Lunatic Baptists shut down summer library program with threats of violence

Here's a bit of "Christian Love" from South Carolina. A summer reading program geared towards young adults and children has been shut down following a number of threats, many of them violent, that have been traced to a local Baptist church. Now, here's the thing: a lot of what was going to be covered in this program is stuff I would object to, on the grounds that it appears to have been in the interests of promoting lots of woo — astrology, Tarot, numerology, that kind of crap. I mean, damn it all, shouldn't summer library programs be educational in nature, and all about such things as science, history, and literature, rather than promoting even more idiotic superstitions?

Now, the difference is that my way of objecting to the materials would have involved sending polite but strongly worded letters to the library directors, as well as to local newspapers. But that isn't how these followers of the Lamb chose to go about it. And it isn't that they object to teaching idiotic superstitions. It's just that they only want theirs taught. Yoga programs were condemned as "teaching other religions" (whoa, can't have that shit in a free and pluralistic society!), and a T-shirt making workshop was objected to — you'll love this — as promoting "the hippie culture and drug use."

Library Director Marguerite Keenan reports that at least one bomb threat has come in. What is it with religionists and blowing stuff up? Clearly, these brave Christian soldiers feel they're doing what's best for the sanctity of their beloved Christian community. Jesus loves you, remember that. And if you don't, we're coming after you!

Who the hell are these barbarians infesting my city?

Okay, this is not necessarily a theism/atheism issue, but it is pretty outrageous all the same. And I think it conclusively illustrates what happens when people dispense with reason and give in to base emotional impulses. Frankly, anyone who values "feeling" over thinking is a rank idiot, and this example settles the issue.

Here's what happened: Following a Juneteenth celebration in east Austin, a man accidentally struck a small child with his car, causing only minor injuries. When he stopped and got out, he was set upon by an enraged mob. When his passenger got out to defend him, the mob turned on him and beat him to death.

Yeah, no shit. This is the 21st fucking century, and this happened.

Would it be redundant to say that this is the same kind of mob mentality that unscrupulous, fundamentalist religions exploit to persuade their lunatic followers to become suicide bombers? Would it be equally redundant to say there's something so very Old Testament about crazed, murderous gangs exacting street justice? What we need more of in our culture is education in critical thinking — the simple art of using your brain, and not just its limbic system, to solve problems in a sensible and non-reactionary manner. Sadly, what too many people would rather see our educational system doing is forcing kids to their knees in prayer and embracing religious pseudoscience in biology class. Actually honing your mind so that it's a skilled problem-solving instrument is less desirable, it seems, than filling it with ancient dogmas so you don't have to think for yourself.

The cause of violence: evolution or religion?

Care to guess?

Heads up to PZ for this one. In the wake of the Viriginia Tech massacre, when deranged student Seung Hui Cho mowed down 32 people, right-wing commentators wasted no time in laying the blame on liberalism, secularism, and the teaching of evolution. Among the more brainless remarks was this one from — surprise surprise! — professional idiot Ken Ham.

We live in an era when public high schools and colleges have all but banned God from science classes. In these classrooms, students are taught that the whole universe, including plants and animals--and humans--arose by natural processes. Naturalism (in essence, atheism) has become the religion of the day and has become the foundation of the education system (and Western culture as a whole). The more such a philosophy permeates the culture, the more we would expect to see a sense of purposelessness and hopelessness that pervades people's thinking. In fact, the more a culture allows the killing of the unborn, the more we will see people treating life in general as "cheap."

Blah blah blah. Well, guess what it turns out was really on the mind of the VT killer? (Emphasis added.)

Agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives also think Cho mentally and physically tried to transform himself into an alter ego he called "Ax Ishmael" before his rampage.... Investigators think "Ax Ishmael" is based on the biblical figure Ishmael, the son of Hagar, a maidservant to Sarah, and the prophet Abraham. Ishmael lived as an outcast, and his brother Isaac was favored. Writings that Cho left in his dorm room, sent to the Virginia Tech English Department and mailed to NBC reveal twisted references to religion as part of his identity.

Cho, 23, of Centreville, whose family was religious and had sought help for him from a Woodbridge church, repeatedly made religious references. He said that he had been "crucified" and that, as with Jesus, his actions would set people free. He called himself a "martyr" who would "sacrifice" his life. He wrote that he would go down in history as the "Jesus Christ of the Weak and Defenseless." He thought his actions would inspire others to fight back and get even.

