has become a downer because of this. Hope that doesn’t mean you’re going to close up shop again. That would SUCK!
Re: Those Particular Assholes Who Also Happen to Be Athiests, I guess soemone once said words that apply to them about as well as anything: “Forgive them, for they know not what they do.” People who shit on other people like those folks did to you actually do more damage to themselves, in my opinion, than they could possibly have done to you. Maybe they’ll wise up some day and realize what fools they’ve been, and made of themselves over the past few days. Maybe not. You can’t talk sense into them, though, so forgivin’ ‘em, and forgettin’ ‘em and movin’ on past ‘em is about the best thing you can do.
My most heartfelt, extremely orthodox and ancient Catholic prayers (take that, Athiest Asshats!) for your loved ones’ swift and perfect recoveries are being said constantly and with great care. Pax Vobiscum.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:17 pmESTRachel,
((hugs))
Nicki
June 10th, 2008 at 4:20 pmESTJesus Wilford Christ
Ok, now I’m confused. Does Jesus have more than one middle name or is there more than one Jesus?
Jesus H. Christ is going to be pissed to find out some other guy is going around claiming to be the real Jesus, that’s all I’m saying.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:25 pmESTYeah, some people are just mean-spirited jerks, and that is a downer.
To cleanse the pallet, I recommend giving Firefly’s Our Mrs. Reynold’s a watch. Nothing cheers me up like a Joss Whedon take on 1940’s screwball comedies. In space. With horses.
Take care.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:29 pmESTI’ve wanted to say something to you, Rachel, since I first heard about Joe. I just haven’t the heart to hope that you’d see it amidst the “debate”. Hang in there, tell the angry atheists to stick it, and bask in the love, well wishes, good vibes, and, yes, prayers that we all are sending your way. Love up Rupert, love up the dogs, and focus on what makes you feel better.
Take a look at BlogDog’s LOLdog:
They called her Ghostface … and she rode a dusty steed.
Makes me howl with laughter everytime I see it!
I can haz Sunny and Maggie pics, plz?
June 10th, 2008 at 4:31 pmESTNicki F. - went to your blog - my guess is you’ve busted the Swear Meter to bits defending Rachel. Nicely done - thanks for having her back and making me laugh!
Ok - here’s my joke contribution, Physics Geek:
Man goes into a bar and sees a fellow patron with a dog under his barstool and says ‘Your dog bite?
Man says ‘No.’
Dude reaches down to pet the dog and gets soundly bitten.
‘I thought you said your dog doesn’t bite!’ he says.
‘That’s not my dog.”
I know, I know, It’s an old one, but it makes me laugh every time.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:32 pmESTThere are two kinds of people in this world:
1. Those who need a swift kick in the nuts.
2. Those who don’t.
Personally, I find sanctimony to be an instant identifier that said person belongs in category #1. It doesn’t matter whether it’s religious sanctimony, political sanctimony, or whatever - if you’re a sanctimonious twit, you need to be kicked in the nuts. It’s that simple.
You, Rachel, are not a sanctimonious twit. The sanctimonious ‘atheists’ who decided to turn your blog into the battleground of a religious fight that nobody is showing up for, on the other hand, should receive some steel-toed crotch kicking justice at the earliest possible opportunity. I say this not because they are atheists, mind you - I say this because they’re “holier than thou” atheists who feel the need to cram their beliefs down the throats of the “infidels”. As Redhead Infidel already pointed out, this reminds us of many other fundamentalists out there, including (but by no means limited to):
1. Wahabist Muslims
June 10th, 2008 at 4:32 pmEST2. 700 Club Fundie Christians
3. Communists
4. Nazis
… and so many other groups of people that are firmly convinced that, regardless of what everyone else thinks, they really do know better than everyone else around them and just can’t wait to impose their beliefs on the mere lesser mortals out there.
Hope the surgery goes well. All of you are still in our thoughts and prayers. Do not despair.
I am never going to apologize for using the foxhole quote, and here’s why: I have no reason to.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:38 pmEST. . . My kind of gal.
Prayers are continuing for Joe, Rupert not-his-real-name, Sunny, Maggie, you, and anyone else I may have missed. It can’t hurt, and it may help.
If I may, Rachel — my six year old daughter spent a month and a half in the hospital earlier this year with severe respiratory infections, to the point that we almost lost her a couple of times. All of my friends and acquaintances, who know that I’m Catholic, offered up their prayers and/or good thoughts during our ordeal. I’m not saying the prayers made her better, because she’s home now but with a trach, but knowing that all those people were praying and/or thinking about her definitely helped the wife and myself get through it.
My $0.02 worth.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:47 pmESTYou and yours are in my prayers.
A priest, a Rabbi and Bill Clinton, carrying a poodle, walk into a bar. The bartender says, “Is this some kind of joke?”
June 10th, 2008 at 4:49 pmESTMarla — Yeah, I’m not nice when people act like douchebags to people I happen to like and respect. I’m not always that cantankerous, but there are definitely times…
June 10th, 2008 at 4:49 pmESTRachel: I said some pretty flippant and borderline-offensive things about Christianity and the Bible, and actually ASKED Christians to fight me on it. They did. And maybe 1% of them were even remotely hostile. The rest found it in themselves to answer my questions with a calm and civil tone, and it turned into a couple of really productive debates.
I’d be interested in reading one or more of these interactions. I find this claim hard to buy given the comments in this and in the previous blog entry.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:56 pmESTOne more wacky idea I thought of… I say this with apologies to William Jennings Bryan:
If they dare to come out in the open field and defend their sanctimony as a good thing, we shall fight them to the uttermost, having behind us the producing masses of the nation and the world. Having behind us the commercial interests and the laboring interests and all the toiling masses, we shall answer their demands for atheist orthodoxy by saying to them, you shall not press down upon the brow of atheists this crown of crap. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of bull.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:58 pmESTI’ve been so busy the last two days I’ve only been able to pray for Rupert’s dad, his family, and friends. That, I can do, and I have. And I will.
I’m not sorry I missed the athiest rants. My dad told me long ago that when athiests deny God, they have to worship someone — so they worship themselves. That’s why athiests are so often overbearing, arrogant pricks who don’t understand why you just don’t OBEY. It’s no fun to argue with a person who believes they are a god. So I don’t.
So I pray for them. Heh.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:59 pmESTAfter too many years in healthcare, I’ve observed that religion is a lot like a vaccination.
Some people don’t want to be exposed to it, but they’re glad everyone else does.
Hope things get better for you & yours, Rachel. Oh, and here are some words to live by: Illegitimi non carborundum. And no, it’s not from the Latin Mass.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:13 pmEST…then you’d be in Canada.
(one more Christian adding my prayers for Joe’s speedy recovery)
June 10th, 2008 at 5:15 pmESTOr, Illegitimaimi non corborundum.
(Don’t let the little bastards grind you down)
June 10th, 2008 at 5:17 pmESTIf you’re interested in reading those interactions, then go and look for them. No one here, especially not Rachel owes you evidence of her belief or non-belief.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:17 pmESTI did not compare you to a racist. I said the comment is LIKE a racist comment. It’s a sweeping insult to an entire class of people.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:19 pmESTWhy does this apply to just atheists? Why do you think it’s ok for theists to say “there are no atheists in foxholes” even if they haven’t been in foxholes themselves, but it’s not ok for atheists to comment on such an absurd claim?
June 10th, 2008 at 5:23 pmESTJeebus Wilford Christ, dipshit “…atheists are dirty festering hemorrhoids on the ass of humanity and should all be wiped out…” but the non-dipshits, God fearin’ or not, can stay and play with the rest of the helmeted.
Sorry, just could not resist using it somehow.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:25 pmESTDid someone hear the flapping of gums just now?
Nope, I didn’t hear anything.
Me, neither. Hey, how about some new dog pics?
June 10th, 2008 at 5:33 pmESTAtheists have a touching faith in their own lack of religion.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:35 pmESTCheck the archives. It’s all there.
I am sorry that you found it offensive, and a little sad that you really have so little to do that you take so much offense at a very old quotation about how some people react when faced with desperate situations.
And of course, none of this has anything to do with how inappropriate the comments were (on both sides, to be honest, but initiated by the atheist response) and the fact that the intent of the hostess, Miss Lucas, was never to insult anyone.
There is a time and a place for everything. This was neither.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:38 pmESTAs touching as a child asking Santa to give daddy a new liver?
I’m just trying to ascertain the level of touching here so I can be appropriately touched. (that just sounded wrong)
June 10th, 2008 at 5:40 pmESTIf there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that in order to really argue over the internet you have to create an unshakeable sense of self-esteem. You have to convince yourself that anybody who ever says anything bad about you is an idiot, no matter what. Even if you have to utterly deceive yourself to do it.
This, I think, is one of the main reasons why there are so few female bloggers compared to male bloggers. It might sound sexist, but I think everyone will agree that women tend to be more emotional than men. And when criticized, they’re more likely to take it personally than men are. Often this is a good thing. When someone says “Hey, maybe that’s not such a good idea,” women are more likely to change their behavior in response to criticism whereas men are more likely to say “Fuck off! I don’t have to listen to you!” and go right back to lighting their own farts on fire or whatever. But on the other hand, men are also more likely to let insults roll of their backs while women are more likely to get upset when personally attacked. The fact that internet anonymity exponentially increases the rudeness quotient of any given user makes the web a decidedly non-female-friendly place, and it’s the rare woman who is able to withstand it. The fact that you’ve withstood it for so long says a lot about you, Rachel.
Still, if it helps, you can imagine them like this.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:45 pmEST“Jesus Wilford Christ”? Rachel, are you telling me that God is really Wilford Brimley?
Don’t be ridiculous. Jesus is only 2000 years old. Wilford Brimley has been doing Quaker Oats commercials for at least twice that long.
Anyway, as an atheist I’m sorry to see other atheists being such dicks in public. I do wish, though, that people would stop making broad, sweeping claims about atheists in general just because this handful happen to be dicks. Jeremiah Wright’s a dick too, but I’m not using him as evidence that all black people suck.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:45 pmESTI found this little gem over at Nicki’s:
And on this thread, we are treated to this sweet compare/contrast:
[Big R The Driver over the loudspeaker]
THAT’S IT! BACK OF THE BUS, ASSHATS, BEFORE I GO ALL RALPH KRAMDEN ON YOUR KISSER!
Posted a comment similar to this elsewhere, too, but it just seems so apropos in this moment, right here, right now.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:47 pmESTHey, he asked for it.
Your dad, while presumably a nice guy who meant well, was mistaken. That’s like saying if you don’t watch American Idol, you have to watch something else instead. It only makes sense to people with a burning need to watch television.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:51 pmESTAnd now, a silly ass joke. With pork.
