A doffing of the atheist cap to Family Guy, who advanced the cause of normalizing the non-belief in God. Brian came out as an atheist this week, though the show laid low by pretending (in TV Guide, I guess) to be about reuniting the cast of Star Trek: Next Gen. That was a disingenuous few-minute subplot, but what were they going to put in the description, “God doesn’t exist and even this animated dog knows it“?
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation don’t like the YouTubes so much, so I can’t show you a clip of the show, but here’s series creator Seth McFarlane chatting with Adam Corolla about his general atheist agenda:
Finally, a mainstream atheist character, even if he is a talking dog. Baby steps.
In a bold, hard-hitting display of brilliant investigative reporting, Faux News provokes thought and deepens our trusting relationship with this gem: the Science of Satan debates.
Oh, I wish I was kidding.
Sadly, the word “science” is invoked twice in this clip about the upcoming special. I certainly hope 70% or so of Americans, as O’Reilly mentions, don’t actually live their lives in fear of stuff that doesn’t exist.
O’Reilly brings it all back to free will; God created the Devil to give us some options and counts on us to choose wisely. We don’t have to love God, because there is a competing product. It’s the free market of the soul!
Neither being has so far made a verfiable appearance unto me, so I’m not sure how God expects me to properly conduct interviews and select someone to worship. I know, I know; mysterious ways.
Catholic and human rights activists immediately condemned the statement, saying that it showed that the Pope was out of touch with reality and advocating inhumane policies that would increase the suffering of innocent people.
Yep, it’s more important to keep sperm from falling on the ground than it is to help stop this killer disease affecting an entire continent. Keeping that in mind, a song…
This past Sunday’s episode of HBO’s Big Love has some Mormons in a tizzy. As a former Mormon, I watch Big Love with great interest, I confess that it is a weekly ritual with my wife and I on Sunday nights. While there are some faithful Mormons who will watch Big Love, there might be a few less now.
This past week saw 2 major events in the life of Barb, the First Wife of Bill Hendrickson. She had been outed by her sister to her bishop in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as living in plural marriage; which Barb knew that she would be ex-communicated for. Before that happened, she wanted to go to the Temple again and take part in the Endowment Ceremony one last time, since once she was excommunicated she wouldn’t be able to do that again.
The endowment ceremony is a very sacred part of Mormon doctrine, and is not talked about by faithful members, and to depict it in the format of an HBO drama is something they will take lightly. Having taken part in the ceremony myself, I can attest that the portrayal on Big Love is very accurate. Yes, I wore the funny hat, yes I wore the fig leaf, and I still have these items in my closet.
I find that the way the temple ceremony was portrayed was quite reverent, and actually more angelic that it really is; the addition of nice lighting and swelling music will do that.
The second major event for Barb was the “Court of Love”. This was the disciplinary hearing with the leaders of the church is which she was excommunicated.
While the Temple ritual being depeicted may be more contraversial, I find the excommunication segment to be more damming.
We see how Barb is surrounded by a group of men in the Patriarchal church, and isn’t given much of a chance to be heard; they made up their minds about what was going to happen before they even got there apparently.
When going up against disciplinary council the person being accused has everything stacked against them; they must be obedient or be cast out of the church; a bad fate for a believer since it cancels the oaths and covenant they’ve made within the church such as baptism, any priesthood offices and temple ordinances; to them they are cut off from salvation.
For all you non-god-fearing fans of Mr. Current, a recent video on what really happens when you go to the big social network in the sky. The end is, in a word, dead on.
No one should be harmed, incarcerated, denied health care or necessary services, or otherwise deprived of liberty or basic needs because they have stupid ideas. No one should be presumed to have stupid ideas because of the colour of their skin.
The UN thinks differently. It believes the value of ideas shouldn’t be judged, that religion “makes a valuable contribution to modern society”, and that “defamation” of religion “could lead to social disharmony and violations of human rights” (unlike the practice of religion which hardly ever lops people’s heads off).
Defamation: “false or unjustified injury of the good reputation of another”.
Resolved 12/19/06, UN Resolution 62/154: Combating Defamations of Religions is the subject of much conversation in this, the week of its annual renewal. The focus of the resolution is the protection of religions, particularly and specifically Islam, from defamation, criticism or offence. You know, blasphemy.
In the same weeks that this resolution comes up for its annual renewal at the United Nations, its chief sponsor-government (Pakistan) makes an agreement with the local Taliban to close girls’ schools in the Swat Valley region (a mere 100 miles or so from the capital in Islamabad) and subject the inhabitants to Sharia law. This capitulation comes in direct response to a campaign of horrific violence and intimidation, including public beheadings. Yet the religion of those who carry out this campaign is not to be mentioned, lest it “associate” the faith with human rights violations or terrorism.
Why is the UN kowtowing to religious pressure? Perhaps they realize that the 80% or so of the world that claims to profess a belief in various unsubstatiated phenomena isn’t going to smarten up any time soon, and that we better tolerate each other’s fantasties or there will be blood. Fair enough; that 80% are by various degrees a fanatic bunch and we atheists don’t want any trouble.
10. Emphasizes that everyone has the right to hold opinions without
interference and the right to freedom of expression, and that the exercise of these
rights carries with it special duties and responsibilities and may therefore besubject
to limitations as are provided for by law and are necessary for respect of the rights
or reputations of others, protection of national security or of public order, public
health or morals and respect for religions and beliefs;
Freedom of expression is apparently a lesser human right than that of believing in primitive sky gods. The UN insists that the world “respect” belief in nonsense, to the point that your ability to question or criticize religion “may be subject to limitations”.
That’s terrifying. Contact the UN if you’re concerned about this precedent.
Topic Agnostic is a place where you can explore and discuss religion with agnostics, atheists, and theists from around the world. Topic Agnostic is the site for you if you've ever wondered: "Does God exist?", "What happens to our consciousness after we die?", "What would society be like without religion?", and "How does religion impact the world we live in?"
Write for Topic Agnostic
Do you want to share your thoughts on religion, atheism, and agnosticism with thousands of people around the world? Then join the Topic Agnostic team and help promote intelligent conversation about one of the most important topics throughout history. We welcome all viewpoints and you can contribute as much, or as little, as you want.
Submit a Story Idea
Do you have a topic you want our writers to explore in blog post or features article? Send all story ideas to the Topic Agnostic inbox and we'll consider it for a future post. If we use your idea we'll give you credit on the post (unless you want to remain anonymous).
Recent Comments