Shame on anyone who would disturb any ceremony such as a funeral! I think that about sums up our community's thoughts and feelings.

"They must be part of an atheist cabal."

Religions provide enough rope to hang themselves without the help of outside forces.

The definition of "christian" and the values attached to "christianity" have certainly been challanged these past 10 years.

Well the there's one thing for sure, I'll bet these people concider them selves "Conservative", and the so-labeled "libruls" will be the folks outraged the most at the desecration of the burial of soldiers. Denouncing the religious fanatics assertion that they deserve to die because of "homosexuality" in America, and that America deserves its demise for it's "sins"! At what point do we start talking about Rev. Wright's out of context loop again?
The religious fanatics are in control of the asylum called America!;-p

Nice try treebones,While there are some greedy preachers out there,Its a small percentage.Your post was exactly the kind of garbage the atheists come up with that the RS was referring to when they stated(Their goal? To undermine churches. To give religion a black eye. To plant in the minds of the young a twisted and evil view of Christianity)

The Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) has a web-site.
So I went and checked it out.
Wow!
It was pretty bad.
***
The christian bashers (and conservative bashers for that matter) need to understand that each person is responsible for their own actions.
***
Here is an example,
An elementary school teacher steals money from the car wash fund (or whatever).
This fact makes this one particular "school teacher" a thief, but does not reflect on "school teachers" as a whole.
Because all school teachers are not thieves.
***
Since each person is responsible for their own actions, the WBC is responsible for what they are saying to the world.
The WBC does not make Jesus Christ look bad, nor does it cheapen or change his message.

Nice anti-atheist bigotry, Wretched Flashlight. Most non-believers I know just want to be left in peace. Can't same for some of the "christian" community.

darnedtoheck..If you want to be left in peace then why are you responding to this stuff,Sounds hypocritical to me,Which is typical seeings how an atheist opened this line of talk.Via treebones 7:09 post.

They are sad people. BIG thank you to DAN GAMEL RV for lowering their flag. What a big way to show your support. I also think that it would b great if the school Mrs.Munns teaches at would lower their flag as well

Cato, good job on Logic 101!

Accurate editorial that really exposes the evil intent of Westboro Baptist Church, who, by the way, neither hold to Baptist doctrine, nor are they a church. The church is the body of Christ. I think not with respect to WBC.

Lastly, the same type of editorial should have been written with respect to Code Pink.

darnedtoheck, interesting name you have there, if you think about it.

I looked up the definition of atheist.

Atheist: A godless person. See infidel.

Infidel: Heathen.

Heathen: Barbarous; unenlightened; any irreligious or uncultivated person, savage, bound for hell.

Sounds like the RS might have been right on.

thanks tkadf6

Yup, tkad, I'm "bound for hell". Why? Because "god loves me". O.K., whatever...

re:
"They must be part of an atheist cabal."

That's just plain stupid...

The morons from Westboro Baptist are "true believers", not "atheiests". Like many brain-dead true believers, they think that their book of fairy tales is the "unaltered word of the almighty" (in reality, they're the superstitions and myths of a Bronze Age Death Cult).

Most atheists of my acquaintance are moral, ethical people who would never do something as mean as protesting at a funeral.

The "true believers" (like Westboro, Osam bin Laden, and George Bush) are the dangerous ones, because they think they're on a "mission from god".

I was taught it is wrong to judge another, especially about their religion.

Look up your history! They have been a church for some time. Why should they be a front for some atheistic front? Fred Phelps has been a minister for many years even appearing in TIMES Magazine in the 1960's. Do you think atheistic groups are trying to convert Christians? Why should they bother? There are enough covert atheists in the Christian ranks already.

As for Kansas, they have been a thorn in that state's side for a very long time. The TOPEKA CAPITAL JOURNAL has a rule that they don't mention their name in print and this was before he lost his right to practice law in the courts.

If the Record Searchlight is going to write an editorial, have the decency to call your sister newspaper and get the goods on this guy. Then write a informed editorial instead of this stupid editorial.

George

Keiko...That seems to be what the atheists do best,They are always the ones to open up this topic and berate the christians.

re: "How else to explain the perverse tactics of the Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church, whose members travel the country to picket soldiers' funerals with a message of hate?"

Two possibilities come to mind:

1) They've read their bibles, and based on that they truly believe that "god hates fags". Thus, they think they are doing the "lord's work" by following what they see as the "word of god".

2) Mental illness.

Note: these two possibilities are NOT mutually exclusive.