A man is walking down the road and, in a flash of light, God appears. The following dialogue ensues:
God: I bring you these commandments.
Man: OK.
God: Thou shalt not kill
Man: (Writing this down)OK, that seems reasonable.
God: Thou shalt not steal
Man: OK, stealing is bad, got it.
God: Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Man: That’s going to take some of the fun out of Saturday night, but if that’s the rule, okay.
God: Don’t eat pork.
Man: (Still writing) Don’t eat porrrr…what was that last one again?
God: Don’t eat pork.
Don’t eat pork? Is that God talking or is that the pigs trying to pull a fast one?
Hmmmm. Pork.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:58 pmESTIs this your strategy? It seems like you’re doing a great job deluding yourself into think you’re anything but an idiot.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:59 pmESTRachel, have only posted here a few times. Your sweetie’s dad and his family, as well as you, are in my thoughts during this really difficult time. I wish him a speedy recovery.
I’m pretty appalled at what happened on your blog, from purely “good manners” perspective. I spent a lot of time on support message boards while dealing with infertility for years. It was a cardinal rule on those boards that when someone posted a request for support/prayers/positive thoughts and you were inclined to respond, that you responded with support–no flames, no contradiction, no baiting. I know your blog is not a support board, but geez, that’s no reason for people to abandon basic rules of *niceness* in favor of advancing their own agendas.
My husband and I are non-believers (I’m not even going to court disaster by using terminology no can seem to agree on) living in the Bible Belt, and believe me when I tell you that we are quiet about it. After seeing the really obnoxious behavior of some of the atheists (greyICE being an exception) from that other site, we’ll have to be even MORE quiet about it now, just to fight the stereotype!
Peace to you and yours.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:04 pmEST“Dan Says:”
Is it just me or does anyone else see the irony in an athiest eating Quaker Oats?
June 10th, 2008 at 6:06 pmESTA comment which Rachel made. Therefore, you were comparing Rachel to a person who makes racist comments (commonly referred to as a “racist”).
Because we’re a bunch of evil, bigoted Jesus-freaks who believe science is heresy and homosexuals should be burned at the stake.
There. Is that what you wanted to hear? Will you go away now and quit bothering us?
It’s not okay to comment on that claim when the subject of the thread is about a loved one who is in a coma.
Honestly, I do not see why this is so hard for you to grasp.
Even if you reject everything the Bible says, surely you understand the concept that there is a proper time and place for that sort of thing? And surely you understand that a thread about a loved one who is now in a coma is NEITHER THE PROPER TIME NOR THE PROPER PLACE?!
Seriously “Reverend”, what is your problem? Why do you INSIST on being such an obstinate jerk? There are literally DOZENS of atheists that regularly comment on this blog, and NOT ONE OF THEM thought that bitching about some quasi-offensive statement when a member of Rachel’s family is lying comatose in a hospital bed was an appropriate thing to do. Only you, and your militant atheist compatriots, were so “socially autistic” (to quote a certain blogger with more social decorum than you) as to think that this was a socially acceptable thing to do.
And on top of that, you actually had the gall to come here and complain when we took your utter rudeness and threw it right back at you. You think that by goading us into responding this way, somehow you’ve “won” something.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:09 pmESTHey, The Reverend:
Mightysamarai didn’t call you an idiot, but you called him one. Thus, it is open season on you, because you’re a complete asshole who likes to pick fights with people who aren’t even looking at you. Here’s a thought, since everyone here is either ignoring you (as I will be after I submit this blast), or couldn’t care less what you have to say, why don’t you go back to talking to yourself on your blog that nobody wastes their precious time reading? That way if you want to call someone an idiot, the person most in need of that epithet will be close at hand.
And don’t bother responding to this blast. I won’t read it because it doesn’t matter what you think about me, about what I’ve said, or about anything else that’s discussed on this blog.
Off you go, now, Reverend Asshat (sung to the tune of Neil Diamond’s Forever in Blue Jeans) . . .
June 10th, 2008 at 6:17 pmESTReverend says: Blah blah. Blah blah blah. Blah blah blah, blah blah - blah, BLAH, blah blah blah. Blah? Blah!
It’s just so interesting and persuasive I could kill myself.
Ok, so a guy sits down at a bar and orders a drink. The gruff bartendar hands it to him without a word. A voice says ‘Nice shirt.’
‘Thanks,’ says the guy to the bartendar.
‘For what?’ he sneers.
‘You just said I had a nice shirt.’
‘No I didn’t. Must have been the peanuts. They’re complimentary.’
June 10th, 2008 at 6:18 pmESTIs it yours? For someone who styles himself as more “rational” than the rest of us, you seem awfully insecure and protective of your own beliefs. You’ve showed up on at least two blogs so far (not counting your own) talking about how “offended” and “insulted” you are at the title of Rachel’s post.
No comment on the member of Rachel’s family who is now in a coma, just a bunch of self-centered whining about how “offended” you were because someone happened to have an opinion different from yours.
But what do you care. Someone is wrong on the internet, right?
June 10th, 2008 at 6:22 pmESTAh, the flame war continues.
“I have very poor character and am a liar and a bigot…”
June 10th, 2008 at 6:22 pmESTBigot, yeah, I got pasted with that one too; must be as common as “idiot,” “magic,” and “take down that nativity scene” in the athiest lexicon.
AWESOME!
Mightysamurai’s got the family daishō (liberal use of bold) out!
June 10th, 2008 at 6:23 pmESTBring the pain, sam!
I have not yet read the comments on this post because before I get into any debate, I just wanted to say that you are one very strong woman. Rachel, you wrote a heartfelt post about a family about which you care very much (BTW - future in-laws?) and so many assholes used it for their personal agenda. I am keeping all of you in my prayers, and fuck the rest of ‘em. Please keep blogging as you have been doing and let the rest go to hell, although apparently they don’t believe in hell.
Your loyal readers are 100% behind you, and I hope you, Rupert, Joe and the whole family know that.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:23 pmESTWhat I love about these God debates is that one side has to be ultimately wrong!! “A” can not be “Not A.” The question is, which side?
June 10th, 2008 at 6:24 pmESTAnd on top of that, you actually had the gall to come here and complain when we took your utter rudeness and threw it right back at you.
With all due respect, samurai, you didn’t throw it back at him; you decided to insult all atheists, including those of us who hadn’t done anything wrong at all. A couple of atheists offended you, and you and a number of other posters here decided to go off on rants against atheism — as if their bad behavior was in some way caused by their atheism, rather than just being caused by bad manners. Fred Phelps isn’t proof that Christians are assholes, is he?
June 10th, 2008 at 6:25 pmESTOkay, Marla, I’ll bite:
An atheist walks into a bar and finds a priest, a rabbi, and an imam in boisterious discussion at a table in the back.
“What is this, a joke?” he thinks to himself.
Nevertheless, he orders a pint of bitters and the fish and chips and sits down, far away from the raucous theological discussion. Or so he hoped.
After a few moments, the priest approaches his table. “Pardon me, sir,” says the priest, “but you look a little lonely by yourself. Would you like to join us in the back?”
“No thanks, mate,” says the atheist. “I’m not into all that god stuff.”
“But God is the most important thing in the universe!” replied the priest. “How can you be disinterested in the Almighty?”
The atheist banged his fist on the table rudely, clattering his pint and his fish and chips. “I’m just trying to have a bite here. Just leave me alone, and let me eat.”
The priest scoffs off back to his table, and the atheist is left alone with his beer.
After a few more minutes, the rabbi approaches the atheist’s table. “Surely you don’t mean what you said. God shouldn’t be a burden, or an annoyance. Having and keeping the divine should be a joy in your life.”
The atheist stands up, and turns to the rabbi. “This is why religion is losing members,” he said, and he banged his fist on the table again and again. His beer wobbled. “It’s because you won’t! Stop! Bothering! People! When they’re trying! To have! A Fucking! Meal!”
By this time, the imam had rushed up to the atheist’s table. “Sir, please, calm down, please!” he cried. The atheist turned on him. “And what do you want?” he yelled as he slammed his fist down on the table one more time. Suddenly there was a crash. Behind him, his fish and his beer had crashed onto the floor and the plate and glass had shattered into a hundred pieces..
Amid the stunned silence of the pub, the imam softly spoke up. “Sir, I was just trying to save your sole!”
Stolen from here:
http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/02/29/complete-the-atheist-joke-1/
June 10th, 2008 at 6:28 pmESTGotcha, Jimmy :), but the problem here has never been athiest/theist - it’s been unbelieveably rude and callous vs caring and compassionate, even where prayer is not a personal practice. As many of the commentariat have pointed out - it’s about civility, manners, respect, caring. Once the first atheist dropped the ‘Rachel doesn’t honor the service of atheists’ card, the gloves were off. If anyone comes to her house, where we are all guests and damn lucky to be so, and thinks we aren’t going to ‘bring it’ over something like that - well, they aren’t being very ‘rational’!
The more I see of him on this blog, the more ‘Reverend’ reminds me of the guy on the Simpson’s that runs the comic book store. There have been some thoughtful, nice atheist on this latest issue, but he ain’t one of them!
June 10th, 2008 at 6:30 pmESTThe link between prayer (if you are the type), lucky pennies and four-leafed clovers is hope. If you believe in God, prayer will give you hope. If you find a penny (heads up of course), you might feel a moment of hope that today will be an especially good day. We can live without a lot of things but living without hope is no life at all. Whatever helps you get there…works for me.
I’m glad you’re not apologizing! There’s a quote something along the lines of “if you please yourself than at least one person is happy”. It’s your blog, your feelings, and hopefully you are happy with the majority of the responses.
Best wishes to Rupert’s dad for a speedy recovery.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:33 pmESTAaand here we go with the insults. You are upset over a “sweeping insult to an entire class of people” which, of course, was nothing of the kind. Perpetually grieved, you cannot even empathize with Rachel’s problems, and come here to insult and stir the pot. Do you really think you will convert anyone or have the last word? Every time I’ve seen you post, you only prove your lack of intelligence and your willingness to sacrifice manners for a point only you will “get.”
Oh well, feed the trolls and all that. Rachel - this too shall pass.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:33 pmESTOr how about this one:
Q: How many atheists does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Two: One to change the lightbulb, and one to videotape the event to keep the theists from claiming that god did it.
Also stolen from here:
http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/02/29/complete-the-atheist-joke-1/
June 10th, 2008 at 6:36 pmESTBorn-again atheists are the worst!
June 10th, 2008 at 6:38 pmESTOh yeah? Show me.