Ah, so! Lessee here. References to the Holy Babble and Jeebus: lots and lots! References to Charles Darwin: zippo!

Now, I confess, the title of this post has a high snark level. For me to say that religion was the "cause" of Cho's rampage would be every bit as stupid as the claims of uneducated creationists who say it's the fault of teaching proper science and of not forcing religion down the throats of students every day. Mental health is a complex issue, and there are numerous factors that lead to madness.

However, it's telling that we have frequently had accounts of all-out acts of wanton violence in society in which fanatical religious delusions reared their frazzled heads, and none in which science and evolution did. It's also telling that religious mania is a known psychological disorder, whereas no one has ever been diagnosed with "evo-mania". Possessing knowledge about how the world really works simply does not move a person to violence. Indeed, violence is most frequently perpetrated by people who are angry that the world isn't working the way they feel it should, and the way they feel it should is most often dictated by a religious or political ideology.

Also disgusting is the way in which especially fanatical religionists make heroes and martyrs out of those who kill for their interests, all the while rushing to vilify science and "Darwinism" when people kill for reasons that don't support extremist agendas. The most egregious display of pro-murder religiosity lately has been the announcement of "Paul Hill Days," sponsored by the anti-abortion terrorist organization (that's not hyperbole, people) Army of God, to whom I refuse to link. This repugnant farce, scheduled to be inflicted upon the citizens of Milwaukee, will celebrate executed murderer Paul Hill, who gunned down abortion provider John Britton and his clinic escort James Barrett. Hill also wounded Britton's wife in the attack. Here's how the sick minds sponsoring this "memorial tour" — during which they plan to re-enact Hill's murders — distort the situation: "On July 29th, 1994, Paul Hill boldly defended 31 babies from unspeakable violence by killing a paid assassin and his bodyguard. He was arrested, given a sham trial, and executed as a martyr."

One simply does not have the warped view of reality presented here, and in the case of Cho, unless one has bizarre beliefs dictating that you have the right to kill and wreak havoc if reality isn't flattering those beliefs. It's no different than what motivates Islamist suicide bombers. And it doesn't happen in the minds of atheists and rationalists with good educations in science and a firm grasp, not only on reality, but on the fact that reality isn't obligated to revolve around them.

Scalzi to invade the Creation "Museum"

This is hilarious. Popular blogger and science fiction writer John Scalzi was being bugged by some of his readers to go visit Ken Ham's ludicrous joke down in Kentucky, since it's evidently a very short drive from where Scalzi lives in rural Ohio. Scalzi set up a challenge; he'd agree to go to the "museum," and post a snarky report on his blog, if any fraction of his 25,000 daily readers would collectively donate a grand total of $250, which Scalzi will in turn be donating to Barry Lynn's Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. (Personally I think a donation to the National Center for Science Education might be more apropos in this context, but hey, it's Scalzi's deal, so he can run it however he wants to.)

Pah! $250? That's chump change! Scalzi has raised over $5100. So everybody's happy...except Scalzi. The AU gets a whopping enormous donation, the blogosphere is about to get one of the funniest field reports from the Kentucky Monument to Willful Ignorance ever posted...but of course, now poor John actually has to go. His response to his readers: "Hate. You. All." Yeah, fine, John. Just hurry back, won't you! I can't wait to read about the coconut-eating T. Rexes!

I personally love the idea of using the foolish activities of fundamentalist clots as a vehicle to fund-raise for groups that actually support quality science and who stand against theocracy and ignorance. I wonder what can be done in the Austin area to get some money for the NSCE or other like-minded groups? Maybe sending an atheist to a psychic fair to raise cash for the JREF, or something like that. But hey...don't look at me!

The price of religious tyranny is ruined lives

You remember the Warren Jeffs/Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints scandal, don't you? Sure you do.

As you might recall, Jeffs was nabbed after a couple of years on the run. He ruled his little cult like a tyrant, forcing teenage girls into marriages with men upwards of 50 years of age, or even their own cousins of similar age, and telling them they'd lose their chance at "salvation" if they didn't comply. The FLDS lived in these remote, isolated towns straddling the Arizona-Utah border, and were the classic closed community. Lately they had been building a compound in central Texas, scaring many of the locals with the possibility of another Branch Davidian blowout in the offing. When rescued from the life imposed on them by Jeffs, a number of former FLDS teenagers reportedly had to be taught such basics as how to bathe.