But what seems very unlikely, is that they are "atheists" as alleged in the RS editorial.

at least on these posts, I don't see either side exclusively 'rightous'. It's always right vs left, christian vs atheist, sober vs user, gov't good vs gov't bad. It becomes ever predictable and a bit boring. Although it is fun to watch the attempt for some to try and change the minds of others.

Uh, darnedtoheck, you said it, not I...

And, GGSSP, "Most atheists of my acquaintance are moral, ethical people who would never do something as mean as protesting at a funeral." Are you serious? They would not do something as mean as protesting at a funeral????? Get real, dude!

NO, tkad, they would not protest at a funeral nor would they fly planes into buildings. And they surely wouldn't believe their god(s) speak to them. You are attempting to equate protestant fundamentalists with atheists...now that's the biggest stretch of all. The actions of religious folks speak for themselves and the evidence is all around and throughout history. Your connection is only in your own subjective head.

OH! And the moron that rights this column.

..writes..! Doh! My stupid brain.

Calling this author a moron gives morons a bad name! Atheist cabal? You are supposed to know the definition of the words you use. This seems to be a big problem here in Shasta Co. It is best exemplified by the RS and its obviously underpaid and under qualified staff!!!

re: "they would not protest at a funeral nor would they fly planes into buildings. And they surely wouldn't believe their god(s) speak to them."

Very well said!

It takes a person who is "strong in their faith" to strap on a dynamite belt and blow themselves up in a crowd of civilians. Or, like the Williams brothers, to murder two gay guys simply because they were gay.

That's the fundamental (ha-ha!) problem with "faith"...it requires that one suspend judgment and reason, and implies that one's actions are in service to a "higher cause", and thus justified.

Scary stuff, from my perspective...but, perhaps easier for some people than thinking for themselves.

tkad_f_6 ,, Those fools Identify with the fundamentalist christian faith. They concider them selves as Christians. It's you that are in Denile! So you blame somebody else for the actions of your ilk.
What part of bearing false witness isn't in your ten commandments?

latlarge,

The leader of the Westboro Church is a Democrat, He is also a supporter of Castro.

Look it up.

latlarge,

The leader of the Westboro Church is a Democrat, He is also a supporter of Castro.

Look it up.

Westboro Baptist Church since they are giving christianity a black-eye let's say they are atheist. Now isn't that a leap of "faith"

"The leader of the Westboro Church is a Democrat, He is also a supporter of Castro."

I hear he owns a cat. Are you, or have you ever been, a cat owner?

Look, it's not the Westboro Democratic Party. It's not the Westboro Arm of the People's Army.

It's the Westboro BAPTIST CHURCH. And they're doing what lots of churches and religious leaders have been doing for years. Blaming homosexuals for other anything and everything. The only difference between Westboro and Hagee/Falwell/Robertson/etc is that Westboro has found probably the most extreme venue to make their pitch.

-concerning the GGSSP post from 12:03 PM

The editorial made the statement, "they must be part of an athiest cabal."
Check it out mr critical.
#1 The way the editorial was written sounded to me like they were being sarcastic in tone when they made that statement.
#2 Any quick web search would reveal that this church has been around since the 1950's - the editor must have known that.
#3 Whether the article was being sarcastic or not the athiest statement was obviously designed to be inflammatory, and in that respect it was successful.
***
To illustrate to you that you are running your mouth in here with an anti-christian bias, and that you are trying to "label" a group of people (namely christians) I will refer you back to my 9:48 AM post.
Go back and read this post, and then give it some thought. If you are honest you will see that I am making alot of sense.
***
Here is another "relevant" example,
I know an athiest who is a child molestor, and another who is a murderer.
Does this make all athiests bad?
The answer is no.
It makes the offending athiests what they are, a child molester, and a murderer.
Some athiests treat other people bad, and some are pretty nice guys.
The same is true for christians.
Quit putting labels on people.
Let each person be judged on the merits of their own characters.
Not the color of their skin, or what church they attend.
Each person is responsible for their own actions.
***
The Westboro Church is responsible for the message they are spreading, and nobody else.
Can you wrap your brain around that?

"I know an athiest who is a child molestor, and another who is a murderer.
Does this make all athiests bad?"

I'm pretty athy, maybe athier, but I'm not the athiest.

It's spelled ATHEIST.

Anyway back to your example. It's a silly strawman argument. Nobody is assigning the craziness of showing up at funerals onto all Christians. The point that is being made is that anti-homosexual bigotry is common among Christians. The WBC has just figured out probably the most objectional way legally possible to express this Christian belief. And don't try to convince me otherwise - the internet is full of examples of anti-homosexual rhetoric from Christians groups and leaders. There are not, however, any atheist groups that are promoting child abuse, murder, and other crimes.