Seriously, show me the post where I insulted “all atheists”. I dare you.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:39 pmESTWhy did the atheist cross the road:
The atheist opposed the use of the word “cross” in the joke since it is a Christian symbol and would therefore propose the following:
Why did the atheist traverse the road?
Right Siders have long extolled the virtues of the right side of the road, proclaiming anyone else (leftians and even centerians) to be heretics. All those who ventured to the other side of the road were, supposedly, doomed to an eternity of torture. Even looking across to the left side was strongly discouraged. However, when using objectively obtained evidence, it became more and more clear that the left side of the street was not, as had long been asserted, a sinister hotbed of hedonistic Satan worship, but was in fact lush and green with ice-cream stands and everything. Add to that the fact that there was plenty of room to move around, as opposed to the cramped right side, and the atheist (rightfully) determined that it was to his benefit to cross the road.
Ditto:
June 10th, 2008 at 6:41 pmESThttp://friendlyatheist.com/2008/02/29/complete-the-atheist-joke-1/
I can’t quite identify with atheists, as I’ve had a personal inclination toward God most of my life. I will never argue about it with anyone.
That said, militant atheists who get offended by “under God” in the pledge and the whole “foxhole” thing are a fascinating bunch to me. What I mean is that if I were to believe that there is nothing after this life, then getting emotionally worked up (with much more fervor than most evangelical Christians, I may add) over these and other issues would seem absurd. To quote Jesus (in a parable about a man who did not take God seriously), “Take life easy. Eat, drink, and be merry.” If I were an atheist, I would like to think that that would be my philosophy. Yet the atheists who make the news are the angry ones who want to take religion away from everyone else, who can’t stand it when someone says “Merry Christmas!” (As an aside, those people should be forced to work on December 25th every year! Heh)
One final thought for now: Why does it seem that only affluent countries have militant atheists? (I don’t count communist autocracies, because the oppressed are taught atheism from birth, and the leaders cynically live off the slave labor of others) I wonder if it’s because people living in poor non-communist countries are more concerned with surviving the next day than arguing about such grand ideas?
June 10th, 2008 at 6:44 pmESTAtheist jokes? Ok, how about some Jesus jokes?
Jesus walks into a hotel and slams three nails on the clerk’s desk.
“Can you put me up for the night?”
June 10th, 2008 at 6:44 pmESTWow.
Most of these people don’t even know you, haven’t ever met you, and then you realize: These people love and respect you. That’s some powerful stuff you’re swinging around.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:45 pmESTA guy walks into a bar, with a half-dozen beautiful women draped all over him. He walks up to the bar, whips out a wad of bills, and yells “Drinks are on me!”
June 10th, 2008 at 6:47 pmESTWhile the bartender is getting everyone set up, he reaches into his vest pocket and pulls out a tiny man. He sets him down on the bar, and the little guy proceeds to kick over everyone’s drink, pees on the bartender’s leg, and bite him.
The bartender says “Alright, you, out of here, now!” The man apologizes profusely, pulls out more money, and says, “I’ll pay for everything.” The bartender grudgingly agrees.
After setting everyone up again, the little guy runs around, kicks over all the drinks, yells insults at everyone, and pees on the bartender again. “All right, that’s it. Tell me what’s going on with this, or out you go!”
The man starts in, “Well, you see, I was shipwrecked on a desert island. One day I found this lamp half-buried in the sand, so I rub it, and out pops a genie. Of course, I get three wishes. The first is for beautiful female companionship. Here they are. Next, I wished for more money than I could ever spend. I can pull twenties out of my pocket all night.”
“Okay, but what’s with the little man?”
“My last wish was for a twelve inch prick…”
mightysamurai Says:
It wouldn’t be hard at all, if he had any desire to grasp it, but it’s that complete lack of willingness to even attempt empathy that allowed for his being here in the first place.
By his standards, I should launch into you now, because I’m female, and you said something at 5:45 that I could choose to construe as an insult to all females.
Or I could read your words in context and perceive them as the compliment to Rachel’s fortitude that you intended; but that’s just me :).
June 10th, 2008 at 6:47 pmESTYou sound like my kids:
“You think you’re so bad, well I’m badder — see, see, look what I can do — HAH.”
Hey, rev, I got them from the forum of one of your peeps. Everyone over there is creating these jokes, not me!
Why not go and get some jokes from one of mine? or maybe go to the site I included and poke a little fun at yourself?
We need a little levity here. Lighten up. Your insides must look like swiss cheese.
You sound like my kids.
Oh, and that’s just funny right there.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:48 pmESTAs an atheist myself I have to say Rachel: don’t let the insensitive pricks get to you. You’re doing fine. I hope after this is all over you don’t think we’re all A-holes. It sucks that they had to choose now, a time when there is much more to think about, as the time when they would try to call you out, “convert” you, or harass you.
Even though I don’t believe in God, and I don’t ever pray, I still have to meditate or at least get some alone time every once in a while to figure life out; to sort things out in my head, or to solve problems with work or family. When believers pray, they pray about those exact same things: that’s what’s on their mind. The way I see it, they are, at the very least, identifying consciously what problems they have in their life, if not solving them, and that’s the same thing I do myself.
So there is value in prayer. When I have a few minutes to stretch out before a mountain bike ride or when I am laying in bed at night thinking about my day, that’s my form of prayer. Atheist prayer. No big whoop.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:49 pmESTHow do you make an atheist mad?
Key his karma and kick his dogma
Try to convert his dog to religion.
Both of these were great!
Once again, I thank:
June 10th, 2008 at 6:52 pmESThttp://friendlyatheist.com/2008/02/29/complete-the-atheist-joke-1/
Heather and Marla,
All these bad puns are ruining the hot lesbian jello-rasslin’ imagery of two days ago.
But, heh, it’s still better than the guys beatin’ the dead horse on this thread.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:54 pmESTI’ve already seen your “I didn’t insult ALL atheists, just MOST atheists” defense in the other thread, and I don’t see anything to be gained from repeating the argument in this one. Suffice it to say that if I claimed “most Christians are pedophiles”, Christians in general would be well within their rights to take offense.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:55 pmESTIt always saddens me when a minority group doesn’t learn from the ways they are treated.
Coming from someone who’s been an atheist since early childhood - people wanting to save my soul grinds on me. But, it also embarrasses me when atheists basically behave in the same fashion.
I believe religion is about comfort. Why would you ever want to take that from someone?
Sometimes when bad things happen - you turn towards God - sometimes you turn away.
When you’ve truly lived through horrible things, you let people have whatever gets them through day with as little suffering as possible. If the same things don’t provide me comfort - what does it matter to anyone?
I sincerely hope your FIL recovers quickly, and has as few scars (physically and mentally ) as possible.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:57 pmESTTo: The Reverend
This is a conservative blog, run by an adorable agnostic. You’re out of context here, can’t you see it?
Pack up and leave already!!
June 10th, 2008 at 6:59 pmESTOne final thought for now: Why does it seem that only affluent countries have militant atheists?
Because it isn’t safe to say unpopular things in most of the non-affulent countries.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:03 pmESTAtheists, on the other hand, particularly the angry variety, well you’re just screwed. Not because they’re right or because their argument is superior, but because there is no overarching moral standard that they claim to adhere to and that you can use to prove to them their own hypocrisy.
You just did, love conquers all. I once proposed that if an atheist stands in to be killed in place of say a child in a hostage situation, does he get to go to heaven? Then I reminded us of Jesus own words. “No greater love has a man than he lay down his life for his friends”. You can do anything with love. Jesus also said “No one comes to the Father except by me”, he gets to decide, for he is love, and those who love are his sheep, and “My sheep hear my voice”.
God Bless
June 10th, 2008 at 7:05 pmESTOkay, Christians, are we mature enough to handle this humor? Get on board …
Why didn’t Jesus replace the stone from the tomb when he rose from the dead?
Well, he was born in a barn.
Got this from the same site where you got yours, Rev:
June 10th, 2008 at 7:07 pmESThttp://www.liberator.net/humor/Jesus/Jesusjokes.html
Who are the angry ones?
June 10th, 2008 at 7:07 pmESTOkay, Rev, I’ll drive that tanka!
Set up:
A duck walks into a bar and asks the bartender, “Got any grapes?”
Barkeep says, “Get out of here and don’t come back! We don’t serve your kind in here!”
Next day, the duck walks into the bar again, and again asks, “Got any grapes?”
Barkeep says, “Get out of here and don’t come back! I told you yesterday, we don’t serve your kind in here!”
Next day, the duck walks into the bar again, and again asks, “Got any grapes?”
Barkeep says, “I told you we don’t serve your kind in here! If you come in here again, I’ll nail your beak to the bar!”
Next day, the duck walks into the bar again, and asks, “Got any nails?”
Barkeep says, “No!”
Duck says, “Got any grapes?”
So my kid and I were talking about some of the resurrection stories: like the one where the disciples are by the sea, and Jesus shows up (but they don’t recognize him) and he’s hungry, so he asks . . .
June 10th, 2008 at 7:09 pmESTRachel,
Best wishes to Joe. I rode for about a year. Me and my dad bought motorcycles during the same summer and went on a couple of rides together. I had to sell mine for book money, but dad held on to his and started riding it daily for his 20 minuet commute when gas got stupid high.
Then one day a blue hair who couldnt see over the dash any more pulled out in front of him. He was going the speed limit (45mph) and couldnt do anything. Unfortunately he made the big mistake of locking up, and broke both his wrists. The EMTs said that the back of his hand could touch his arm. The doctors word for the state of his wrists was “destroyed”. They told him he would be lucky to get 50% of his use back and recommended that he get one of them fused.
He didnt.
For a few years he had to be careful about how he used his wrists. He couldnt do many of the things he used to do, including playing guitar (something else we did together…something he taught me). At christmas I was trying to play Jesu, Joy of Man’s Desiring, and kept mangling the same part. Dad had taught it to me, and I kept pestering him to show me again. To get his hands around the neck he had to hold the thing almost vertical…but he played.
He got himself an $11,000 Gibson as a challenge to himself. He continued to play and do the other thigns they told him he would never do again (home improvements, pingpong, etc). Now he has 100% use of his wrists again. And he was 50 when this all happened…no spring chicken.
Dont give up hope because of doom and gloom doctors. It may be a long road, but recovery is always an option. The same goes for Rupert and his back.
As for the totally unrelated atheist assholes, I have an email coming for you…so keep an eye out for it.
Ok, and to keep the mime going:
A guy walks into a bar, grabs his head and yells “Ow!!”
That one always tickled my funny bone.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:11 pmESTSetting aside for a moment that I did not, in point of fact, go off on a rant about “all atheists”, a person’s religious views ARE one of the main determinators of their behavior.
Our religious views make up the core of our identities and personalities. They inform our every thought and action.