Now there's a new tragedy that's emerged as a result of all this fundie polygamist inbreeding. Babies born to FLDS cultists are afflicted with an extremely rare genetic disorder called fumarase deficiency. According to the news article, it's "an enzyme irregularity that causes severe mental retardation brought on by cousin marriage." Among children born with the condition, "brain cells fail to receive enough fuel to grow, multiply and function properly because of a missing enzyme needed to generate energy from food, causing severe mental retardation and muscle control problems." Lovely. Evidently the condition is so rare out in the real world, where normal people live, that the FLDS community in Arizona can claim fully half the world's cases of fumarase deficiency!

In Jeffs' tinpot holy dictatorship, in addition to being forced into multiple marriages, young people went without education. Needless to say, free inquiry was not allowed. Religious tyranny is the only way you can get a group of people blindly to accept engaging in repugnant and potentially deadly behaviors, all in the belief it's what God wants. Unfortunately, the price for rejecting reason in favor of lunacy is often too high to pay.

Hovind's descent into insanity is complete

Going, going, going....gone. Such is the state of Kent Hovind's mind behind bars. His latest missive on the CSE blog is a bizarre script in which he imagines himself to be in a dialogue with God. This is perhaps the most detailed and explicit first-hand evidence we'll ever get of the extent to which fundamentalist beliefs lead inexorably to actual, irreversible mental illness. Read this one little excerpt, and imagine blustery Terry Jones in the role of God, and a hapless Michael Palin as Kent. Remember, you gotta do the voices.

KH: Lord, I’m outside enjoying Your glorious sunshine on a gorgeous day in South Carolina. I really need the sunshine for my health. Thank you, Lord! What is my next assignment while I’m here?

GOD: One step at a time, son. I’ll guide you. What happened after lunch today?

KH: I was sitting in the sun writing to you and Don came over and sat down to talk. He sure was eager to learn about the Bible. He gladly asked You to forgive his sins and trusted You as Savior.

GOD: Yes, I was there with you. Don is twenty-seven years old. His life will do a complete 1800 turn during the next twenty months in prison. I have big plans for him, son. Thanks for being obedient to my leading, son. Sometimes, I have a hard time getting you to listen to me.

KH: I know, Lord. Sorry about that. I have another question, Lord. Why did you let them more me five hundred miles away from my family?

GOD: I know this is hard for you. How many men in there are away from their families?

KH: Nearly all of them, Lord. Some only see their family once a year—and some not at all. I know what you are going to say, Lord, that now I know how they feel and can be a better witness to them, right?

GOD: Very good, son. You are starting to get the picture!

KH: But, Lord, five hundred miles away?

GOD: You are still in America, son. Would you prefer…Siberia?

KH: Oh, no, South Carolina is just fine! Hey, Lord, why did you let me slip on those steps in Atlanta and bruise my ankle so badly?

GOD: I needed you to see the new prison doctor that just came from India. He knows almost nothing about Me, son. I know you didn’t have much time with him, but you did tell him about your Website. He will look at it and read the “How To Be Saved” article. That will start him on the road to salvation later this year.

I’m sorry about the bruise, but you can’t see the doctor in there unless you are hurt. Would you rather I break it next time—or bruise your head?

KH: No, Lord! The ankle was a great idea.

I guess it was obvious to God that Kent's head has already taken a little too much damage!

Jet-setting, "faith-healing" fraud Hinn still begging for money

This guy just keeps getting more and more vile. Ol' Pastor Benny Hinn, whose bogus "faith-healing" extravangazas were thoroughly exposed in this Canadian television documentary, is claiming that he's four months in arrears on his airtime bills to TBN, which he says total $450,000 each month. As if Paul Crouch, who's entirely complicit with Benny in fleecing the gullible, would ever kick his cash cow pal off the air.

The face of sleaze.