Dumb example, try again.

jrd---;-]~

socalgtr,, I said nothing about Dems, reps, or Grns, or P&Fs, AIP Or Libs for that matter. What's your point?
Sheesh!! The next thing you know, tkad_f_6 will tell the rest of us that Timothy McVeigh was an al-Qaeda operative!

Check out Bruce Ross's blog entitled "Irony Alert" about his above editorial (apparentely, we just don't "get it").

The sarcasm would have been a lot more obvious had they been a bit more explicit in the byline:

"Our view: The *religious* nuts of Westboro Baptist Church should stay in Kansas."

Patrecia and Co.,

Just to be clear, in these cases of misunderstanding, one can only blame the writer. If the readers don't "get it" -- and some apparently didn't -- it's hardly their fault.

Peace,

Bruce Ross

razor,
I'm not an atheist, nor have I ever been one. Now what do you do?

Cato, your example misses the point. These people feel righteous in their actions because it is "God's will".
All Christians rely on "God's Will" to explain many actions taken. That's the fallacy in Christianity, (and all "revealed" religions for that matter) in that people can feel "certain" in their relationship to the Biblical God.

So how does one tell which sect is right, if any, to be able to express a special relationship in public to say such things as "God Bless" so and so or "I'll pray for" so and so or "God hates America"?
Why should I take those comments seriously?
What do they know that I don't?

They know what they have been indoctrinated with, hate and fear, and self richeousness treebones.
Free thought is beyond their reason, or their lack there of!:-]~

RLF does spouting scripture make someone a "christian"?

"Does mocking and refuting Christianity make one a "good" athesist ?"

It's not my fault that a haphazard collection of Middle-Eastern myths are easily refutable.

These protesters aren't Christians, or Atheists, they're just plain scum.

"Funny I never saw I atheists write anything negative in the comment section under the Sikh article a few days back..."

Why? The Sikhs aren't bigots or sanctimonious whiners and they certainly aren't constantly hurling verses from the Guru Granth Sahib at those of us who, frankly, don't care about the contents of your holy texts.

"Is that an Inquisition Enoch prophesied"?
Shoot, I'm going to have to rethink my views on Biblical prophesy. That one came true.
Or how about Jihad? I bet there is something in the Quran that talks about "executing judgment" on non-believers.

>>Well the there's one thing for sure, I'll bet these people concider them selves "Conservative", and the so-labeled "libruls" will be the folks outraged the most at the desecration of the burial of soldiers. Denouncing the religious fanatics assertion that they deserve to die because of "homosexuality" in America, and that America deserves its demise for it's "sins"! At what point do we start talking about Rev. Wright's out of context loop again?
The religious fanatics are in control of the asylum called America!;-p<<

Like I said, the "leader" of this "church" is a Dem.

So, he aligns himself with them. So your attack above is complete Bull.

You break this into two sides, I would say that these people dont represent any Lberal or Conservatives but a lunatic fringe that are not reprentative of any political belief.

You probably see this differently because you are pre-disposed to to a black and white (and somewhat simpleminded) view of the days issues.

"Like I said, the "leader" of this "church" is a Dem. So, he aligns himself with them. So your attack above is complete Bull"

You have got to be kidding.

WBC blames gays for God smiting others. This is not a component of the Democrat's platform. It is a component of conservative Christian beliefs.

Whether their leader is a Democrat, whether he wears Gap khakis or chews Wrigley's spearmint gum, none are relevant to the anti-homosexual message that the WBC puts forth.

Sorry Proco, he is a Democrat, it is a fact and latlarge claiming that they will no doubt claim to be Conservative is bull, I was not kidding about that.

The idea that this person embodies the Democrats as a whole is without doubt false, but neither does he represent Republicans or Conservative Christian belief, you are just plain wrong. You choose to believe that because that is all you choose hear.

That is your problem not Christianities.

How many "christians" totally supported the bombing of Bahgdad? How many "christian" leaders have been found to have been molesting children for decades and then protected by other church leaders? These Westboro idiots should come as no big surprise. Christ and the truth he brought to us has not changed, there are just many more wolves running around in sheep skins these days.

RLF, I want your view on this. A person growing up without any spiritual or religious education goes through life learning from books and personal experience finally to develop their own relationship with God and humanity. This person follows the teachings of Christ,Taoism, the Native American Church and all other religious and spiritual teachings that teach mutual love and respect. Does the fact that this person does not claim to be "christian" in any way affect what happens in life or death?