You brought up the example of Fred Phelps. Well, his religious beliefs DO play a part in his behavior. He embraces the parts of the Bible that condemn homosexuality, but he ignores the parts that urge Christians to be kind, show respect to others, and not to judge. Or he might just be building a whacko cult, as two of his sons allege. Either way, his religious beliefs inform his actions.
Therefore, I would argue that the atheists who felt so compelled to lecture and insult Rachel simply because she asked us to pray for one of her loved ones ARE doing it because of their atheism. Their particular brand of atheism, at any rate. They’ve decided that not only does God not exist, but it is their right and duty to tell everyone about it. They have elected themselves the “guardians” of their non-faith and decided they must fight against anyone who utters anything that even might be an insult towards them. Reasonable atheists are rightly embarrassed by them, just as reasonable Christians are rightly embarrassed by this guy and others like him.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:13 pmESTI’ll never understand the religious fervor of atheists.
(obviously this comment doesn’t apply to atheists who are without religious fervor, so if this doesn’t sound like you, I’m not talking about you)
June 10th, 2008 at 7:13 pmESTSome atheists like to claim that they’re more evolved than those who believe. I guess they’ve evolved beyond such draconian concepts like tact and humility.
Still sending my best to Rupert and his folks.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:14 pmESTTo Carbo, with luvz. You must have “magical wished” hard enough
… GRANTED! Hah, enjoy, my friend!
June 10th, 2008 at 7:18 pmESTRev, if you’re an atheist, then what possible joy could you derive from spending your life bitching about what other people say or do? Just go out and have a good time. After all, this life is all you’ve got, right? So, you may as well party your ass off. Go out and find some chick to bang instead of wasting your time here. Heck, go for two! See if you can snag a couple of lesbians; that would be awesome.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:19 pmESTWay to backtrack.
And no, I didn’t say that either. I said that most people who call themselves atheists are like that. I also said that the people who do that aren’t actually atheists, even though they claim to be. If you had claimed that “most Christians are pedophiles” I would respond that any person who calls himself a Christian but also molests children is NOT a Christian.
But lets say I did say that “most atheists” are like that (again, I didn’t, but lets say I did).
Did I say that before or AFTER a bunch of militant atheists came to this blog and started spewing insults?
June 10th, 2008 at 7:21 pmESTDan, with all due respect, the insults came after a few from your forum came over here and decided to shit on Rachel’s grief. Additionally, I’ve read the thread on that forum as well, and it’s absolutely disgusting that most (not all) there fail to understand that tactlessness and rudeness is what we’re taking issue with here, not the fact that you happen to be atheists.
I don’t care if you’re atheist, theist, agnostic, Buddhist, Christian or Great Pumpkinist. You shit on someone I consider a friend, and you’ll get it threefold! I don’t think I’ve seen people here condemn all atheists - not for their lack of belief. What I HAVE seen is the consistent outrage at how some of you decide to crap on a stranger’s grief, without knowing her beliefs, without understanding her personal journey or who she is. That outrage is damn well justified.
Again, no one here is condemning atheists for their lack of belief. But we ARE condemning your pathetic little compatriots for coming over here and shitting on someone we consider a friend.
Think about that.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:22 pmESTWhen I first saw the thread about Rupert’s father, I was touched and wished the best for all of you. I started to comment but whatever I wrote sounded spacey and New Age. I’m atheist. I don’t pray. However, I do believe that the universe has a way of balancing itself and that there will be happiness and positive results as the pendulum of fortune swings back. (No, I don’t believe in a Cosmic Pendulum of Fortune.)
I hope you’ll see that there’s a difference between atheists and assholes. You’re getting all the self-serving flak from the latter. I’d like to believe that the fact they’re also atheist is incidental, but I’d guess that some of them are just plain contrary.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:24 pmESTThat said, militant atheists who get offended by “under God” in the pledge and the whole “foxhole” thing are a fascinating bunch to me. What I mean is that if I were to believe that there is nothing after this life, then getting emotionally worked up…
They believe in God, their lips profess him in every profanity, every condemnation and every insult. What sane man would rail against something that doesn’t exist?
June 10th, 2008 at 7:25 pmESTRachel, I am so sorry for all the stress and heartache you have had recently. My best wishes and thoughts are with you and your loved ones.
I am also sorry you have had to deal with so many master baiters…
June 10th, 2008 at 7:31 pmESTThe Sin of Lying
A minister told his congregation, “Next week I plan to preach about the sin of lying. To help you understand my sermon, I want you all to read Mark 17.”
The following Sunday, as he prepared to deliver his sermon, the minister asked for a show of hands. He wanted to know how many had read Mark 17.
Every hand went up.
The minister smiled and said, “Mark has only sixteen chapters. I will now proceed with my sermon on the sin of lying.”
How many churchgoers does it take to change a light bulb?
Charismatics: Only one. Hands are already in the air.
Roman Catholics: None. They use candles.
Pentecostals: Ten. One to change the light bulb, and nine to pray against the spirit of darkness.
Presbyterians: None. God has predestined when the lights will be on and off.
Episcopalians: Eight. One to call the electrician, and seven to say how much better they liked the old bulb.
Mormons: Five. One man to change the bulb, and four wives to tell him how to do it.
Unitarians: We chose not to make a statement either in favor of or against the light bulb. However, if you have found in your own journey that light bulbs work for you, that is fine. You are invited to write a poem or compose a modern dance about your personal relationship with your light bulb and present it next month at our annual light bulb Sunday service in which we will explore a number of light bulb traditions, including incandescent, fluorescent, three-way, long-life, and tinted, all of which are equally valid paths to luminescence.
Baptists: At least fifteen. One to change the light bulb, five or six professors to search the Bible for authorization and then two or three committees to approve the change. Oh, and some faithful women to make a casserole.
Lutherans: None. Lutherans don’t believe in change.
Methodists: A whole congregation. One to change the light bulb, and the rest of the congregation to be sure that he doesn’t backslide.
A Priest, Rabbi, and A Minister
A priest, a rabbi and a minister were all in a boat out in the middle of a lake. The Minister says, “I am thirsty. I will go to shore and get something to drink.”
So he gets out of the boat walks across the water to shore, gets a soda, walks back across the water, and gets back in the boat.
The minister says, “I am thirsty also. I will go to shore and get something to drink.”
So he gets out of the boat walks across the water to shore, gets a soda, walks back across the water, and gets back in the boat.
The rabbi thinks to himself “pretty cool. I will try it.” So he says, “I am thirsty also. I will go to shore and get something to drink.”
He gets out of the boat and falls in the water and drowns.
Then the priest said to the minister, “Do you think we should have told him where the rocks were?”
(admit it, you laughed at that one)
June 10th, 2008 at 7:32 pmESTThat is my absolute favorite religous joke of all time.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:37 pmESTThanks, Heather!
I think we just committed Spam.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:38 pmESTNot a Jesus joke, but a religious one all the same:
Q: What do you get when you cross LDS with LSD?
A: A High Priest
June 10th, 2008 at 7:44 pmESTHey, Carbo - there you are! I knew you had to be in attendance. And dang it, Heather - your restaurant joke made me clock out 4 minutes late
.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:52 pmESTKids say the darnedest things:
June 10th, 2008 at 7:56 pmESTSo many things I want to type, but at this point I think it’s mostly been said.
Here’s hoping (and praying) that the heaviness, from health worries and the angst over the blog dust-up are gone from Rachel’s mind soon.
I just hit the Amazon tip jar to show appreciation for dog humiliation and the generally courteous tone of this blog even when hot-button issues are discussed.
When you’re up to it distract yourself with a pork-filled photo session with the girls and share with us:)
June 10th, 2008 at 7:56 pmESTIf you are claiming that religious belief is a main determining factor in some people’s behavior then sure, that’s true, but you had no basis for thinking that it was a main determining factor here. If you are claiming that it is one of the main factors determining everybody’s behavior, though, you’re quite wrong. You are particularly wrong in saying that about atheism, as the one and only religious belief of atheism (”there are no gods”) doesn’t say anything about how to act. It doesn’t imply “… and you should convince everyone of that”, it doesn’t imply “… so you should be nice to people”, it doesn’t imply “… so you should NOT be nice to people”, etc. An atheist might think it is a good idea to be kind, or cruel, or philanthropic, or greedy, but all of that is decided by his other, NON-religious beliefs.
For that matter, the “no atheists in foxholes” claim doesn’t even conflict with atheism in the first place. Even if it were true, what would that establish other than that people start praying when scared witless? Telling me I’d pray when someone shot at me is like telling me I’d soil my pants if someone shot at me. Maybe I would, but that doesn’t make pants-pissing a good idea for everyday life.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:57 pmESTI’m not backtracking. I just recognize that there’s no point in having a rational discussion with you about what you did, as it is been tried before without success.
By all means, have the argument again a second time by yourself.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:01 pmESTOh. My. Gawd! I just posted an update on my site. I went over to the Randi Foundation forum, and now there’s a distinct attitude of “we’re so persecuted” drama!
Hate speech?
And then this from the bitch who posted one of the snarky posts that inspired my own diatribe.
Wow Skeptigirl, would you like your 40 acres and a mule with that whine?
June 10th, 2008 at 8:05 pmESTRachel,
I was so glad to hear that Joe is doing better, my thoughts are with you & your loved ones. I hope the surgery goes well tomorrow. Don’t be bothered by the trolls - because that’s what they really are, just trolls. You are really lucky on your blog to not attract them generally and boy did they pick a great time to pop in and stir up a shitstorm!
Just my observations over the past couple of days:
1 - One poster assumed that Joe was not wearing a helmet and several other people picked this up and made a big deal about how you’d be better off helping by educating people about wearing helmets they praying. WOW. Thanks a lot, really helpful in this time of worry! Asshats. I don’t remember if Rachel said if he was wearing a helmet or not; I don’t think she said. I could be wrong but either way it’s none of our business and has NOTHING AT ALL to do with the “please pray if you’re the praying type” original request. RUDE and unfeeling.
2. I actually went over to the famous forum and read the 1st few pages of comments on fire about this. WOW what a bunch of whiners! Those comments struck me as snarky and incredibly awful in the worst possible way. The basic theme was “screw you, you shouldn’t have insulted us and then deleted our comments, what a whiny attention-grabbing bitch, you must be a newbie and we’ll teach you!” There were a couple of rational people who opined that they were being childish and should apologize, but they got shot down pretty quickly.
The thing that struck me the most was that people were posting over here without even having read the original comment that started it all (because it was briefly deleted). And still most everyone over there (skepti-girl mostly) have not admitted that the original comment was AT ALL rude out of line! Well it was. VERY rude, VERY out of line.
