Archive | August 2011

Morality Without God

If God exists, everything is permitted!

I hate it when they try to shift the blame

The difference being, when a man outside of the Catholic Church anally rapes a child, he feels the full force of the law and is fully condemned by society.  When a priest anally rapes a child, he is shielded and protected by one of the most powerful organisations on the planet.  And because this organisation has been so successful at corrupting the minds of millions, many otherwise decent individuals will refuse to accept the truth and actively fight in defense of these monsters.

http://secular-europe-campaign.org/2011/08/archbishop-says-married-men-are-worst-sex-abuse-offenders-not-priests/

“It’s ONLY a theory!” “Yeah well, yours is ONLY a myth, so there!”

I know it sounds childish, but that’s going to be my answer from now on.  Anytime anyone tries to argue that science ONLY has theories, that evolution is ONLY a theory, I’m not going to take their bait.

Their ultimate goal is to convince me that their God is real.  Science, and the science of evolution in particular, is just an obstacle in their way.  Whether or not they can disprove anything in science, evolution included, has no impact on the God hypothesis.

I hope “It’s ONLY a myth!” is as annoying to religious people as “It’s ONLY a theory!” is annoying to me.

Christians are so f**king annoying!

What started out as a chat about physics with a mate turned into a Christian trying to educate me about “faith”, OMFG!

I’d like to point out at the start that I didn’t mention god, she did.  I was happily talking about Hawking, the Big Bang, etc. and she decides to insert her god.  When it was clear that she was going to hammer home her point my mate took the wise course of action by exiting the room (I wish I had joined him).

As with all conversations of this kind, it was a random mix of every logical fallacy known to man:

  • Leading questions: “Who created everything?”  As if there was a “who” or that everything needed to be created.
  • Argument from ignorance: I can’t explain how we got here, therefore she must be right.  She demands levels of evidence for evolution, which she can’t provide for her belief in creationism.  She tries to poke holes in evolution, because she can’t provide any positive evidence for her beliefs.
  • It’s “only a theory”: Apparently science knows nothing because it only has “theories”.  I asked if she has been vaccinated, she answered “yes”.  Her comeback was, “vaccination is science and evolution isn’t”.  As if she is the authority on what classifies as science, and what doesn’t.
  • Only humans can be moral and caring: A quick search on YouTube can prove that false.

The worst part was when another Christian overheard our conversation and decided to join in.  The only thing worse than being subjected to this ignorant bullshit, is having it coming at you from multiple directions.  Such as today when I had to restrain myself because I was at work, and he was a customer.  (I’m all for being open about my beliefs, and I’ll happily express my opinion to anyone, but not if I think it could get me into trouble with my boss.)

It’s perfectly ok if you’re a member of the main religion to spread your hateful, discriminatory beliefs, even at work, because the majority share you beliefs.  And when you’re pushing your opinions on others, people like me (Atheist), we must restrain ourselves so we don’t get into trouble, because we’re “discriminating against their religious beliefs”.  I am not!  You tell me something stupid, and I simply reply that I don’t agree.  They persist when I’d much rather they left me alone.  I wonder what would happen if I take up my grievance with HR?  Do you think they’d take me seriously?

She gave me a great example of how religion can corrupt your mind, and your sense of morality.  She tried to explain to me that God loves everyone, even her dad who isn’t a proper Christian like she is.  To find out how much her God loves her dad I asked what was going to happen to him after he dies.  She said she didn’t know.  I asked if he was going to hell…she refused to answer.  She said that she believes that God will do what’s best.  “Sending your dad to hell is for the best?” I asked.  I could see that she desperately wanted to switch topics, but I kept pushing the questions.  I could see her physically squirming in her seat.  I never did get an answer to that question.  Or the question “Is it moral for your God to allow him to go to hell?”  When the second Christian joined in (the customer), I felt it was best to let it go.

After that the argument turned to science, which I talked about in a previous post.

 

Note:  These people are only annoying when they’re being Christian.

The meaning of life, according to a couple of Christians!

Joey Hodge has posted on a couple of my posts:

He and his friend Glen Veltum has started a podcast called Think Between the Lines (http://thinkbetweenthelines.wordpress.com/).  “Think Between the Lines is a Christian podcast and blog dedicated to discussing the clash between worldviews and exploring how presuppositions influence all conversations about the things that matter most.”  Their presupposition is that Christianity is true.  They never explain how they know that, maybe they’ll explain it in a future episode, but I won’t hold my breathe.  That’s not what I want to talk about in this post.  I want to talk about their latest episode (#5 The Meaning of Life part 2).