The teachings of Christ are in the words he spoke to the world. The teachings of Christ are revealed in the parables he spoke. The teachings of Christ I refer to is every truth that came from his mouth. The reason I attempt to isolate the words of Christ from the rest of the bible is because the teachings of truth in his words draw distinct lines between right and wrong. Throughout the bible are statements that can be twisted into anything you want to justify, even the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. The words of Christ himself do not allow for acts of death and violence. Do you get me now?

The members of Westboro Baptist Church are definitely not atheists. A more appropriate term would be Christian extremists. Also, I am irritated by people such as razor who at 10:32 am posted this: "darnedtoheck..If you want to be left in peace then why are you responding to this stuff,Sounds hypocritical to me,Which is typical seeings how an atheist opened this line of talk.Via treebones 7:09 post." An atheist did not open this line of talk. It was obviously the anti-atheist bigot who wrote this article! If you were mistakenly compared to or associated with an immoral group of hatemongers, you would stand up and say something about it too.

Has the leadership of the Baptist Church made any move to repudiate these obscene religious fanatics. Why are they allowed to even use the word Baptist for their church. I think that the religious and the atheist alike would agree that this dirty little cult is a perversion.

"They can't be real Christians. They must be part of an atheist cabal."

The person who wrote this knows nothing about
the Westboro Baptist Church (since they are for
real), knows nothing about Christians (since
he thinks they are "incapable" of WBC's behavior,
and obviously they are), knows nothing about
atheists (since he thinks they are, by definition, amoral and they are not).

I also note that the author of this "editorial"
doesn't even have the guts to sign his own name.

Another shredding of the lead off phrase "They can't be real Christians. They must be part of an atheist cabal.".....

In an theological debate (where the standard of truth is consistency with the Bible), the Westboro crew can pick their teeth religious moderates. I've read the Bible and God is no moderate.

The Westboro world view is the world view of anyone who believes the bible to be the accurate and true words/position of God. Christian who disagree with Phelps and family have doubtless had their religious beliefs moderated by Christian dogma's many conflicts with reality (hurray for them!).

There are many good arguments that Freddie is an abomination, but those arguments are not founded in Biblical scholarship.

Phelps and company are the face of the evil that is Christianity at its most pure. A presumed Christian is trying to lay *that* evil the feet of those who are *most* opposed to it. I can think of nothing in recent memory that exposes the hypocrisy and lack of self knowledge that Christians demonstrate so often.

Phelps is the face of true believer. Learn to recognize it. I'm sure the 19 9/11 hijackers could.

I believe this to be true:

There are Christians (and Jews, and Catholics, etc etc) who are murderers. There are Atheists who are murderers.

The vast majority of Christians (and Jews, and Catholics, etc etc) are *good people*, despite what anybody thinks of them. The vast majority of Atheists are *good people*, despite what anybody thinks of them.

Slightly off-topic, but worth putting forth, perhaps.

Kansas Doesn't want em either.

Atheists? Are you fu¢king kidding? You have no knowledge of the fundamentalist Christian. These are hateful people. '

The church has plenty of black eyes, as a result of its own actions over centuries. The Christian church has been a major source of evil, in the past. Read your bible, and you'll see it approves of slavery, torture, extreme child abuse, and the art of fag-hating.

Your pathetic article had found a point of truth. These people are desperate for press, and you stupid a$$holes keep giving it to them.

No need for an atheist conspiracy. Except for picketing funerals, the same language and beliefs can be found in many Christian churches that are not, apparently, parodies of the faith.

"They must be part of an atheist cabal."

What sort of bigoted nonsense is this? Does the writer even know what an atheist is? Sorry, these nut jobs are pure 100$ god-believers. They worship the same god of Abraham & Moses as you probably do, only they actually followed the book instead of making up their own modern interpretation. To see such willful ignorance in the author should suggest just how people can become so deluded by their own preexisting prejudices. Hopefully more Americans are at least a little less delusional than the Westboro Baptists or the author of this piece.

The final line is just as bad, "But the rest of us have an equal right to call this circus act what it is: a poisonous parody of faith whose adherents should stay in Kansas."

While I fully agree that people have the right to (and should) protest these evil cretins, to suggest that they are 'parody' of the Christian faith (poisonous or no) is simply laughable. This is another example of religious moderate calling a true believer out as a fake. This holds just as much water as the common assertion that Islam is a peaceful religion hijacked by a few extremist. If you read the holy texts and *really* believe what they say, these behaviors are completely rational and to be expected.

If you are a Christian and are repelled by their behavior, it is time to start digging a little deeper into your faith.