Lesson in all this? READ THE ARCHIVES IF YOU WANT TO BE ACCURATELY SNARKY ABOUT A BLOGGER. There’s plenty to snipe at Rachel about in the archives if you’re easily offended. But at least get it right. Not that I expect the trolls to actually do any reading before they jump all over someone, ’cause that’s not what trolls do is it?
3. I’m really sorry in retrospect that the comments degenerated into sniping (on both sides, me included). A debate about agnostic vs atheist vs religion would actually be an interesting topic for a post, and right up Rachel’s alley (or would have been). Really this wasn’t about Atheists, it was about ASSHOLES.
So I learned something today . . . never in a million years am I starting a blog. This one of many blogs I read where the blogger has been subject to unbelievably horrible personal attacks, via email or comments. Maybe mighty-samurai is right and women can’t take it as well as men, but does anyone really feel good when they are viciously attacked? When I happen across a blogger I don’t agree with or think is a nut job, I don’t feel it’s my personal obligation to point out to them what I think of them. JUST DON’T COME BACK AND READ THEIR BLOG ANYMORE. What kind of person does that? What kind of person even has the TIME? Time is my most precious commodity and I just can’t imagine spending it by actively looking for things on the internet to go and be offended about. The internet has hi-jacked any sense of politeness for so many people — how many people would say this stuff to someone in person? I bet none, although I’m probably wrong on that too. I bet most of the snarksters wouldn’t say boo to you if if they (for example) didn’t like your “there are no atheists in a foxhole” bumper sticker. But they might key your car.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:12 pmEST“My forum”?
You shit on someone I consider a friend, and you’ll get it threefold!
I don’t think I’ve seen people here condemn all atheists - not for their lack of belief. What I HAVE seen is the consistent outrage at how some of you decide to crap on a stranger’s grief, without knowing her beliefs, without understanding her personal journey or who she is. That outrage is damn well justified.
See, that’s exactly what I’m talking about. You know nothing about me other than that I’ve said I’m an atheist. On the basis of that ONE fact you’ve decided that I am to blame for what those jackasses from the atheist forum (”my forum”, you call it) did, and that I deserve whatever abuse you feel like heaping on me and other atheists.
Here’s a suggestion: go fuck yourself. I did nothing to offend Rachael or her loved ones. I don’t know or like the people who did. I’m just objecting to your vilification of atheists, which you claim isn’t happening but which you JUST DID AGAIN NOW.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:13 pmESTcomment removed for completely inappropriate insults
[Brad, stop that. You're attacking the wrong guy. Seriously, the WRONG one. Dan here has been downright pleasant compared to those who, well, haven't. And the particular sort of name-calling you're doing really isn't okay with me. Again, remember, Dan is not one of the assholes who took a dump in the other threads. I wouldn't let any of them insult you like this, so you need to stop doing it, too, especially to someone who didn't ask for it. Thanks - Rachel]
June 10th, 2008 at 8:22 pmESTSince you were so polite about it, I’ll take the time to patiently explain that I was not comparing religious belief to pants-pissing. I was pointing out that we shouldn’t assume everything we do when we’re scared is a good idea. “I was scared” isn’t enough to tell you if you made the right call.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:23 pmESTHey, shit for brains! The “you” was a generalized term. Sorry if your small little brain can’t comprehend that. Jesus Jumping Christ on a Pogo Stick!! It was not directed at you per se!
If you didn’t come from the Randi Foundation website, I apologize for the assumption. Sheesh! However, I was referring to that forum and its shitty inhabitants. If you aren’t a part of it, cool. So stop the righteous indignation. It’s unwarranted.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:23 pmESTNo, it is a determining factor in EVERYONE’S behavior.
My day-to-day behavior is informed by my faith. Your day-to-day behavior is informed by yours. That is an undeniable fact and any psychologist will tell you exactly the same thing.
Okay, HOW am I “quite wrong”. Explain it to me.
It’s easy to simply assert that I’m wrong. It’s quite another to prove the point.
So you’re saying atheists have no moral compass? That the morality of an atheist is based on his/her personal whims and not on any objective standard?
Um….okay then. If that’s the way you want to go.
Oh yes you are.
First it was “all atheists”. Then it was “most atheists”. Now I don’t even think you know what you’re saying.
If there was no point in discussing it, why are you still here? Why did you comment at all?
June 10th, 2008 at 8:24 pmESTWhat did Jesus say when he was up on the cross?
“This was one Hell of a way to spend my Easter vacation.”
June 10th, 2008 at 8:27 pmESTA string walks into a bar. The bartender takes one look at him, and chases him out. “We don’t serve your kind in here!”
June 10th, 2008 at 8:27 pmESTThe string twists and contorts himself, untwists and frizzes several strands, and walks right back in.
“Hey, aren’t you that string I chased out of here just a minute ago?”
“No, I’m a frayed knot.”
OK Wachael
[Thank you Brad]
June 10th, 2008 at 8:28 pmESTWell, that’s not quite true.
We also know you’re an insensitive jerk who apparently has a serious reading comprehension problem.
See that? Poor reading comprehension. Where, exactly, did Nicki vilify “all atheists” as you claim? It seems to me she was specifically vilifying YOU, and I can’t say as I blame her.
…By comparing religious belief to pants-pissing.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:32 pmESTMS - I was actually referring to the assholes on that forum. I don’t know Dan from Adam, but based on his screeching histrionics, I’m beginning to think maybe I should have included him in the bunch.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:35 pmESTHey, shit for brains! The “you” was a generalized term. Sorry if your small little brain can’t comprehend that.
I did comprehend it. That’s exactly the point. You’re decided it is fair to insult any atheists you want to because some of “us” from “our” forum said something mean. It isn’t “my” forum, asshole. I’ve never been to it in my life.
You said “you”, not “they”. You included me with the people who insulted Rachel and her family — not because I ever did anything wrong, but because I have the same “religion” as people who did. So either apologize or kiss my ass, either solution’s fine with me.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:37 pmESTLinked because this joke is a bit long and I don’t want to eat up too much of Rachel’s bandwidth. Posters with children will appreciate it the most.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:39 pmESTBullshit.
Quick grammar lesson, genius: when you’re talking to someone about what a *different* group of people did, you don’t say “you did that”. Any English speaker here knows that.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:42 pmESTI hope you read this Rachel, even though it’s waaay down the comment list, because I have something to say on this post: Don’t let this stupid snit-fit some random strangers have thrown turn the blog into a “downer.” The people being jerks are NOT your regular readers. Look how fast and how many people jumped to your defense on this.
It’s weird, we’ve never met, as I imagine you’ve never met most of your readers. But we care about you, and Rupert, and Rupert’s dad. Those of us decent human beings have prayed for Rupert’s dad, or if they don’t believe in prayer/God/Bob at least had him in their thoughts. You’ve got a lot of well-wishers here. Take heart in that — the people that actually READ your blog and understand you, even if we don’t agree with everything you say, we care. The ones who don’t are the random net freaks who get confused trying to work an elevator.
You’ve rapidly become one of my favorite bloggers and are one of the very few blogs I read every post (okay except the American Idol ones…) of. It pisses me off that people might have turned this into a downer for you. Don’t let them.
I don’t want to argue with the atheists or the Christians or the SubGenius crowd or whatever. Get over yourselves. The way I see it: The non-regular-reader atheists swatted a wasp nest, and then objected to being stung. Every truly negative thing said about the atheists started because of their attitude coming in here, and they should have maybe thought about what commenting behavior was appropriate given the context of the post before they started flinging poo. People read this blog because they like Rachel’s writings, not because we want a bunch of greasy foreheaded poindexters to insult her.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:44 pmESTYou should put your telepathic powers to better use than arguing in an internet forum.
Sigh.
You insulted all atheists. You’re claiming you didn’t, using a lame “I was talking about ‘most’ atheists and it wasn’t an insult” argument that I do not deign to respond to. That’s what I was referring to.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:45 pmESTNick Fellenzer has it exactly right. I could care less about what what an atheist might believe, or not believe. But what I do care about, and what will cause me to pound you to dust (with words, of course) is when an asshat hurts someone I respect and care about, like several people who happen to be athiests did on this thread and the other.
“Reverend”: Oh, please. The anologue to an atheist joke is a christian joke, not a joke about Jesus. Interestingly enough, there isn’t any joke that you can tell about Jesus, however potentially offensive it might be, that a true Christian can’t just laugh off. By telling that joke, you’re attacking Jesus, not Christians. Don’t you realize that? Christians know that Jesus is tough enough to handle your jokes. I mean, Hell, they hung him on a cross. A joke is going to hurt him?
June 10th, 2008 at 8:47 pmESTI didn’t mean they can’t take it, I meant they don’t like it. Any woman is perfectly capable of taking an insult just as well as a man. But most just prefer a less confrontational environment (whether that’s due to nature or nurture is another matter).
June 10th, 2008 at 8:49 pmESTLenny Bruce would be surprised to hear that.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:50 pmESTOK, dickstain. I apologized for making an assumption that you were from that forum. Now, I’m going to take it back, because you’re a whining bitch. You comprehend nothing. And it’s quite obvious. The generalized “you” wasn’t a dig at atheists either, but a warning to ANYONE who fucks with my friends. You really need reading comprehension remedials.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:50 pmESTAnother joke to ease the tension:
Did you hear the one about the 288 dead people?
June 10th, 2008 at 8:54 pmESTForget it, it’s two gross.
Oh please. Ask any psychologist on the planet and he will tell you exactly the same thing.
A person’s religious beliefs shape their very identity. They affect everything that person says and does. That is a FACT. Deal with it.
Yeah, and I asked you to show me where I insulted “all atheists”. You couldn’t. Instead you backtracked and instead claimed I insulted “most atheists”. Then you made the bizarre claim that atheists have no moral compass (which I can only assume you agree with since you have yet to object to that point). Maybe you’re hopped up on something, I don’t know. But you’re all over the place.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:59 pmESTMy turn for a nerd joke:
There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
Those who understand binary, and
June 10th, 2008 at 9:09 pmESTthose who don’t.
Perhaps your mileage would have been better with this little ditty instead:
“there are no Atheists in hell…..”
in any event, now that that unpleasantness has been cast aside, best wishes and prayers for your family in your time of need.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:13 pmESTDr. Feelgood, shouldn’t it be:
There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
0. Those who understand binary, and
1. those who don’t.
? (I know, I’m going to nerd hell.)
June 10th, 2008 at 9:14 pmESTHey, shit for brains! - assholes on that forum - I’m an atheist… go fuck yourself
Ummmm Huh?
Pray constantly, with every breath. Easy to do before the babbling brook, hard to do in a cubicle. God made all things, and accepts your prayers, your way. Above all things, pray.