Of course, if Benny's so hard up for cash, what the hell's he doing buying a $46 million Gulfstream jet? What's he doing staying in lavish hotel suites costing up to $4000 a night, and living in a palatial $10 million mansion? If he's so broke, why doesn't he sell off some of his $1000 designer suits and pick up a few things from the Men's Wearhouse instead? Why not trade in his $80,000 Mercedes SUV for a Corolla? Hinn's ministry reportedly raises in the neighborhood of $100 million every year (compare that to the pittance a group like the National Center for Science Education has to subsist on, and feel the steam emerge from your ears), and its finances have gotten the IRS's attention. Really, at a cool hundred mil a year, Benny could meet his broadcasting bills to TBN with ease, and still have $94,600,000 to play with.

Benny whines that it's the evil secular media that distorts his spending. But that isn't the case. Hinn has refused to join the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability. A Christian watchdog group, MinistryWatch.com, has issued a warning about associating with or donating to Hinn's ministries. Among their conclusions:

[Facts presented] on NBC DATELINE – coupled with MinistryWatch.com’s previously stated concerns about Hinn espousing the self-serving “prosperity theology” message – has caused MinistryWatch.com to recommend that donors consider redirecting their gifts to one of the many biblically-based ministries that are not only more transparent in their dealings with the public but also treat donor’s funds as a sacred trust dedicated exclusively for the Lord’s work.

I'll say it again with glee: This swine should be in prison. But I suspect that, unlike Kent Hovind, he's probably just a bit smarter about hiding anything he could get really nailed for from the proper authorities. Sadly, our culture's insistence upon treating religion, no matter how absurd or exploitive the practice of one might be, with "respect" means we can't exactly criminalize the guy for standing up on a stage and lying to idiots that he can cure them of any ailment they've got (including AIDS) as long as the cash buckets are appropriately filled. Am I wrong in insisting that's gotta change?

Only religious "morality" would condone "honor killings"

Hi all. I've had a very busy last couple of weeks, and that's kept me away from blogging here as often as I'm used to. A shame, because there has been plenty of good stuff going on worth discussing. But a number of the other top-notch atheist and science blogs have been covering them just fine.

Today I stumbled upon this piece on CNN that reminded me why I needed to get back in the saddle and do my very small but enjoyable part in the growing atheist pushback against religious horror around the world.

The very concept of "honor killings" ought to be oxymoronic. Naturally, it would be a concept that would find a welcoming home in the grisly world of religion. In England, a Kurdish man has been convicted of the murder of his own daughter, because, apparently, she brought "shame" upon the family by leaving her first husband from an arranged marriage and falling in love with someone else. Only in the diseased and violent world of Islam would falling in love be considered shameful and dishonorable, and strangling your own child be considered right and proper.

Now, please don't waste time in the comments section arguing about how this sort of thing is not indicative of the behavior of all Muslims, how most Muslims are fine folks who aren't terrorists or shoe bombers, and who would find this incident utterly appalling. I know this. In fact, having grown up in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates as a child, and thus surrounded by more Muslims in their native habitat than most Americans would ever dream of, I know it better than many people.

The point I'm raising is that, without something like an extremist religion requiring people to live by perverse distortions of what consitutes "moral" behavior, and backing those benighted ideas up with threats of violence, woe, and divine wrath, you simply would not see this kind of thing going on. Religionists often like to accuse atheists of lacking a moral sense. But who's out there in the world slaughtering their own daughters (or, in the "milder" cases, simply sentencing them to be gang raped) under the notion that one is restoring your family's "honor"? I'll give you a hint. It's not the atheists.

Religion distorts moral precepts by tying them to whether one is or is not making a capricious and vindictive invisible magic being happy. On an even simpler scale, religious morality is about nothing more than obeying a list of rules to the letter in the hopes of winning a spiritual kewpie doll labeled "immortality". Very little is mentioned in religious circles about the actual real-world consequences of good or bad behavior having much of a bearing on whether or not said behavior is moral or immoral. In fundamentalist Christianity, morality is especially confused, because while fundamentalists will bleat all the live long day about how our society's morals have gone to hell in a handbasket, most of them will state in the same breath that salvation is possible only through faith and not "works". In other words, it doesn't matter one whit whether you're a good person or not, all that matters is membership in the club. You'd think this view would make morality an utterly irrelevant topic for Christian fundamentalists, but it wouldn't be the first inconsistency they've preached.

