Friday 30th of July 2021

breaking windows...

windows

The “Christian" article that follows is not very nice but apparently it was written in response to a not very nice critique by a certain Boghossian that stated than "only brain damage people, can’t be atheist".  This hurts… Ouch. This mean that religious people are brain-damaged. Ouch.

 

But in this righteous riposte, we, atheists, are subtly compared to village idiots… Excellent. I did a few annotations as we peruse thought this shit-job.



-----------------------

"Boghossian asserts that any theist who fails to respond favorably to an atheist's explanation of their beliefs must be brain damaged. Apparently only a brain damaged person could fail to see that atheism is true.”
read more:
https://www.christianpost.com/voice/the-problem-of-village-atheism.html

--------------------
Peter Gregory Boghossian is a young American philosopher with the subtlety of a jackhammer on the loose. He is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Portland State University. His primary research areas are critical thinking, philosophy of education, and moral reasoning. Boghossian is a speaker for the Center for Inquiry, the Richard Dawkins (we love him) Foundation for Reason and Science, and the Secular Student Alliance. He has been nominated as a member of the Global Secular Council. Boghossian is the author of A Manual for Creating Atheists, from which the brain damaged quote comes from. 

Old Gus has explained over and over the non-existence of god on this site, and if you still believe in god, that’s okay with me, AS LONG AS YOU DO NOT INTERFERE WITH THE PROCESSES OF GOVERNMENT AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES. Whether you are Blue Cods, Christian, Muslim or Red Voodooist, leave the thingsters alone. 

But of course, you want to interfere anyhow. So we, the village idiots with no god in our pockets, have no choice but to tell you about theological myths, the multiplicity of gods and the doggie-gods the dogs believe in. 


Here we have to look at more of what the good professor of teleothingimagining, Randal Rauser — Professor of Historical Theology at Taylor Seminary in Edmonton, Alberta — tells us:

---------------------------

So what exactly is a village atheist? As I define it, this individual is characterized by several traits including the following:

 

The proliferation of binary oppositions: Perhaps the most common (and troubling) hallmark is the simplistic categorization of people into two groups: the irrational, delusional religious "faith-heads" and the rational, irreligious skeptic. Boghossian's book is a disturbing example of this opposition.


Gus: There are a lot of people in between. It’s not a binary opposition, except on the battlefield between atheists and religious nuts, such as the “creationists” who refuse point blank to know anything about proper scientific procedures. When they start to mention the “Grand Canyon”, one idiot can only scream at them for being beyond stupid. At this stage there is no point claiming brain damage: they have no brains to damage. And the existence of god is only a point of view, there no truth or reality in it more than an ant being as big as an elephant. 

 

A claim of righteous indignation: Village atheists frequently claim the moral high ground. They are angry at biblical atrocities, the problem of evil, God, intelligent design, the Discovery Institute, Answers in Genesis, Muslims, hijabs, the Crusades, etc. Unfortunately, this alleged righteous indignation often provides a cover for them being overly emotional, rude, xenophobic, and moralizing.


Gus: Who’s talking? Who’s moralising? Who’s overtly emotional? Not the atheists, not even the idiots of the village. We simply don’t like your assumptions of “evil”, of “intelligent design” — that  clockmaker would have made a lot of “mistakes” and killed them off: the trilobites, the dinosaurs, the list is longer than that of presently living species — of "twists and turns in genesis”, of anyone with a godly belief that is not reconcilable with reality and scientific proof, including the Muslims. Can't we just say like Jerome Cardano (1501-1576) that we don’t believe in the virgin birth? Or like Isaac Newton that the Trinity is a fallacy? That the concept of an original sin is totally ludicrous? That the evolution of the human species condition can be proven? That we find the death of a Jew on a cross in Palestine to redeem “our” “original sin” performed by a couple of idiots in paradise is a bit far fetched? As mentioned before should these paradisiac idiots, Eve and Adam —the story of whom has been expunged of old contradictory texts — would not sin, we, humans, their descendants, would not exist? 
There is no moralising being proposed by Atheists, especially those idiots in the village. They just want to have a good time on this planet without hurting anyone nor burning the planet down. The only people who constantly “moralise” are the religious mobs, whichever they are...