Do your best, always. That is prayer.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:25 pmESTJust read the last number of posts and feel terrible about Rupert’s Dad. Have not been online a few days because my folks are visiting and my 89 year old Dad is in a wheelchair and it’s a 24 hour a day job and my mom has highblood……I’m sorry I was fixated on my own selfish crap when Rupert’s Dad is fighting for his life. My stuff doesn’t seem so bad any more.
I will certainly pray for Rupert’s Dad, his Mother, Rupert and of course, You.
I will pray, if for no other reason than it makes me feel like I am doing SOMETHING for you and the ones you care about.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:33 pmESTIf you can travel back to the 19th century to talk to them, sure. But during the four years I spent getting my degree in cognitive psychology, religion was never once cited as a universally major determining factor in human behavior. I’d have been surprised if it was, given that there are around a billion nonreligious people on Earth.
Well I’m certainly not going to try reasoning you out of a position you didn’t reason yourself into.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:38 pmESTA Good friend of mine, Layton Howerton, wrote this song. My youtube account, me and my Motorcycle. Is pertinent to what I have said.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:49 pmESTA somewhat appropriate picture for this thread.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:57 pmESTMy kind of thread, except for the name calling and gratuitous insults… no wait, it IS my kind of thread. Anyway, more bad jokes of no particular persuasion:
June 10th, 2008 at 9:57 pmESTThe best song I ever wrote which is also pertinent to the post.
June 10th, 2008 at 10:09 pmESTFirst, and this is not something I am proud of, but, I sometimes get embarrassed to announce: “I am praying for x,y,z.” I don’t want to be ostentatious, and I figured you knew many unexpressed readers were nevertheless praying. So, I didn’t jump into the comments when you first wrote of Rupert’s dad. However, since I am here now: I am praying for Rupert’s dad, and for Rupert and his family - which of course includes you, since you are also part of the family in a particular way.
Second, and I hope I’m not going through previously plowed ground: I don’t understand the particular atheists’ complaints. Does anyone truly believe there have never been atheists serving courageously in foxholes? Everyone knows atheists have inhabited foxholes. The “foxholes” quotation is not about literal, tangible, quantifiable truth. It’s about underlying truth about human beings(or, at least: about most human beings) which both theists and atheists understand.
I suspect it’s a touchy topic b/c atheists lose many of their number when truly tough and desperate moments arrive. I suspect it’s easy to be an atheist when you are young enough and fortunate enough to have never personally been in a desperate (metaphorical) foxhole: feeling agony, and looking at seeming overwhelming circumstances coming directly at you. When the desperate and raw and agonizing foxhole moment arrives: some atheists move through and remain atheists. They remember that God is laughable fantasy - kind of like Barack’s Iran policy. However, I suspect - during foxhole moments - a good number of young atheists become young theists.
I, personally, turn desperately and rawly to God. It could be that part of the purpose of agony is to better reveal God to those who desperately and rawly turn to Him during agonizing moments.
I suspect the entire “foxhole” touchiness has something to do with a desire to encourage wavering atheists to get through the tough times with their atheism intact. I suspect there’s enough truth in “foxhole” to touch a nerve, or even to poke at a raw, open wound.
June 10th, 2008 at 10:10 pmESTI think for the most part everyone knows I am Rachel’s cousin. I could go into an hour long diatribe about how awesome Rachel is but I think everyone else has adequately established that fact in other comments. I do, however, want to point out I am grossly offended by the personal attacks on her character, persona and kindness. Those individuals, whatever label you give yourselves, have perpetrated the exact offense you so astutely and self-righteously state Rachel has committed. Therefore, I demand an apology to her for your disrespect; otherwise one could only come to the logical conclusion you are hypocrites. Nothing would please me more for you to prove me wrong. My patience is wearing thin. I would have effectively kicked your ass for far lesser offenses than what you have put her through the last couple of days. You obviously don’t like the words she used to characterize her feelings and have stated so but you have come to the erroneous conclusion anyone here gives a shit. Some may, I guess, but I for one do not. What I do give a shit about is my cousin and you are obviously causing her grief. Be a victim if you so choose, but for all the logic you seemingly uphold, your behavior is absolutely illogical and irrational.
June 10th, 2008 at 10:39 pmESTDoes the whole atheist/theist thread remind anyone else of these verses from “Whistling in the Dark”(They might be Giants, Flood):
Edit: Actually, though, that first verse sounded more like Obama!
June 10th, 2008 at 10:42 pmESTDamn, girl, I thought you were snoozing … this is unbelievably astute, I MUST and MUST hear this song … off for the research.
June 10th, 2008 at 11:05 pmESTThe truth is a rock
That cannot be changed
Molded, broken
Or rearranged
Founded in faith
And rooted in love love
A gift to all
From out Father above
When the storms come dancing
Threw the abode of life
With sickness disease
Famine or strife
When the sands of the beaches
June 10th, 2008 at 11:41 pmESTWash to the sea
Upon this mighty rock
Is where I will be.
pffft! It’s such a goofy song — the whole album is pretty silly (and what’s even sillier is that I can still sing most of it!) — and yet those particular lyrics just popped into the old brain box while I was reading the flame war posts. Sigh!
Here’s a link (cracked me up that those are considered ‘oldie’ — “Hey, man! 1990 was only . . . Oh. Yeah.”)
See? Like I said, mostly just silly! (Though their later stuff got more politically obvious, and thus no longer interesting — so very lefty!)
But Equus Pallidus’ song, now that’s astute!
June 11th, 2008 at 12:02 amESTWhen the desperate and raw and agonizing foxhole moment arrives: some atheists move through and remain atheists. They remember that God is laughable fantasy - kind of like Barack’s Iran policy. However, I suspect - during foxhole moments - a good number of young atheists become young theists.
What an odd image of atheists you have.
I and my family have gone through hard times now and then, as most families have at one time or another — unemployment, death of loved ones, cancer, the usual. I didn’t spent time scoffing at the notion of God; I didn’t think about the idea of God at all. I didn’t pray for the same reason you didn’t give burnt offerings on the summer solstice: because it never once crossed my mind that there’d be any purpose in doing so. Strange as it may seem to a religious person, the average atheist simply never thinks about the idea of gods unless somebody else brings it up.
I suspect the entire “foxhole” touchiness has something to do with a desire to encourage wavering atheists to get through the tough times with their atheism intact.
That’s much too conspiratorial. As long as they don’t proceed to show up on my doorstep demanding that I attend Bible study with them I don’t care if other atheists “convert”.
The real explanation is simpler: being told that you’ll discard your beliefs when times are tough is annoying. If I said to you “sure, you believe in God *now*, but if you lost your family to a plague you’d see that there’s no loving God watching over you”, you would probably be at least mildly annoyed with me. Similarly, if I told you “if you had the opportunity to cheat on your spouse, you’d take it” you would probably be annoyed at me, because you probably think of yourself as faithful. Even though lots of people do lose their faith after a catastrophe, and even though lots of people cheat on their spouses, it would be just plain rude for me to tell you that your religious and moral beliefs are just matters of convenience for you, to be cast aside when they are no longer useful.
But it was still asinine for those folks to take issue with Rachel’s comment, both because people under stress deserve a lot of slack and because Rachel was talking about her OWN response to tragedy, not mine or anyone else’s.
June 11th, 2008 at 12:03 amESTOh, come on!!! Can’t y’all just please let this go? Both sides. Please, I beg you. Think about this… the more time Rachel has spend monitoring these comments, the less time she has to write new stuff. For me, I’d rather have some new stuff. Just please stop.
June 11th, 2008 at 12:18 amESTGrace and Peace to you and your family Rachel. I am a friend of Brad and Nikki and found your blog through Brad’s comments today. Faith is a personal thing, between you and God. To say differently shows a complete lack of understanding on SO many levels. Keep up the good work and I wish all good blessings from God on you and your family for the hurts and tragedies as well as the good times.
As for the “athiests” who commented in the ways they have. Eh, ignore them. That kind of behavior says alot more about the individual than the belief system. I am still waiting for athiests to build hospitals, schools and orphanages…kind of funny that “organized religion” doesn’t really contribute to society according to them. Snort!
Fr. Michael
June 11th, 2008 at 12:24 amESTMesa, AZ
Dan,
I understand your frustration. The thing is:
1) Believers do often question or lose their faith. I certainly have done both - and will at least question my faith in the future. So, I can’t get mad at truth.
2) There’s a saying: “No such thing as a married person on the road.” Many people do cheat when it’s convenient. I can’t get mad at truth.
I don’t think of “foxholes” as specifically predicting that you will go theist in a pinch. Rather, it points to a truth: many humans will go theist in a pinch. I don’t think anyone intends it as a literal, quantifiable statement about all people. It is, rather, a statement about many people. It’s a statement about the human condition. It is similar to statements about losing faith, and about cheating on a spouse.
I understand you. But I respectfully disagree that “foxholes” is rude. I’ll let it marinate awhile. Maybe I will change my mind.
June 11th, 2008 at 12:26 amESTFine, I don’t want to run out a bunch more comments. You are welcome to email me, if you wish.
June 11th, 2008 at 12:32 amESTRachel, much love to you, Rupert and Joe. I’m keeping you all in my prayers. So is hubby — mentioned it to him over breakfast Sunday.
Interesting observation about the “overarching moral standard.” As you’ve read from C.S. Lewis, that’s one of the arguments in favor of the existence of some kind of supreme being who transcends humanity and nature. We all are appealing to a standard “out there” that says hijacking someone’s emotional post about a family tragedy and attacking you just ISN’T RIGHT.
And it isn’t.
Glad to hear that Christians are, proportionally, giving you less grief. I cringe every time one of the tribe goes ballistic on someone.
Peace.
June 11th, 2008 at 1:12 amESTRachel,
For what it’s worth, know that there is some guy in California, who you’ve never met and probably never will meet, who’s pulling for Joe.
Jeff
June 11th, 2008 at 4:54 amESTFirst off, my prayers for your friend’s speedy recovery.
I followed the link from Vox Day’s site, and I’m quite glad I did. It IS quite illustrative to compare the behavior of the radical atheists and their Christian debate opponents. Vox has a theory that a large number of these radicals have Asperger’s Syndrome, and as a father of two children with AS I concure. They seem genuinely unaware of the tone and consequences of their behavior (when confronted) and get angry when called to task for it.
While some Christians do engage in tit-for-tat arguments (myself included) there is always a purpose to getting down and nasty with these people; to give them a taste of their own medicine. Call it tough love. And before anyone reminds me that “Jesus wouldn’t do it that way”, remember the moneychangers, and the woman caught in adultery. Jesus most certainly used scorn, ridicule and even sarcasm when appropriate.