Yet another case study in the #1 issue atheists such as myself have with people who practice religion: unmitigated faulty logic gone unevidenced and unexplained with righteous abandon. Here we have someone that commits a random, completely unwarranted editorial drive-by on atheists because, hey, atheists are a relatively small group that we can scape goat, sooooo....why not? I note that the writer makes the anti-atheist charge in the first line, and then never revisits it, let alone even gives us the dignity of a thin rationale for making the charge. If you're going to make the charge, at least be man enough to make up a defense. But we don't even get that.

The math goes like this:

bad people (A) + ugly speech (B) = it must've been atheists (Z)

Use of the word "cabal" is another indicator of the shoddy intellect behind this editorial. That word is often used by conservatives when talking about any number of groups they don't like but don't have good, defensible, non-fear-based reasons to dislike them. We've all heard about the "liberal cabal", the "gay/lesbian cabals", the "anti-Christian cabal", etc. So why can't atheists have their own? Equal-opportunity hate, no?

Look, if you are against the words uttered by those claiming to be a part of WBC, then focus on their words, and their people. Be logical and make your argument against the hateful deeds and speech of the WBC. But don't try and kill two birds with one stone by making comments at one group's expense, as a means of denouncing another. There is exactly ZERO evidence that the WBC is anything other than a religious organization. So to you religious people here: own it. Don't shove your garbage onto innocent groups that have nothing to do with the issue. If you don't like what they say, find some way to excommunicate them, or counter what they say. As for Phelps being a Democrat, I hasten to point out that Kansas is/was a southern state. Southern Democrats largely became Republicans. so as far as your attempts at misdirecting the discussion go, you're still wrong, and Phelps is still indicative of a thinking much more prevalent among Republicans than Democrats, as this Independent's knowledge of history recalls it.

But regardless of the political angle, illogic like this is just one reason why I no longer have a need for religion, why I refuse it having a place in my life. I can't bring myself to think crap like this about other people, at least not without a damn good, reality-based, verifiable cause.

Posted by randy on April 13, 2008 at 8:28 a.m

"The words of Christ himself do not allow for acts of death and violence. Do you get me now?"

And Jesus speaks in the New Testament:

Luke 19:27
But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

Matthew 10:34
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Matthew 15:4
For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

Revelation 2:23
And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

Yeah...that Jesus was a real peaceful dude. I won't even get into the part where he curses a fig tree that didn't have fruit even though it wasn't the season for fruit. Can you say tantrum? Seem that you might want to actually read your bible Randy. I did. The vile stuff I found in there is why I am now an atheist. So are these the words of Jesus that "true christians" follow?

RLF you are 100% wrong.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

I suggest you spend time reading the entirety of section CA000: Ethics

Hitler did not reference Darwin at all for his killing of the Jews. He *DID* however reference God and Christianity many times. "Gott mit uns" mean anything to you? If not, look it up. There is also plenty of photographic evidence of Hitler galavanting about with Christian leaders:

http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm

I suggest you take a long, hard look.

Also, Darwin nor Haeckel nor any scientist within the last 2 years invented eugenics; the term is a recent development. The idea behind eugenics has been around for thousands of years, and indeed finds use in many Biblical passages. You should know this. If you don't, I suggest you pick up your Bible and actually read it.

Secondly, that Darwin hit upon an original idea that other NON-scientists took and misused for political and social gain is not Darwin's fault. It is the fault of shameless, power-hungry dictators promoting strictly nationalist agendas (or other dogmatic constructs) in order to suppress people they don't like.

Blaming Darwin is, again, another act of scapegoating. He wasn't around at the time of the atrocities you indict him in, nor had he ever supported such a thing against anyone. Your defense of religion is again, 100% misguided in its focus, and 100% factually incorrect, as well as disingenuous to the group to which you yourself subscribe.

"Im afraid this rather learned University Professor would disagree with you about Darwin"

If we're going to talk antisemitism, then let's not forget its Christian roots in Martin Luther's "On The Jews and Their Lies"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies

Also, there's just a *slight problem* in blaming Hitler on Darwin, in that the Nazis had banned books about evolution, in favor of creationist texts:

http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/10/from_darwin_to_2.html

Trying to play the Hitler=Darwin card is about one the biggest losing arguments you can get into on the internet. But if you really want to rehash it, go for it!

Posted by RLF on April 14, 2008 at 3:17 p.m

"NorCalHeathen~"THIS IS THE EXACT SORT OF REASONING THAT ALLOWED HITLER TO BLAME THE JEWS FOR GERMANY'S PROBLEMS."

Um no, you can thank Charles Darwin and Ernst Rüdin for that~"

Hatred of the Jews in Germany preceded Hitler by many years. Ever heard of the Pogroms? If you use a screwdriver to stab someone, does that mean that screwdrivers are the cause of the murder. No it means that someone misused the tool. In the same way, just because certain people misunderstood what Darwin had to say doesn't mean that evolution can be equated with eugenics. It's a logical fallacy.