 

Lack of prior theoretical reflection: Village atheists frequently make bold assertions without a theoretical framework to back-up those assertions. For example, they will claim "Belief in God is irrational" without a defensible theory of rationality to justify the assertion. Or they will claim "You're a Christian because you were born in Kentucky" without a defensible theory of why social location defeats one class of belief (e.g. "religious") but not another (e.g. "non-religious").


Gus: I’ve never been to Kentucky… so there. I come from a place in Europe where the ferocious vicious deathly battles between the Protestants and the Catholics were more bloody than the incoming World War Three… You can still see the hatred in the bullet holes on the buildings. Luther hated the jews and the Muslims. The Catholics rolled in gold… The Crusades were more an economic event, in robbing other nations who already had robbed other nations… Still continuing today with the US empire.

 

Short attention span: This becomes especially evident when you challenge the village atheist to provide a theoretical framework to back-up their various incendiary assertions. Instead, if any response is forthcoming, it is typically the invocation of some new red herring or rabbit trail.


Gus: That is Rubbish… I have all the time in the world when talking to my friendly Jehovah Witnesses… It’s them who after having tried to ram their beliefs down my throat who give up after I explain my point of view, in calm and reasoned fashion with my own bible in hand — which is much bigger than theirs since mine is a church-sized catalogue of biblical proportion.

 

Unresponsiveness to criticism: You can spend the afternoon arguing with a village atheist, carefully deconstructing some point they've made, only to have them repeat the very same point (perhaps in slightly amended form). This is indicative of doxastic closure.


Gus: Unresponsive to criticism?… What is there to criticise the atheist village idiot like me with? nothing. I am a nice person. A “doxastic closure" relies on a modal operator which forms propositions from propositions. In general, a modal operator has the "formal" property of being non-truth-functional, and is "intuitively" characterised by expressing a modal attitude (such as necessity, possibility, belief, or knowledge) about the proposition to which the operator is applied. A doxastic closure is like a linear sophism: Ipso facto — god does not exist. Simple.

 

Caricaturing the opinions of others: Village atheists tend to caricature the views of other people, setting up and knocking down strawmen. (See for example, how Boghossian defines "faith".)



Gus: Guilty. Except I do not believe in guilt but in making mistakes against my best judgement. And my best judgement is to make cartoons about it… And to tell the truth, my truth, I hate Sharia Law and its precursor in the Christian faith, the Inquisition, which for all intent and purposes are and were shit-jobs in order to create more of their faithful kinds and prevent loosing them to proper thinking.

 

The proliferation of tribalism: Village atheists tend to look askance on internal criticism (i.e. one atheist critiquing another), instead insisting that efforts must be focused on attacking Christians and other "religious" people (i.e. the out-groups).


Gus: Tribalism?… Wow-wow… Tribalism exists also and mostly in the faiths, not just Atheists… who, we, us, really don’t care about what you believe in as long as you do not interfere in governments and all the trimming of society. 

 

As I already noted, there are also many village Christians who exhibit similar traits. (But the way, it should not surprise us that when village Christians leave the church, they typically become village atheist.) 


Gus: Good for them to leave your horrid deluded beliefs... and join us, the village idiots. We welcome them with open arms.
Note: picture at top by Gus, from one of the buildings in the former (huge) Rozelle Mental Asylum compound, Sydney — now openly being used for the rehabilitation of people with various problems, and also a wonderful space for an artists college and a writers' residence, as well.

ken ham does it again

Young Earth Creationist Ken Ham slammed the response he received from one atheist who took him on his challenge to explain how atheism is positive for children.

"This atheist's 'positive' message for kids is nothing but a tirade against Christianity (which is the best he can do). He mocks those who believe in Adam and Eve, the fall, sin, and Jesus. Then, he borrows from a Christian worldview to make moral claims," Ham, CEO and president of Answers in Genesis, said on Facebook Wednesday.