The difference is MOST Christians know when to stop using these tactics. And MOST Christians (at least this one) feel remorse when we’ve assumed that our opponents deserved such treatment only to find they didn’t. But these non-radical atheists usually don’t engage in debate like this, and even though we feel bad for the state of their souls, when you find a non-radical atheist debating metaphysics or theology they can prove to be the most enjoyable and enlightening engagements you can have.
Unfortunately, its the bad guys who make it hard on the good guys. The non radicals are embarrassed by the behavior of people like those who hijacked your thread. There is an element of totalitarianism in their behavior, and the non radical atheists know this.
For those like myself who are training for this social/religious battle between the secular and the sacred all I can say to the non-radicals is let us know you’re out there! There is much to discuss and if we can drown out both the Fred Phelps’ and Richard Dawkins’ from the debate we might get some real progress for all mankind. Trust me, I know what I’m talking about here.
Tom Bryant
June 11th, 2008 at 5:45 amESTB.A. - Philosophy of Religion, Clemson University 2008
M.A. candidate, Religious Studies, University of South Florida
DogPictures.dog.dog.dog.blogAboutDogs.MoreDogs.
June 11th, 2008 at 7:20 amESTPettingDogsMakesYouFeelBetter.
SeeingDogsMakesMeFeelBetter.
Post.More.Dog.
Brilliant!
Hilarious! I was wondering what that high-pitched drone was.
Ditto ALL that.
June 11th, 2008 at 7:43 amESTfrmichaew - Geeze, Mike, it took you long enough to chime in!
See, Rachel - I bet I’m the only Pagan-leaning agnostic with her own priest on call!
I GOTS DA POWER!
hehe
June 11th, 2008 at 8:12 amESTRachel, I know you have no control over this, but isn’t it cool how often the posts with jokes immediately follow the really heated posts, where the name-calling gets particularly nasty? I really HATE conflict, makes me nerrrrrrvous, but the jokes are really helping, folks!!! (still laughing about the walking on water one!
June 11th, 2008 at 8:47 amESTYou and Rupert’s family are in my thoughts and prayers.
June 11th, 2008 at 8:53 amESTOne word.
Windmills.
BWAHAHAHHAHAH
As he fenced with windmills, was he not not convinced of his ordained mission?
June 11th, 2008 at 9:02 amESTDamn! I really have to get my computer back online at home. 175 comments even before I start reading the post? Oh, the Humanity (or, since we’re talking about Atheists, would that be Humanism?)!
June 11th, 2008 at 9:41 amESTOnce again you are trying to twist my words around to mean something they very obviously did not. I didn’t say “religion is the determining factor” I said “religious beliefs are the determining factor”.
Your belief that there is no God is your belief about religion, which makes it your religious belief. That belief shapes how you see the world and how you react to it.
And if you really spent four years studying psychology and were never once told that a person’s religious views form the core of their personal identity, then you clearly had a lousy education.
Just because you call yourselves “nonreligious” doesn’t mean you aren’t actually religious. You have just as much faith as I do.
What an odd argument you have.
Did Gcotharn say that no atheist has ever gone through tragedy and come out of it still an atheist? It sure doesn’t seem like it to me. In fact, it seems like Gcotharn said EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.
Seriously Dan, is this reading comprehension problem of yours the result of brain damage or were you just born like this?
June 11th, 2008 at 9:43 amESTThe reaction - to something that wasn’t even remotely a bait - was damn near perfectly inversely proportional to the reaction I got from Christians when I actively baited them.
I know others have mentioned this, more or less, on this comment thread, but this is the exact fucking thing I suggested would happen if the roles were reversed. Another triumph for the painfully obvious, I know. But it’s kind of satisfying to have a prediction come true, even if it does make me bonk my head on my desk a few times.
June 11th, 2008 at 9:51 amESTTold to me by a defrocked Catholic priest (no no, not that kind, he left to marry a woman):
Jesus sees a crowd preparing to stone a woman for adultery. He intervenes, telling the crowd, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone!”
An old woman steps up and starts hurling rock after rock. Jesus sighs, and says to her, “Mother, sometimes you really piss me off.”
June 11th, 2008 at 10:19 amESTOkay, time to piss off another whole segment of society (of which me and mine are members):
A beautiful blonde lady stepped onto a plane going to L.A. and sat down in first class. The flight attendant proceeded to go around the airplane checking the ticket stubs of each passenger to make sure they were all in the right seats.
When she got to the Blonde woman she noticed that it was for Coach seating, not first class. She tells the woman, “You’re ticket says coach maam and we have a full flight today. I’m going to have to ask you to move.” To which the blonde replies, “You don’t understand, I’m blonde, beautiful, I’m going to L.A. and I’m getting there in first class.” Confused, the stewardess gets her supervisor. Again, she tells the woman that she must move. Again, the blonde replies, “You don’t understand, I’m blonde, beautiful, I’m going to L.A. and I’m getting there in first class.”
Also confused, they go get the captain. He tells the woman that she must move. The blonde starts to say, “You don’t understand, I’m blonde, beautiful…” when he interrupts and asks, “Can I whisper something in your ear?” “Sure” she replies and he proceeds to whisper something in her ear. Suddenly she gets up and goes back to coach seating with a look of surprise on her face. The flight attendants are startled. “How did you get her to move?”
“I told her that first class wasn’t going to L.A.”
http://www.dirtyjokesinc.com/joke-dumb_blonde_jokes-8086.htm
GOD I’m such a racialist … or would that be rachelist : )
June 11th, 2008 at 10:26 amESTWait — did I just name the members of the Cult of Bus Enlightenment?
WHY GOD NEVER RECEIVED A PHD
1. He had only one major publication.
2. It was in Hebrew.
3. It had no references.
4. It wasn’t published in a refereed journal.
5. Some even doubt he wrote it by himself.
6. It may be true that he created the world, but what has he done since then?
7. His cooperative efforts have been quite limited.
8. The scientific community has had a hard time replicating his results.
9. He never applied to the ethics board for permission to use human subjects.
10. When one experiment went awry he tried to cover it by drowning his subjects.
11. When subjects didn’t behave as predicted, he deleted them from the sample.
12. He rarely came to class, just told students to read the book.
13. Some say he had his son teach the class.
14. He expelled his first two students for learning.
15. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students failed his tests.
16. His office hours were infrequent and usually held on a mountain top.
17. No record of working well with colleagues.
June 11th, 2008 at 10:38 amESTFunny how “all” of the atheists in the JREF forum are spoken of being all angry and whiners. Anyone who actually read the thread would realize there is a discussion going on over there and it really is no just one bitch session about this blog. Then again, since this is a conservative’s blog, I’m not surprised.
June 11th, 2008 at 10:55 amESTHey Rachel,
I’m an occasional reader of your blog, and thought this was the appropriate time to say a few things.
1. I love the blog- it enriches my day every time I read it.
2. My best wishes for Joe, and my deepest condolences for the difficult time you and yours are suffering.
3. Ignore the whining atheists. Just ignore them- they’ll go away.
How do I know?
I am, in fact, an Atheist.
Over the years I have noticed that Atheists are a lot like that friend everyone’s had at some point. We know they’re X, but they won’t admit it. Then..they finally admit it, and they’re so excited to finally be X that suddenly..their whole life is about being X.
It’s irritating as hell, but like most phases, eventually, it passes.
Eventually, they’ll realize that what YOU say on YOUR blog/time is none of THEIR goddamn business….especially under circumstances like these. And they’ll learn to keep their yaps shut.
In the mean time, I’d like to offer the apologies of just one Atheist, not in any way indicative of any other, that chooses to retain his manners, civility, and tact.
Again, I’m very sorry for the situation, and hope that it will be resolved quickly and to your happiness.
Angry Atheists- Don’t mess up this fine blog with your whining about my statement. E-mail me. voltaire_jade@yahoo.com. In order to get through the filter, put “Angry Atheist” in the subject line.
June 11th, 2008 at 10:56 amESTThe Power Of Suggestion
A local preacher was dissatisfied with the small amount in the collection plates each Sunday. Someone suggested to him that perhaps he might be able to hypnotize the congregation into giving more. “And just how would I go about doing that?” he asked.
“It is very simple. First you turn up the air conditioner so that the auditorium is warmer than usual. Then you preach in a monotone. Meanwhile, you dangle a watch on a chain and swing it in a slow arc above the lectern and suggest they put 20 dollars in the collection plate.”
So the very next Sunday, the reverend did as suggested, and lo and behold the plates were full of 20 dollar bills.
Now, the preacher did not want to take advantage of this technique each and every Sunday. So therefore, he waited for a couple of weeks and then tried his mass hypnosis again. Just as the last of the congregation was becoming mesmerized, the chain on the watch broke and the watch hit the lectern with a loud thud and springs and parts flew everywhere.
“Crap!” exclaimed the pastor.
It took them a week to clean up the church.
June 11th, 2008 at 10:57 amESTMightysam, that’s brilliant, and I am posting it on my office wall for my graduate students to refer to when they complain about the elements of preparing their dissertations!
June 11th, 2008 at 11:04 amESTOh shut it, “Reverend”. Nobody cares what you think.
June 11th, 2008 at 11:08 amESTEr, Reverend. She’s not a conservative. You just proved your Dumbassness. You are extra special 1337 retarded!
Congratulations!
June 11th, 2008 at 11:22 amESTAnd thus concludes teh sermonizin’.
June 11th, 2008 at 2:50 pmESTAmen.
(voice of Beavis):
June 11th, 2008 at 3:08 pmESTFoxhole! Foxhole! Atheist for my Foxhole!
Huh huh huh.
Here’s a hypothetical example to help you understand:
Say I told you that I really admired Hannibal Lecter because he was such a gentle and caring soul. I went on to tell you that I couldn’t wait to meet him once he got out of prison. You repeatedly try to explain to me that Hannibal Lecter is a fictional character whom I will never get to meet, but I reject any and all arguments for the nonexistence of this wonderful man. You then try to point out that even if he did exist, he’s a sick and evil person who shouldn’t be viewed as a role model.
Which of us sounds more “sane” to you — the one railing against the nonexistent person, or the guy who believes in him?
People have been discussing the merits and flaws of fictional characters for thousands of years. Every one of us had to do it in school or college. There’s nothing insane about it. There’s certainly nothing insane about doing it in a conversation with people who think the characters *aren’t* fictional.
June 11th, 2008 at 3:55 pmESTI am an atheist, and never being in a fox hole always struck me as one of the advantages…
June 11th, 2008 at 4:06 pmESTI apologize for not using the exact phrase you use. I’ll re-explain in a manner you’re less likely to whine about: during the four years I spent getting my degree in cognitive psychology, religious beliefs were never once cited as a universally major determining factor in human behavior.