Posted by RLF on April 14, 2008 at 4:55 p.m.

"Im afraid this rather learned University Professor would disagree with you about Darwin"

Can anyone name this logical fallacy? Anyone? That's right, it's an argument from authority. Just because someone with credentials supports a particular point of view does not mean it is correct. The truth of a claim should ultimately rest on logic and evidence, not the authority of the person promoting it.

"Now if you may, please read these quotes from Hitler on faith, and tell me by what standard of text do you judge that he was a Christian ??"

Who wants to explain to RLF that linking to a page of Christian quotes by Hitler doesn't really strengthen your argument that Hitler wasn't a Christian?

I mean, it's an interesting strategy. I certainly didn't see it coming.

Thanks for the link RLF. You have shown me the proof that Hitler really thought he was doing his gods' work, that he was a "pious" man, and that it was his religious belief and not any sort of "Darwinist" beliefs that made him become the monster he was. Whose side are you on?

RLF: "Um no, you can thank Charles Darwin and Ernst Rüdin for [inspiring Hitler]"

That pretty much takes it full circle. The Westboro Baptists are not representative of Christianity (the point of the original editorial -- however clumsily it was made) and neither Darwin nor evolutionary theory is responsible for Hitler.

I'd make the tongue in cheek suggestion that "maybe Hitler was simply trying to discredit evolution with the whole holocaust thing", but (besides being as crass as the RS editorial comment) it doesn't make much sense because there isn't much evidence that evolutionary theory motivated Hitler at all.

"Adolph Hitler = Atheist in disquise"

Typical fingers-in-ears non-thinker: anyone that committed evil under the guise of Christianity, and with its help, couldn't possibly have been a Christian. No I do not have a docorate in History; do you? And you're using someone with a doctorate in History to make a case against atheism? Explain how that makes sense. I also notice your linked videos are basically being panned by most people there. Two stars? And oh look, the people with doctorates also happen to have "Rev." next to their name. How convenient. Color me unimpressed. Your professor can disagree all he wants. The fact is people like you eat up the misrepresentation of real history. Darwin was not the devil you and other concern troll professors make him out to be, and has contributed more to our understanding of the world than any religion has. I'm sorry that fact makes you tremble. I guess that's what separates new thinking that challenges old, tired conventions for a better world, and just following text written in a book a couple millenia ago

Sorry RLF. I'm not the kind to let your obfuscations off the hook. You can't push Hitler off the table willy nilly because it's convenient for your historicaly challenged arguments. People like you would accuse all Muslims as being evil because there are Islamic suicide bombers. Yet when it comes to your own pet religion, well that's above reproach.

And please spare me your dictionary-like reading of the Bible. I have one and can read it myself thank you. Your Jesus quotes do not scare me, and I will not be heading for damnation. I quite frankly intend to live a happy life above the kind of vapid thinking you are displaying. If you get your rocks off at living according to an ancient text that is contradictory of itself from one page to the next, go ahead. Just stay out of my civil rights - and out of public schools - thank you very much. The scientists that are making your life and mine better on a daily basis will pay no mind to your veiled threats. I'll watch your videos in due time, but right now I have to educate myself by completing an advanced degree.

Wow...I don't see that anybody actually tried to refute that Jesus spoke about doing violence in his name. Typical fundie trick. If someone refutes your argument, move on to a different one. Moving Goalposts, Proof by Verbosity - yet more logical fallacies. I wish more "Christians" would read the whole bible instead of the carefully selected verses their ministers feed them.

Let's play "Spot the Logical Fallacy"!!

It's a game we all can play and here are some links to get you started.

http://www.theskepticsguide.org/logicalfallacies.asp

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4073
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4074

For extra points look at any Intelligent Design blog and see how many you can find. I typically lose count.

And for those still confused about Hilter and Eugenics.

http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php?p=272

Seems like Godwin's law applies once again:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_Law

Wow, I'm stunned at the lack of neurons in RLF's commentary.

Hey, clueless - Darwin was never associated with Eugenics. Are you "lying for Jesus" here?

Oh, and your "rather learned" fellow, did you notice, was a bigot? Have you checked his facts? Rather learned people can say darned stupid things sometimes, kiddo.

You can post all the scripture you want, it won't make you any less of a bigot or a jackass. Here's a little test for your scripture: why don't you go make yourself a perfect pot, using the recipe stated in Kings? You know, the one that was thirty units in circumference and ten in diameter?

Let me know when you finally make it - there's a nobel in mathematics waiting for you if you do.

