A Topic Agnostic founding news author, Reason is completely open to a sign from all and any gods that there is in fact life after death, but isn't hopeful.
Reason is currently thinking about empiricism vs. rationalism, cares a lot about the separation of church and state, and sees Jesus in 9/10 tacos ingested.
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.
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.
We’ve recently been introduced to Derek Chatwood, having accidentally appropriated his artwork for a Topic Agnostic story on creationism. That’s how authentic his vintage-style comic book artwork is; it appears to be an honest-to-god hilariously Jesus-loving kid’s colouring book.
It’s been pilfered into the big time of street art as well - check out what looks like a back alley wheatpaste in Bellingham, WA, of the iconic ‘Jesus Riding a Dinosaur’ image. In the vein of Shep Fairey, this image stands on its own even without the context from which it came, but the impossible creationist juxtaposition communicates & provokes more thought than a baleful Andre.
The nation’s capital is locked in a battle over Canada’s eternal souls. OC Transpo rejected the Freethought Association of Canada’s “stop worrying” bus campaign last week, though brave and fabulous “transit committee chairman Alex Cullen had attempted to overturn the decision and pledged to bring it to city council in early March as a separate motion.”
Ottawa’s dedicated humanists will keep fighting the decision.
Fears are the ads will spark community debate. Of course, that’s what they’re intended to do. The real problem is that religious folks can only hold on to their power if no one thinks about god’s existence.
To be clear, the ’stop worrying’ ads are intended to console and inspire nonbelievers who feel intimidated andoppressed by their workplace, family, friends or society into keeping quiet about their atheism. That camaraderie is the point of the ad: “stop worrying and enjoy your life” is intended for atheists who are struggling with social isolation.
Suggestions that this is ‘hate’ are kind of ridiculous, kind of not. No, the public statement that there is no god isn’t terribly tolerant, but it’s not ‘hating’ \ on the religious; it merely points out that they’re unlikely to be right in their worldview, so don’t worry about it. Acknowledging an error in reason or information is not hate, it’s knowledge.
“A meeting in late October heard from 18 speakers, including a number of campus religious groups who defended the original wording.” I’m confused how religious groups could defend a charge that clearly asserts God’s reality. God is only real to them. Any other personal proclivity you may harbour without reason doesn’t need to be respected in a public university, so why that one?
2. Non-God bus ads hit Canada! Two different Canadian organizations are working on atheist bus campaigns.
I mean, you don’t expect a lot out of Fox News to begin with, but their editorial “slant” sometimes overwhelms. My dinner.
The inaugeration was soaked like a rumcake in God references, but a very special thing happened when Obama acknowledged that his country is comprised of 16% rational people. He said “Hey, you guys exist. And you probably voted for me”.
Fox tried to make a controversy of it, suggesting it was “offensive”. Offensive to acknowledge the existence of—is that some 48 million Americans? We exist, in massive numbers, Fox News.
The drama over the potential inclusion of creationism or intelligent design in Texas biology curriculum is over for now as a coalition of six Democrats and two Republicans defeated an amendment that would have maintained discussion of evolution’s “weaknesses.”
Textbook publishers cater to the influential Texas market, so whether or not science books continued to kowtow to creationism is of great interest nationally—changes to Texas’ science curriculum will likely be echoed across the land. The exact issue was whether to re-incorporate the phrase “strengths and weaknesses” into the discussion of evolution in state biology curriculum. The loathsome Discovery Institute had it’s scaly hands all over this fail.
The big deal about referring to “weaknesses” in evolution is that there aren’t any. Creationists are trying to introduce controversy and suggest that gaps in evidence equal flaws in the theory. We’ve seen those gaps steadily filled in as knowledge and technology increase. There’s no reason to think knowledge won’t continue grow, unless of course the Discovery Institute has its way.
This is a vote on the science curriculum, not theology or philosophy. It’s certainly not an issue of free speech; I doubt high school kids have been doing research and uncovered a dramatic flaw that’s being suppressed by wily biology teachers. There are no “sides” to be on; within the realm of science this theory is the accepted one, due to overwhelming evidence, for the diversity of life.
Here are some of the reasons those who understand the process and results of science “believe” in evolution:
The ironies in the following story are so sweet that I invite you to poor yourself a glass of Cabernet, slice up some Swiss and a tart apple, and savour this feast of Christian moronism. I’ll wait til you get comfy.
You may recall that 800 buses recently launched in London bearing the slogan: “There is probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.” Co-sponsored by Dawkins, the British Humanist Association, and concocted by Ariane Sherine of the Guardian’s Comment is Free, the ad campaign was created in response to irritating, scary Christian bus ads warning of damnation, hellfire and other nonsense.
The ads are now being challenged by “leading Christian activist” Stephen Green, who has made a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) and is calling for their removal.
Here’s one of the sweet nuggets of irony: “truthfulness” and “substantiation” are Mr. Green’s basis for a challenge. He suggests there’s not “a shred of supporting evidence” that God is not real, and thusly the ads (unlike most advertising?) are misleading.
Mr. Green: what kind of evidence will ever be recorded that God doesn’t exist? None, because proving a negative is a flaming logical fallacy. How does one show that something isn’t there? By the fact that we never see, hear, smell, touch or taste it? And anyone who says they have can’t replicate it for anyone else?
The onus is not on atheists to prove God does not exist; we are safer in our claim, as no evidence whatsoever shows that God does exist.
Which brings us to the second, even more succulent irony nugget. Should the ASA have to rule on the truthfulness of assertions of existence of a diety, the ruling logically has to
a) affect future Christian ads and
b) weigh in favour of those who don’t need to prove their assertion, as opposed to those who’s extrodinary claim has 0 extrodinary evidence to back it up.
Truthiness was apparently already addressed when the atheist campaign was accepted for appearance on British transit. Philosopher and BHA Distinguished Supporter A C Grayling wrote, in what we hope will inform a legal precedent, that the advertising rules that insisted on the “probably” in the atheist slogan need apply just as stringently to the Christian’s hellfire advertising.
Way to go, Mr. Green! You have exposed your religious convictions for the baseless nutjobbery that they are. You have no reason to believe God exists, and neither do we. Kudos.
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).
A Topic Agnostic founding news author, Reason is completely open to a sign from all and any gods that there is in fact life after death, but isn't hopeful.
Reason is currently thinking about empiricism vs. rationalism, cares a lot about the separation of church and state, and sees Jesus in 9/10 tacos ingested.
Recent Comments