So does my belief that strawberries taste better than blueberries. But you claimed this:
You went on to say that this applied to everybody. That claim is utter nonsense, for the reasons I already explained above. Obviously my one religious belief has an effect on my behavior, in that (for example) when someone says “do you believe in God” the behavior I exhibit is to say “no”. But it is no more a main “determinator” of my behavior than my belief that there’s no Easter Bunny is.
Yeah, I’ve heard that claim before. It is still just as funny as it was the first time I heard it.
June 11th, 2008 at 4:11 pmESTIt might be better if you provided a hypothetical example to help yourself understand, because you clearly don’t know sh*t about sh*t.
Guess they didn’t teach you about subtlety in any of those cognitive psychology courses.
Yeah, right. God is so “obviously” a fictional character. Why? Because an atheist says so, that’s why! And even if God was real, He doesn’t fit your personal standard of morality so therefore He’s a “cruel” God who doesn’t deserve to be worshipped.
Whatever. Come back when you actually know something about Christianity.
Then you’re either a liar, a failure of a psychology student, or your professors were utterly incompetent. Religion is one of the core beliefs that make up a person’s identity and determine their personality. Any competent psychologist will tell you that.
What “reasons”? So far the only argument you’ve made is “none of my psych professors mentioned that in class”.
Nervous laughter is a common reaction to an uncomfortable truth. You can ask your psych professors about that one too.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:09 pmESTThanks for sharing that opinion. I think you said it best:
Congratulations. You’ve succeeded. You are now ready to argue with people on the internet.
I didn’t say it was obvious that God was fictional. What I did was explain why someone who thinks there is no question about a character’s fictional status might still be willing to discuss that character’s supposed traits.
And to think I originally thought your “convince yourself that everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot” post was meant as humor.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:48 pmESTYes you did. In fact, you’re saying it right now. You think that there is “no question” that God is a fictional character.
See, this is why atheists don’t get a lot of respect from believers. Because so many of you are just damn arrogant. You think it’s so blindingly obvious that God doesn’t exist that anyone who thinks otherwise must be either lying or suffering some sort of delusion. You don’t even have the guts to admit that your faith (and it is a faith) is not backed up by any proof, anywhere. At least believers are honest when we say we believe in God’s existence. You on the other hand, claim there is “no question” that God doesn’t exist. (If there was no question about it, how do you explain all these questions?)
But you, Dan, you’re a special case. I don’t think I’ve ever met an atheist who completely denied the profound influence a person’s religious views have on their identity and behavior. You even equated it to the belief/disbelief in the Easter Bunny, as if religious beliefs were as superficial as a person’s food preferences or favorite colors.
Other atheists claim their non-belief in God is based on profound thought and a deeply personal understanding of the world around them, but not you. Apparently you think atheism is as hollow and skin-deep as one’s views on the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus, and can be instantly changed at the slightest whim.
You’ve not only supported my argument, but you’ve also supported the whole “no atheists in foxholes” argument as well.
Bravo, Dan. Bravo.
June 11th, 2008 at 6:36 pmESTSo, MightySam, you are saying that if an atheist states there are no gods, that is disrespectful of theist beliefs, but if a theist says there is a god, that is not disrespectful of the atheist’s beliefs?
June 11th, 2008 at 7:35 pmESTEuler’s number raised to the power of pi times the square root of negative one is equal to negative one. Unquestionably true? Yes. Obvious, no. This concludes today’s lesson in why saying something is definitely true isn’t the same thing as saying it is obvious.
I can’t imagine why an atheist would avoid having a conversation with a person as honest, polite and rational as you.
June 11th, 2008 at 8:16 pmESTYou could use a few English lessons.
unquestionable |ˌənˈkwes ch ənəbəl|
adjective
not able to be disputed or doubted : his musicianship is unquestionable.
syn: indubitable, undoubted, beyond question, beyond doubt, indisputable, undeniable, irrefutable, incontestable, incontrovertible, unequivocal; certain, sure, definite, self-evident, evident, manifest, obvious, apparent, patent.
If something is unquestionable it is, by definition, obvious.
I love how you don’t even try to address my argument and instead choose to attack me personally.
June 11th, 2008 at 9:01 pmESTIf that was true it would be listed in the definition, not as a synonym. Synonyms are often words with slightly different meanings (c.f synonym), which is why kids like you should be careful about using a thesaurus. For example, if you told a person “it is obvious that gold bricks are mostly made up of empty space” they’ll look at you like you’ve grown a second head, because even though it is unquestionably the case that they are, to an average person they sure as heck seem solid.
I’m not attacking you personally, just observing that atheists are unlikely to discuss their religious sentiments with a person whose idea of an argument consists entirely of unsupported assertions, insults, and occasional attempts to tell them how they *really* think and what they *really* believe.
But as for addressing your argument, I already responded to your unsupported claim that religious belief is a major part of everyone’s thinking. Since you didn’t offer any evidence in support of your claim I don’t see what more I’m obligated to do.
June 11th, 2008 at 10:11 pmESTDear “Reverend”
“Not surprised” != “Pays attention to the overall content of the blog because I have an axe to grind.”
Cheers, mate
June 11th, 2008 at 11:08 pmESTNo, he is pretty obviously saying that it is extremely arrogant to state that it is unquestionably true that God does not exist.
Unless, of course, Dan has received some sort of supernatural insight on this matter that the rest of us lack.
June 12th, 2008 at 12:13 amESTThe Reverend Says:
Funny how “all” of the atheists in the JREF forum are spoken of being all angry and whiners. Anyone who actually read the thread would realize there is a discussion going on over there and it really is no just one bitch session about this blog. Then again, since this is a conservative’s blog, I’m not surprised.
Um. Reverend do you realize the hippocracy in your post? You are upset about a common comment about someone’s own personal spiritual story at a time of crisis. Oh, I’m upset! My feelings are hurt. There’s a comment that offends me on a blog I never read! And yet you call this a “conservative blog” that should expect certain behaviors. Do you see the correlation?
June 12th, 2008 at 8:51 amESTOkay, dillwad. This is NOT a conservative blog. Rachel is NOT a Republican. But even if she were you think it’s okay to expect what you consider to be poor behavior? And you don’t see how that’s throwing stones. This isn’t a city council meeting where you have a right to be offended. This is someone’s personal blog. She pays for everything - including her time.
I had my atheist friend read this shit. He was appalled. He loved how you were so offended that you went and created your own blog just to counter.
If there is something on someone’s blog that I don’t agree with or I find offensive, know what I do? I just don’t come back.
Would you say it was extremely arrogant of me to say that there was absolutely no chance that my house is infested with invisible geese? Given that there’s as much evidence for an invisible geese infestation as there is for the existence of gods (i.e. none whatsoever), I’d have to say that both beliefs were equally arrogant… but I suspect that you, too, are absolutely convinced there are no invisible geese in your house.
Besides which, I attended church for many years. Never once did I hear a preacher or a member of the congregation say “God *probably* exists” or “Jesus *might* have been sent to save us”. Nor was “why God might not really exist” ever the subject of a sermon. There was never an ounce of doubt expressed about God’s existence. Similarly, of the many Christians, Jews, and Muslims I’ve discussed religion with over the years, only around one in twenty has answered “yes” to the question “isn’t it possible that there’s no God”.
So maybe I’m arrogant. But probably no more than most of the people you know, you probably included. It is just I’m arrogant *and* disagree with you.
June 12th, 2008 at 12:18 pmESTI’m glad I will never meet some of you in real life. Seriously.
June 12th, 2008 at 12:24 pmESTA parent has to ask, is that a totalitarian dictatorship ruled by George and Martha?
June 14th, 2008 at 4:22 pmESTI’m not interested in the “foxhole debate” but you’ve been making me laugh for about 15 minutes now (I love that dog!), and praying for your boyfriend’s Dad seems like a good way to say thanks. So, the candle in front of the Icon has been lit. The ancient prayers have been recited. Please, let us know how he does.
June 18th, 2008 at 3:57 amESTDear Dan;
Biases up front. Male, in late 20s, Christian of Anglican denomination, evangelical, Chinese descent, Malaysian citizen, USA-friendly, libertarian-leaning (but not much) very conservative socially and fiscally by US standards.
You know, I’ve been thinking about what you said about Hannibal Lecter, and how would I go about it if you really admired the gentleman and I wanted to correct your perception.
Well, assuming I cared about you enough to go through all the trouble, okay? Because, if I didn’t, and this issue was what my father calls ‘low-stake’, I’d shrug my shoulders after a couple of back-and-fros, say internally, ah, f*it, and leave you alone.
But, assuming I cared enough about you and your delusion, I would ask you where you got your information on Hannibal Lector. I would point out the movies and the books (canon!) where it specifically says ol’ Lector’s not the kinda guy you want around. I’d point out that these were categorised as fiction. And at long last, if I really couldn’t hammer it into your head, I’d get help. Psychiatric help. Possibly even two burly men and a straitjacket.
But, at some point during all of this intervention, I would possibly devote all of 30 minutes seeing if Hannibal Lector was a *real person*. (In this case, he’s not; he was based on several real people, but HL himself does not exist. Although I won’t put it past some Mr and Mrs Lecter calling their son Hannibal. In fact, there are even places called Hannibal, so you could have been referring to the Hannibal Lecter, as opposed to the Washington Lector or the New York Lecter. And also, Lector is a job description, so just as you can call for Bob Plumber, you can probably call for Hannibal Lector too.)
Hence, you must admit that by your own analogy, militant atheists can be more accurately called anti-theists, even evangelical in nature. Because (and I’ll give it to you straight) I’m quite passionate about Santa Claus, and the fact that he doesn’t exist the way he’s usually commercially depicted. But I’m not going to give much guff to anyone (not even adults) who want to believe in him.
Now, I would probably get a bit cheesed off if you wanted to convince me Santa Clause is real when I can prove he’s not.
You must understand; when someone persists in believing something that is manifestedly and evidently untrue, especially when we’re talking about an unarguable fact, and this impacts their lives in a major way (such as thinking you’re Mohandas K. Ghandi when you’re not, or that you can fly with unaided muscle power when you cannot), we call this a delusional person, and should we care about him enough, we will call the sanatorium guys on him.
In this, I respect the belifs of those militant atheists who actually say this; that religion is a delusion, and that all religious people should be locked away for their own good. Because this is logically consistent.
The fact that we’re still debating this in the marketplace of ideas indicates that this remains a legitimate area of research.
All of which is secondary to the main issue. Rachel, by thoughts and prayers, for what they are worth, are with you and your loved ones.
June 19th, 2008 at 4:35 amEST