Meanwhile, you've acquitted yourself well among the ranks of the self-proclaimed morons - congrats. I'm sure the folks at WBC would be glad to have you.

And speaking of which, for the original article's author, I wonder why he didn't write: "They can't be real Christians. They must be part of an Jewish cabal."

Oh yeah, that's right - because he thought he might get crushed for his bigotry. Guess what, Redding? You're taking it in the shorts anyway.

T

www.borkedcode.com

Mook,
Well, I guess I will just have to change my perceptions of what Christ taught to the world. It seems I must be an optimist looking for some core truth that would define human behavior in a way that would bring harmony to our world. The only other option I can see is "everyone for themselves", which seems to be the most common strategy for people. Now I understand why the Christian community can stand in almost complete unity behind the bombing of Bahgdad.

RLF, Did you support the bombing of Bahgdad?

"Oh BlueIndependent atheist speak with fork tongue , "The people with doctorates also happen to have "Rev" next to their name" ? How do you know if you dident watch them ?? What side of your neck are you talking out of ?? Now found to be a Liar, your dismissed~"

To a religious nutcase, the truth is the devil. No matter. Science has been smacking religion down with that apparently forked tongue for hundreds of years now, without religion being able to lobby any significant reply other than suppression of human thought. I took a quick gander and the first thing I saw was a person with a doctorate, but with "Rev." next to his name. I don't have to view every second of every video to make this determination. More negative points for you and your idiocy. I am not dismissed; I am not expelled. I am very much in session.

"An agnostic scientist blew Darwin out of the water in one of those Videos, get a grip."

One single person "blew Darwin out of the water"? Based on your agreement with his individual determination? Or 150 years of actual research? Yeah, that's what I thought.

Nobody is trying to stop you from posting scripture. It's your persecution complex that makes you think you're all high and mighty and "oppressed". Tell me how it is that Christians can be in the majority yet be so oppressed? It's simply because you feel as a larger group that you're above criticism and that you don't have to answer for anything. Your posting of Bible versus as apparently your idea of well-reasoned replies betrays your intentions. I promptly disregard your scriptures because they mean nothing but to people looking to abdicate responsibility for their lives to an old idea of something yet to be proven to exist, let alone possess any modicum of intelligence.

RLF, I add you to my list of people holding Humanity back.

RLF doesn't want to answer your posting of scriptures because the ones you chose rain on his Jesus/God parade, and prove what a sham of a tome the Bible is vis a vis morals and ethics. But this goes for the Torah, the Quran, and any other "sacred" text that has any mixture of seemingly good morals mixed with rampant violence, genocide, off-the-cuff damnation and judgement, and general inhumanity and barbarism, yet is still taken as the recipe for peaceful coexistence with others.

RLF gets his marching orders on Sunday morning and is plenty OK with it because he doesn't have to think about tough issues. He can let other people do that for him, and he graciously drops his coins in a basket and complies. I used to be like that, but it got old, and there wasn't room for discovery and curiosity about the world. So, I dutifully dropped that and moved on.

Posted by randy on April 15, 2008 at 7:55 a.m.

"The only other option I can see is "everyone for themselves", which seems to be the most common strategy for people."

Wow..what a narrow view of the world you have. Are you one of those who think that morals come from the bible? I wonder why it is that Denmark, which is one of the most secular governments in the world, has low crime, high standard of living, and a mostly happy society (according to recent polls)? People can have a moral code without religion. There are billions of people on earth that are not christians and yet most of them seem to get along without raping and killing one another on a daily basis. The non-religious represent anywhere from 10-18% of Americans depending on what poll you go by. Yet atheists only account for 1% of the prison population.

I think I actually have a stronger moral code than many christians because it's a code I follow voluntarily and not because I'm scared of going to hell. If the only thing that keeps you running wild and having an "everybody for themselves" life is fear of eternal damnation, I feel very sorry for you. I donate blood, shovel the snow off my elderly neighbor's walk, and help people in general because I think it is the right thing to do regardless of what the bible might say.

Yes, if christ actually existed, many of his teachings are of love and peace. But the bible is not a buffet where you can pick and choose which parts to believe in and follow. If it's the word of god then you must assume all of it is. When you choose only the parts you want, you yourself are deciding which parts are moral. And if you know what is moral independent of what the bible says, why do we need it at all? It seems evolution has equipped most of us with a built in sense of right and wrong.

I don't think that all religious people are bad. Most of them are good people just as a random sample of society will have mostly good people in it. Let just conclude that religion can make people do bad things as well as good. Nobel Prize-winning physicist Steven Weinberg said "With or without religion, good people will do good, and evil people will do evil. But for good people to do evil, that takes religion."