Ham's comments were a response to Luciano Gonzalez of the Sin God Patheos blog, who on Saturday responded to an earlier Ham tweet that challenged atheists to explain what positive message they have for children.

Read more: 

https://www.christianpost.com/news/ken-ham-slams-atheists-answer-to-why-...

Read more crap from Ham the Amateur-Ark-Builder — and what did he expect? A tirade against Santa Claus? Against the scientific evidence of evolution? Against the best behaviour to be good? ...

-------------------------------

 

Go for it, Luciano Gonzalez:

A Positive Message For Children From An Atheist:
As an atheist, I have a fairly positive message for children that stems not directly from my atheism since atheism itself is just a lack of belief in any deities but rather from an understanding of what a world without deities means for humanity.
A world without deities has a significant impact on our role in the world and in the universe. It means that every single person isn’t cursed to walk along a predetermined path where they at most make minor but already accounted for choices that do not alter the future but to decide their own fate and to make choices that will ultimately alter humanity’s future in ways they might not understand or ever even see themselves. It means that it isn’t wrong for boys to like boys or for girls to like girls, or for children to like both or neither.
There is something positive in understanding that there was no plan by God that allowed for children to suffer for things beyond their control like starvation because their parents had no jobs or because they were victims of theft or of nature and lost everything. There is something positive about encouraging children to accept personal responsibility for their own actions (and hold other people accountable as well) and not to blame the condition of the world or even their own imperfections on two folks in the incredibly distant past who took a bite out of fruit and were punished because a deity told them not to do that instead of rightfully understanding that the current state of affairs for better or worse is due to the actions of real people who live and who lived and push and pushed societies in certain ways that are reflected in the different cultures, beliefs, and more.

Read more:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/singod/2018/08/positive-message-kids/

Read from top.
See also:
http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/30421
http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/32261
http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/27819
http://yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/30100

you're welcome...

In a slanted article in the Guardian, we are told:

"If you think religion belongs to the past and we live in a new age of reason, you need to check out the facts: 84% of the world’s population identifies with a religious group. Members of this demographic are generally younger and produce more children than those who have no religious affiliation, so the world is getting more religious, not less – although there are significant geographical variations.
----------------------------

 


Exactly… And we the non-believers (probably far far less than 16%, are split in two major groups: the agnostics and the atheists. The agnostic are by far the biggest group.

So, why would many believers fear atheists who might represent barely 1.2% of the world population, a teeny wensy bitsy that does not have any credos nor any spiritual products to sell, and usually stay quiet in the red corner? Is it because the religious mobs fear than we, atheists, may be right and spoil their deceptive crummy business?

Most religions are about SELLING ideas. Pass the collection plates, give a gold coin for your incense sticks, so we can build more churches, mosques and castles dedicated to our god… and we will give you a fake bone to chew on.

We, atheists we give ideas away for free. We’re cheap! We do not have temples! We’re as free as a bird! God is a delusion! Oops...

So what are the ideas? What do religions sell? For starters, they want you to entrust your mind and body to them, while they butter you about eternity, about the ancestors and the voodoo of the original sin. They sell you the fear of being human. They tell you that unless you “believe”, you will never become happy now, nor forever after… Second, they want you to be part of the(ir) “system”— usually a rigid system of stiff social interaction. No gays, no abortion, no apostasy, no fun... plenty of sexism and some other crap-isms...

For many years, Western religions were in bed with governments, kings and despots, and now they try to cuddle together with the queen, Mrs "deemoocracee”…

Religions and governments are still in bed together in Muslims countries — and also in the USA. They don’t say “God bless America” for nothing in Washington. The hierarchical structure of godly dependency is strong. They don’t want you to be “free”. They want you to submit through various ways: you will be flogged or stoned to death if you don’t believe in Allah or you’re will be shamed in your own mind as a non-patriot, if you don’t follow the spirit of the exceptionalism under god Himself (god is a male)… So god rules your psyche, even if you’re a bad boy with a gun in your pocket. God or the devil made me do it...