As for this situation...well, let me just say that I'm glad absurd PC ideas about "respecting" religion are still drawing the line at murder. But think of other appalling behaviors that have been enabled because the spectre of religion gave them its support. A prime example would be the Catholic child molestation scandal of a few years back. As Bill Maher pointed out at the time, would any parent entrust the well-being and care of their children to a bunch of aging bachelors if it weren't called religion? Likewise, would any parent go against all of their innate, biological drives towards nurturing and protecting their own children from harm — indeed, to the point of wilfully and gleefully killing them in cold blood — if there weren't a religion providing such perverse concepts as "honor killing" to help numb their consciences to the enormity of their deeds? Sure, there have been child-killings by parents where mere mental illness, and not religion, has been the key factor, such as Susan Smith. But then there are Andrea Yates and Dena Schlosser, two mentally ill women whose religious fervor only exacerbated, rather than corrected, their conditions. If God really existed, would he not have seen what was wrong with the minds of these women, and either fixed their malfunctioning cortexes, or at the very least, done something to save the babies before they were butchered? Oh yeah, I forget. God can't interfere with that "free will" thing. Sorry, kiddies.

Far from providing a sound and rational set of moral precepts to follow, religion most often provides flimsy justifications for people to do whatever they were inclined to do in the first place. In most cases, both religious and non-religious people will do what's right and proper anyway, because we have evolved as a social species, and it's in our genes that group cooperation is what will ensure species survival. But when people wish to do wrong, historically, they've had a good friend in religion to give them all the excuses they need. I fully expect that, in prison, Mahmod Mahmod will be able to lay out his prayer mat and bow to Mecca as often as he likes, secure in the twisted confidence that what he did to his daughter was right and proper, and suffering no pangs of remorse whatsoever, other than to think of the Western secular judicial system that sentenced him as a horribly corrupt tool of Satan. When Dawkins says that a strict religious upbringing can be comparable to child abuse, the sad, wasted life of Banaz Mahmod, whose only "sin" was love, will loom large as an exemplar.

Testing the supernatural

One criticism that is often applied to intelligent design is that it is fundamentally untestable and hence can never be scientific. But is this really true?

The classical notion of God is definitely untestable. A being that is intelligent and omnipotent, and doesn't want to be found for its own reasons, can do whatever it wants to avoid being found. It can hide indefinitely, and it can even plant false evidence to trick people into reaching the wrong conclusion about the origin of the universe. That's kind of what true believers are required to believe, in order to explain away the overwhelming lack of evidence for God.

There is an assumption among ID promoters that they don't need to come up with ways to test the properties of the designer; all they have to do is detect objects that have the property of being designed, and the nature of the designer can remain comfortably outside the domain of scientific inquiry. However, that's not necessarily true unless you assume that the designer is godlike -- which of course they do, even though they lie and say that they don't.

But I don't think that this property of being hidden from investigation should be true of all supernatural events in principle. What does it mean to be supernatural? I think the usual understanding is that it's something that exists outside the realm of the natural universe. But does this mean that a supernatural thing can do absolutely anything with no limits? Not necessarily. If the supernatural thing lives in its own universe, or its own metaverse, then that universe is probably subject to its own rules and limitations. Those rules wouldn't necessarily be the rules of our universe, but they'd be rules nonetheless, and would require anything in that universe to behave in a way that is, at least in principle, also predictable.

Is it possible to test what the rules are? Well, it depends. Really, the interesting question at work is whether the other universe can interact with this one. If it can, then it ought to be testable in some way. If it can't, then there is really no reason to care about it.

In the 90's there was this sci-fi show called "Sliders" about a small group of people who figured out how to "slide" into parallel universes. These universes had parallel versions of all the main characters (except in universes where the characters died or were prevented from being born), and they had separate histories. In one world, the British won the war of independence, and America remained a colony owned by a preserved monarchy. In another world, the patriarchal society was reversed, women ran the world, and men were considered weaker and often objectified as sex objects.

These universes had apparently always existed, but until sliding was discovered, they were completely irrelevant to this one. If you asked me right now, "Is there a universe where Kazim is the popular and successful pastor of a megachurch?" I would say "There could be, but who cares?" For the time being at least, "sliding" is total fantasy. If Pastor Kazim can never meet Atheist Kazim, and vice versa, then we have no effect on each other's lives, even potentially. I don't rule out the possibility entirely. I can imagine it easily. The problem is, there are so many different implausible things for me to imagine, that there's very little point in treating any of them as true without evidence.

