In the last year or so, two different Facebook friends have directed me to this picture:
I've also seen it posted online a number of times in contexts where it wasn't specifically directed at me. Yes, I do think it is funny, but needless to say, I vehemently disagree with the second sentence.
I'm a vocal atheist and anti-theist, and I feel like I must make myself clear, briefly, on why I do what I do.
First of all, although I've considered myself an atheist since about the age of 17 or 18, I probably had serious doubts at ages as young as 13 or 14. Up until the age of about 31, I thought of religious beliefs as silly and unfounded, but also as completely harmless. I even debated other atheists and defended the Bible; I often said that although people don't need religion to live righteously moral lives, religion certainly helped people behave better. I was ridiculously wrong about that.
The first time I ever had an idea I might be wrong was when I listened to an audio book by David Marshall Brooks called The Necessity of Atheism. Brooks described the horrors committed by the Christian religion; he correctly attributed, among other atrocities, the Inquisition, Crusades, and Salem witch trials to literal belief of the Holy Bible.
Brooks' book opened my eyes to the possibility that I might be wrong in defending the morality of religion. It prompted me to do further research, and I read Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Richard Dawkins. As a result, I regret that I defended any religion, and am positively convinced that humanity is not only better off without it, but I've come to understand that if religiosity isn't openly shamed into extinction, religion is doomed to end this world. As Harris has noted, "It is as though a portal has opened, and fourteenth-century hordes are pouring into our world. Unfortunately, they are now armed with twenty-first century weapons."
If you think that making fun of sincerely held religious beliefs is annoying, rude, obnoxious, or dangerous, then please self-reflect on how you feel about the beliefs of the Islamic 9/11 hijackers. They believed that God has a special place in heaven reserved for martyrs; they believed that they would be rewarded in heaven with 72 virgin wives. The terrorist attacks that took place on September 11, 2001 were 100% inspired by a believe based on divine authority. That's important: To believers, there is no questioning God. What he wills must be done, no ifs, ands, or buts. Those Twin Towers were coming down.
Should the religious beliefs of radical Muslims be challenged? Should they be mocked? Is it ok for me to publicly voice my opinion that those beliefs are completely asinine, in addition to being quite obviously dangerous?
If the answer is 'no' then you are probably a radical Muslim yourself. Maybe you're a moderate Muslim who thinks that Osama bin Laden was under a misapprehension when he claimed that Divine Revelation inspired him to kill more than 3,000 people. Either way, if you don't think it's ok to challenge the beliefs of 9/11 hijackers and other radical Muslims, then I would seriously question your sanity.
Of course, radical Islam is not as dangerous as Christianity in the West, right? Well....
The Catholic church opposes birth control under all circumstances. They have a combination of power and money and assert themselves in politics. As a result, the United States spends money teaching abstinence-only sex education, and sexually transmitted diseases have been allowed to run rampant. See this graphic, citing the disparity of instances of chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis in the secular northeastern United States compared to a couple of the Bible Belt states in the south.
If the Catholics are correct, then as Hitchens used to say "AIDS is bad, but condoms are worse."
Oh, and let us not forget that the Catholics spend millions of dollars every year hiding child molesting priests from the authorities and paying for their defense lawyers.
There is no good reason why anybody should be forced to tolerate any of these ridiculous and obviously harmful beliefs. I don't respect beliefs without evidence, and I will unapologetically fight to replace superstitious religion with critical thinking and logic. The natural result of honestly applying these tools leads inevitably to atheism.
In America, where only some 25% of citizens believe the scientific evidence that carbon emissions are leading to global warming, moderate Christianity has duped an overwhelming majority of the population that this life is only a warm-up for our second chance in heaven. We haven't the slightest evidence, anywhere, that our souls live on after we die. Belief in heaven comes down to wishful thinking--it would be nice to live in paradise and see our deceased relatives again, but the fact remains nobody on earth has the foggiest premonition what really happens after we die. The only life we know for fact exists, is the one we are in right now. There are far too many people under the misapprehension that it doesn't matter if life on earth is unmade, and this leads to a lack of attention paid to preserving and bettering the lives of current and future humans.
The biggest problem in the world right now is the illogical delusions of theists far outnumber the well-grounded logic of atheists, secularists, agnostics, and free-thinkers, and, furthermore, there are far too many in the latter groups who respect and defend the religious when they say "Let us believe as we wish, and leave us alone."
In short, if you think I am wrong to criticize the destructive practices of those who believe in God, then you are an accessory to the destruction they cause. Is it okay to shame religious belief? Not only is okay, it's absolutely in the best interests of humanity's future.
Follow me on Twitter: @GodsNotReal_
I've also seen it posted online a number of times in contexts where it wasn't specifically directed at me. Yes, I do think it is funny, but needless to say, I vehemently disagree with the second sentence.