The mind-boggling thing is that many of the rich people are agnostics… They really don’t care whether god exists or not. They just want you to spend your cash, for their tills to go “kachingggg”.

But we are told that, like in the Middle Ages, religions still fight each others for supremacy:

More prejudice and persecution. Followers of most major religions report increasing hostility and, in many cases, violence. Christians have been largely driven out of the Middle East, with some calling it a new genocide. Meanwhile antisemitism and Islamophobia are rising in Europe.


------------

To these ugly fights, you also need to add the fights within religions and they look like being run by a bunch of rabid ritualled loonies who steal your soul, sell it to the devil for their own profits, while making your life a misery. But you don't know. You're brainwashed beyond being aware. See below...


-----------------------

One of the biggest upheavals on the religious landscape in the next few years is likely to be the death (or, possibly, retirement) of Pope Francis, who is 81 and has a number of health issues. His efforts to reform the Vatican and the church have led to a significant backlash by conservative forces, who are organising against his papacy and preparing for the moment when the post becomes vacant.


Of course – there are huge consequences to religious belief and practice. Firstly, countless wars and conflicts have had an overt or covert religious dimension throughout history right up to the present day. In the past few years, we’ve seen Islamic extremists waging war in the Middle East, a power struggle between Sunni and Shia across the region, the persecution of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, the Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria, violent clashes between Christians and Muslims in Central African Republic, to name a few. Women are subjugated, LGBT people are persecuted, and “blasphemists” are tortured and murdered in the name of religion.


 

And now for the biggie:

 

Then there’s the political impact. Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election with the overwhelming support of white evangelical Christians. [note the absence of the Ruskies].  Legislators in Argentina recently voted against legalising abortion under pressure from Catholic bishops and the pope. Hungary’s far-right prime minister, Viktor Orbán, has cited the need to protect his country’s “Christian culture” to justify his anti-immigration policies.


But it’s not all bad news. There are millions of people of faith across the world engaging in social action projects to help the poor and marginalised. Look at the involvement of churches, mosques and synagogues in food banks and projects to support refugees, the sanctuary church movement in the US, the extraordinary sums raised by Islamic charities for relief work in some of the world’s most desperate places.
------------------------

What does this slanted work means with "But it’s not all bad news.”?
Does this mean that… Hey! I have a suspicion that "anyone, even religious people, who support Trump is bad news” Is this a loaded statement or what? Aren’t the vast sums of money raised by some Islamic charities going to support the families of terrorists? Am I being stupid?

Were the White Helmets a true equivalent of the Red Crescent in terrorists haunts or were they in situ to pass on “fake news” to the West to get the Assad government bombed by the US/UK/French gangsters? Yep. You know that. That’s why the West took them out of Syria because the West could not afford one or two White Helmets spill the beans about their deceptive operations.


Being an atheist is much simpler and better than all this crap... No funny hats. Actually no funny "religious" hats. You're welcome.

Read from top.
sheepo

having a go at prosperity from the horizontal church...

It’s been an awful week to fill in for your regular Gadfly, Richard Ackland, because absolutely nothing salacious or idiotic has happened. Steven Bradbury prime minister Scott Morrison has lent Canberra the sombre gravitas only a man with the voice and mannerisms of a suburban greyhound race caller can provide.

“If you have a go in this country, you will get a go. There is a fair go for those who have a go,” Morrison declared in his first address as PM. “We have come to have a go and we will get a fair go.” Churchillian.

It seems inevitable that Horizon Church, the Pentecostal megaplex in Sydney’s Sutherland shire where Morrison grapples with the divine, will soon release a line of Saint Scott bobblehead dolls, free with every tax-deductible donation. Morrison is a walking vindication of Horizon’s “prosperity doctrine” theology, which is much like regular Christianity without any pesky insistence on giving up your worldly wealth and putting others before yourself.

 

Read more at:

https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/2018/09/01/gadfly-flagging-new-churchill/

 

Read from top...