If we ever proved that a supernatural entity did exist, it would only be because that entity interacted with the natural universe in some detectable way. Either a physical manifestation of something appears and does something, or we develop technology that can peer into the supernatural realm and see it there. Either way, there is an exchange of information between the two. And if that exists, then suddenly the supernatural thing is detectable by natural means. By some definitions, that would mean that the supernatural thing has become "natural." That's why I'm wary of calling things "supernatural": the definition is vague and kind of fragile.

But if we're slightly less ambitious in our assumptions about the designer's identity, there's no good reason to assume that we couldn't learn about it through experiment. It presumably stuck its finger into our universe at certain points in history, and altered the universe in detectable ways. (Remember, if it didn't do this then it's irrelevant -- just like Pastor Kazim may exist but is currently irrelevant to me.) If it did something we can detect, then we can see what the changes were and come up with likely mechanisms for how it interacts with our universe.

The only reason ID has to remain non-science is because they've set up a boatload of assumptions that make it non-science. As soon as they get creative and come up with hypotheses that can be confirmed or disconfirmed in some way, then they could figure out a way to do some legitimate research.

Just don't hold your breath waiting for that.

The Onion's version of Intelligent Design

Last week on the show I talked about the notion that the new creationist tactic is to say they "believe in evolution" but describe a warped notion of evolution that is essentially indistinguishable from creationism. Closely related is the Intelligent Design technique of mostly accepting the science behind evolution but then insisting that some particular gap needs to be filled in by God.

This week The Onion takes up that theme with I Believe In Evolution, Except For The Whole Triassic Period.

Excerpt:

"In fact, scientific reasoning can explain nearly every stage of life from the Big Bang to the present day. I say "nearly" because the period that scientists claim lasted from roughly 205 to 250 million years ago, commonly known as the Triassic period, was quite obviously the work of the Lord God Almighty.

"Think about it: I'm supposed to believe that the same process that we know slowly changed us from simple bacteria into highly advanced reptiles over the course of the Paleozoic era is also responsible for turning us into highly advanced reptiles with different body lengths? Do these people ever pause to think how ridiculous they sound as they advance these theories?"

Yabba-Dabba-Dumb!: Christianity's war on reality kicks it up a notch

Ken Ham opened his colossal monument to ignorance this weekend, the Creation "Museum", and PZ Myers is hosting a carnival right now of scientific responses to this folly. The NCSE has also issued a statement.

Clearly the anti-science fools in fundamentalist Christian circles will not rest until an entire generation of American students grows up completely miseducated and deceived, and America itself collapses in global stature to the level of a scientific and intellectual third world country. Not only that, but our economy could falter the more science and reason are rejected in America (among the supporters of Republican presidential candidate Sam Brownback are people who deny — get this — that the earth revolves around the sun!), as America fails to advance scientifically and we become just as dependent on Europe and Asia for our medicines, our technology, and our research needs as we currently are on the Middle East for our oil. (I know that last bit sounds slippery-slope-ish, but come on, who ever thought we'd see people willingly pump $25 million into something like this?)

Finally, the stereotype of Christians as being just plain less intelligent than everyone else is powerfully reinforced. In the end, that may be the only bit of fact this "museum" promulgates.

Cletus and Clem Clodhopper enjoyed their trip to the Creation Museum this weekend, and reported they learned a lot. "Ah cain't read much 'sept comic books, so lookin at the big plastic dinersores was just like goina collidge, 'sept better, cuz I dint hafta read!" boasted Clem. Cletus particularly appreciated being able to spend a Saturday away from the family farm, which he shares with his mother/girlfriend and about 23 of his brothers/sons and sisters/aunts/daughters. "Mostly ah look forward to the weekend cuz after ah muck out the stables Pappy lets me blow the goat. Ah never thought ah'd get no schoolin but now ah done gone to the museum, I got alla mah schoolin in one day! Praise Jesus!"

What kind of atheist are you?

Find out. Here's me.