I'm a vocal atheist and anti-theist, and I feel like I must make myself clear, briefly, on why I do what I do.
First of all, although I've considered myself an atheist since about the age of 17 or 18, I probably had serious doubts at ages as young as 13 or 14. Up until the age of about 31, I thought of religious beliefs as silly and unfounded, but also as completely harmless. I even debated other atheists and defended the Bible; I often said that although people don't need religion to live righteously moral lives, religion certainly helped people behave better. I was ridiculously wrong about that.
The first time I ever had an idea I might be wrong was when I listened to an audio book by David Marshall Brooks called The Necessity of Atheism. Brooks described the horrors committed by the Christian religion; he correctly attributed, among other atrocities, the Inquisition, Crusades, and Salem witch trials to literal belief of the Holy Bible.
Brooks' book opened my eyes to the possibility that I might be wrong in defending the morality of religion. It prompted me to do further research, and I read Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Richard Dawkins. As a result, I regret that I defended any religion, and am positively convinced that humanity is not only better off without it, but I've come to understand that if religiosity isn't openly shamed into extinction, religion is doomed to end this world. As Harris has noted, "It is as though a portal has opened, and fourteenth-century hordes are pouring into our world. Unfortunately, they are now armed with twenty-first century weapons."
If you think that making fun of sincerely held religious beliefs is annoying, rude, obnoxious, or dangerous, then please self-reflect on how you feel about the beliefs of the Islamic 9/11 hijackers. They believed that God has a special place in heaven reserved for martyrs; they believed that they would be rewarded in heaven with 72 virgin wives. The terrorist attacks that took place on September 11, 2001 were 100% inspired by a believe based on divine authority. That's important: To believers, there is no questioning God. What he wills must be done, no ifs, ands, or buts. Those Twin Towers were coming down.
Should the religious beliefs of radical Muslims be challenged? Should they be mocked? Is it ok for me to publicly voice my opinion that those beliefs are completely asinine, in addition to being quite obviously dangerous?
If the answer is 'no' then you are probably a radical Muslim yourself. Maybe you're a moderate Muslim who thinks that Osama bin Laden was under a misapprehension when he claimed that Divine Revelation inspired him to kill more than 3,000 people. Either way, if you don't think it's ok to challenge the beliefs of 9/11 hijackers and other radical Muslims, then I would seriously question your sanity.
Of course, radical Islam is not as dangerous as Christianity in the West, right? Well....
The Catholic church opposes birth control under all circumstances. They have a combination of power and money and assert themselves in politics. As a result, the United States spends money teaching abstinence-only sex education, and sexually transmitted diseases have been allowed to run rampant. See this graphic, citing the disparity of instances of chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis in the secular northeastern United States compared to a couple of the Bible Belt states in the south.
Southern piety and abstinence-only sex ed: Because Jesus won't hesitate to give you syphilis. pic.twitter.com/J13lobh7ph
— God Is Not Real (@GodsNotReal_) July 27, 2014
If the Catholics are correct, then as Hitchens used to say "AIDS is bad, but condoms are worse."
Oh, and let us not forget that the Catholics spend millions of dollars every year hiding child molesting priests from the authorities and paying for their defense lawyers.
There is no good reason why anybody should be forced to tolerate any of these ridiculous and obviously harmful beliefs. I don't respect beliefs without evidence, and I will unapologetically fight to replace superstitious religion with critical thinking and logic. The natural result of honestly applying these tools leads inevitably to atheism.
In America, where only some 25% of citizens believe the scientific evidence that carbon emissions are leading to global warming, moderate Christianity has duped an overwhelming majority of the population that this life is only a warm-up for our second chance in heaven. We haven't the slightest evidence, anywhere, that our souls live on after we die. Belief in heaven comes down to wishful thinking--it would be nice to live in paradise and see our deceased relatives again, but the fact remains nobody on earth has the foggiest premonition what really happens after we die. The only life we know for fact exists, is the one we are in right now. There are far too many people under the misapprehension that it doesn't matter if life on earth is unmade, and this leads to a lack of attention paid to preserving and bettering the lives of current and future humans.
The biggest problem in the world right now is the illogical delusions of theists far outnumber the well-grounded logic of atheists, secularists, agnostics, and free-thinkers, and, furthermore, there are far too many in the latter groups who respect and defend the religious when they say "Let us believe as we wish, and leave us alone."
In short, if you think I am wrong to criticize the destructive practices of those who believe in God, then you are an accessory to the destruction they cause. Is it okay to shame religious belief? Not only is okay, it's absolutely in the best interests of humanity's future.
Follow me on Twitter: @GodsNotReal_
Comments
Post a Comment