Whether it's crazy Christian fundamentalists picketing funerals and bombing abortion clinics, or Islamic fundamentalists flying planes into buildings, those people did what they did because they believed that their god wanted them too. When is the last time you saw an atheist suicide bomber? More harm has been done in the name of religion than anything else.

Mook:

They would retort by saying the whole of Communism was the supposed slaughter that adhering to atheism causes. Nevermind the fact that Communist regimes practiced and continue to practice false science, in some cases used religious institutions to round up a modicum of support, and generally treat their leaders as untouchable figureheads. All of these things are indicative of behaviors unique to religion. Japan viewed Tojo as a divine being (though they were not communist at the time). Myriad examples throughout history have human leaders assuming the mantle of a god on earth. Uncle Joe, Mao, Castro, Tojo, they all fit this description. But religous apologists will say that these examples are atheistic because they are human. That's a false argument because it's the idea of divinity that causes these problems to begin with. This can be seen in the Bible itself, when the Israelites make up a golden calf as a god to worship in Moses' absence. There is even Biblical evidence against the idea that atheism has caused the vast majority of human suffering throughout history. Quite the opposite. Whenever there is a supposedly wicked people in the Bible, they are usually worshipping just a different god, which makes them ripe for slaughter.

We used to worship fire. We used to worship gold and the sun. Then, the idea evolved into formless unseeable beings that have universe-spanning power to judge, command, control, create and kill at will. The physical worship has become a series of psychological ocnstructs represented by physical symbols over the years.

Atheism has not caused death and destruction, because there is no moral code with which to follow or form fundamentalisms or sects over. There is no divine, unchallengeable will that imperfect humans are tasked with understanding. Further, atheism has never been widespread anywhere in the world at any point in history. To say otherwise is simply blatant ignorance, or false witness. Religious people look at the lack of a moral code in atheism as a weakness, but it's really a strength. We can see the evil that believing in a god has gotten us, and we can also see that people of many faiths worldwide have basically the same social values, i.e. don't rape, steal, or kill. That so many people understood and continue to understand this without Christ or Allah or Hillel or any other formless mental construct points quite starkly to the idea that hey, maybe religion is a load of crap.

You claim that atheism is “faith”, a “religion”? Fine So be it!

My "Bible" is the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, and Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers. My "Concordance" is The Pocket Ref, 3rd Edition.

The symbol of my “faith” is not an ancient torture device, it's a slide rule. The simple three part device that helped build the Brooklyn Bridge, Hoover Dam and the Empire State Building, as well as sending humans to the Moon and returning them to Earth.

Algebra and Calculus are my “liturgy”, and Physics is the celebration of all that exists, from the smallest subatomic particle yet to be discovered, to the Universe as a whole. The Unified Field Theory is my “Holy Grail”.

The "Saints" of my faith are legion. Galileo and Einstein, Sagan and Asimov, Eratosthenes and Fermi, Hawking and Feynman, Dawkins and Darwin, Jefferson and Franklin and Paine, and countless others who have sought and still seek to expand the knowledge of how the Universe works, for the betterment of all, to free the minds of humanity from the shackles of superstition and ignorance, and, finally & simply, "To Know."

I worship no god, nor bend the knee to anyone, man or god.

And yet, despite my lack of fawning obeisance to the judeo/christian/islamic deity, I do not rape nor rob nor murder my fellow man or woman. I do not defraud them nor seek to enslave their bodies or their minds. I do not turn my face from them if their beliefs differ from mine, nor do I condemn them if they choose to love someone of the same sex or of a different "race".

My friends include the gay and the straight, the atheist and the deeply faithful, Caucasian, African and Asian.

I help the less fortunate in this world as best I can, and do not seek to convert them to my way of thought by my actions, I help merely to ease their suffering.

I choose to stand in the Light of Knowledge and Reason.

I oppose the Darkness that is ignorance and superstition.

And I KNOW that, in the end, it IS Knowledge and Reason that will triumph over ignorance and superstition, and triumph over those who would use ignorance and superstition for their own evil and ego-driven ends.

BlueIndependent,

Let's also make people aware that Stalin did not kill to simply squash religion. He destroyed any person or group that was a rival power. The church was just one of many groups that fell under that label. He didn't do it out of hatred for christians but simply to eliminate competition. Many political groups suffered the same fate for the same reason. Yes, some horrible leaders were atheists. Stalin and Hitler also both had mustaches. Maybe mustaches are evil.

Stalin was evil and ruthless and and atheist. But the atheism was not the cause of the other two attributes. Many leaders who subscribed to religious ideology were also evil.