They spent part 1 critiquing the meaning of life according to others, but I have to say their opinion of what the meaning of life is, has got to be the worst.  Not just because it’s demeaning to all humans, but because it makes no sense to an intelligent being.  And it’s highly demeaning to their own personal God for good measure.  I have more respect for their God than they do (and as you can imagine, my respect for the Christian God ranks somewhere around zero).

So what is the meaning of life?  It turns out that we’re here for God; God is not here for us.

Sounds pretty straight forward.  I can imagine every Christian I know subscribing to that way of thinking.  Then they went on to explain what that means, and I agree with them.  If the Christian worldview is true, they are spot on.  So here it is:

  • We are slaves to God.
  • What is going on in our lives does not matter.

They make their God out to be very petty.  Us humans now accept that slavery is immoral.  Sure, it’s great for the slave owners, but you’re not going to get a consensus from everyone involved (slaves). Joey and Glen seem to think their God is petty (created thinking beings, solely for his own benefit) and immoral (supports slavery).

They make it clear that God doesn’t care about you and your circumstances.  It doesn’t matter to God if you’re in a bad marriage, if you can’t afford to get by, if your life sucks.  All that matters to God is that you do his bidding, and don’t expect God to help you out, no matter how good a slave you are to him.  Why would anyone believe that?  Why would anyone want to?  And even if it is true, why would you respect a God like that?  How could you respect a God like that?  That God is not a loving God.  That God is not a merciful God.

Note: I’ve since uploaded a follow up to this post: The meaning of life, according to an atheist

Science doesn’t know anything!

I got into an argument last week, which I’m going to split into two posts.  This is the first and will cover the intellectual aspects of the argument.  The second post will cover the emotional side.

“Science doesn’t know anything!”, not my words, these are the words of a Christian.  Obviously he doesn’t know anything about what science is and how it works.

First off, let us try to put ourselves in the shoes of this Christian.  Why would he think that science knows nothing?  Let’s compare the scientific method to finding truth and the religious method of finding truth.

The scientific method: A guy comes up with an idea to explain how something works.  He can support his idea with evidence/observation.  Other people have been able to replicate his experiments with the same outcomes.  If someone else comes up with another idea, which explains how that same thing works, but explains it better, then the old theory is replaced by this new theory.  Science always keeps the door open for new, better theories than the ones currently being used.  No matter how supported a theory is, there is always the possibility that a better theory will be found in the future.  The current theory is held as truth, with the understanding that some new evidence or observation may change our opinions.  Just because our minds are open to change doesn’t mean we disregard everything we know for ignorance.

The religious method: If it’s written in their holy book or decreed by their holy men, it is “fact”.  That’s what the religious want, facts.  They want to be told that this is true beyond any doubt.  It has always been true, and it will continue to always be true, forever and ever, amen.

The religious start with a presupposition, that their holy book is true, and the decrees of their holy men are fact, because they are inspired by the holy spirit or some other supernatural thing.  After that, they are prepared to twist themselves into all sorts of shapes to make it fit.

When science and religion collide: Most people would claim that there is no conflict between their religious beliefs and science.  The term for this is NOMA (Non-Overlapping Magisteria).  This is what I was told last week.  I was arguing with two Christians.  One told me that her beliefs didn’t clash with science at all.  Of course, with her very next breath she was telling me that evolution isn’t science (I’ll get into evolution in another post).

NOMA is a myth.  The religious books and holy men have made lots of claims, from claiming that the earth is the centre of all things, to prayers being answered.  Of course, these are claims that involve the material world and science can apply its methods to them.  According to science, both of these claims are false.  With time, and a lot of kicking and screaming, the religious finally gave in and accepted the scientific observations with regard to the first claim.  The second claim I mentioned, prayers being answered, is still being debated.  Just imagine how the religious would respond if the study proved positive, that prayer did work.  They are quick to embrace any scientific study that supports their beliefs, and quick to criticise any study that doesn’t support their beliefs.

Religion is not open to new possibilities.  It is stuck in the past when mankind knew less about everything.  The religious hold that the strength of their belief is of value, even when it’s in opposition to observations in this world.  This is their greatest weakness.  Their minds are closed.  They can’t admit that they might be wrong.

Science is open to new ideas and change.  Religious people point to this as if it’s a fault, but it is sciences greatest strength.  Science is open-minded.  It’s even open-minded towards your god, it just turns out that he is most likely not there.

Templeton Prayer Study: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html

Update: Second post is up.

 

 

 

Deeper and deeper they dig

A guy hired by the Catholic Church to ensure paedophiles didn’t gain access to children in church’s has admitted to 12 counts of making, possessing and distributing indecent images of children.  The Catholic Church just keeps digging.  And no, there’s no sign that he’ll get excommunicated.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/07/31/church-child-protection-chief-caught-with-child-porn-pictures-115875-23308972/