You scored as a Scientific Atheist. These guys rule. They know the rules of debate, the Laws of Thermodynamics, and can explain evolution in fifty words or less. More concerned with how things are than how they should be, these are the people who will bring us into the future. Scientific Atheist 100% Militant Atheist 83% Apathetic Atheist 58% Angry Atheist 50% Spiritual Atheist 50% Agnostic 33% Theist 8% What kind of atheist are you? created with QuizFarm.com

Hovind's mind is beginning to crumble

There are signs emerging that Kent Hovind is starting to deteriorate between the ears ("Whaddaya mean, starting to?" you're saying, I know) as a result of his incarceration. His latest letter from the pen posted on the Creation Science Evangelism blog is a bizarre, self-pitying bit of blather in which he refers to God as the "master," Jesus as the "woodsman," evolution as a "big oak" and himself as the "ax". He then goes off in a profoundly weird rant, following a "why hast thou forsaken me" motif.

I mean, get a load of this (spelling errors included):

Dear Woodsman,

Why have you done this? We were doing so well felling tress for the Master’s house and you quit chopping with me in the middle of cutting that big oak. Why? I was doing my best. I never flew off the handle. I cut as deep as I could every swing. What did I do wrong?

Why do you have me clamped in this vice? I can’t move! I can’t chop wood here. I was designed for chopping wood. I love it! Please don’t leave me clamped in this vice. I feel pressure on my sides that I’ve never felt before. I can handle the pressure on my cutting edge. Go ahead. Chop with me all day long. I can take it. Actually, I love it!

Now what? No! Wait! Why are you grinding and filing off part of me? Why would you take away pieces of the most effective part of me—my cutting edge?

Woodsman, the Master needs the trees cut! This delay is holding up the job we were doing for Him! Please stop grinding on me and get me out of this vice. I want to go back to work. I love cutting wood. Ouch! You are hurting me!

Woodsman, are you listening to me? Do you know what you are doing?

The Ax

This is the kind of thing you read, and then sit there quietly for a second, before exhaling and thinking "...Wow!"

Hovind is disintegrating. When he's released, it is likely he will have to undergo treatment of some kind in a mental health facility. He may even have to be remanded to such a facility before his release. I don't feel sorry for him in the least for who he's been and what he's done. But it's a reassuring sign, I suppose, that his influence has considerably waned, and may even be considered negligible. In the "deuling polls" matter discussed a few days ago, the "Free Hovind" petition still has fewer than 100 signatures, many of which are pranks, while the "Keep Him Locked Up" counter-petition has over 1100. He's lost his fan base except for all but the stupidest and most deluded, and now he's losing his marbles.

Because goofing on YEC's is just fun!

Young Earth Creationists are not exactly the brightest lights on the tree, as we all know. And the dimmest bulbs among them have to be Kent Hovind's dwindling fan club.

In the way creationists in general think that facts will change to conform to beliefs, Hovind supporters have whipped up one of these stupid online petitions in the hopes of getting him pardoned and released. If there has ever been a case in the history of the internet where an online petition has impacted or changed — well — anything, I haven't heard about it. But to think the Florida criminal justice system would actually reverse a felony conviction and prison sentence on the basis of a handful of people signing an online petition is a particularly pitiful brand of stupidity. I mean, you'd have to be stupid enough to believe the earth is only 6000 years old or something to believe that!

Naturally, the atheist and science blogosphere has been having some fun at these poor fools' expense, just as they did with that numbskulled Christianity Today poll a few days back. A few people have posted phony signatures to the "Free Hovind" petition, but I, like PZ, would discourage this. Hell, it's just mean, like taking candy from a baby. The better choice for a mocking response has been the "Keep Hovind in Jail!" counter-petition, which, as of this morning, has 843 signatures to the pro-Hovind poll's 53 (and some of those 53, as I indicated, are pranks). The YEC's who started the "Free Kent" petition are aware of the counter-petition, and have gone into full "Mommy mommy, the monsters under the bed are trying to eat me!" mode.

Now of course, a key difference is that the people who started the "Keep Hovind in Jail!" petition know online petitions are bogus. The reason for the counter-petition is to give the poor deluded dimwits who still have the wool pulled over their eyes where Hovind is concerned a blunt reality check. The man was a liar and a con artist, a schemer and a deliberate crook. And those fine Christians who think he actually told them the truth about dinosaurs and the age of the earth are the victims of his most egregious and inexcusable con, and their views are not in the mainstream here.

Yes, sometimes it seems mean to pound on the religiously deluded and uneducated. But sometimes a little "tough love" is needed. Signing your name to "Keep Hovind in Jail!" isn't really like participating in an "iPetition." Think of it more as an "iIntervention".

Creationism Evolves: Intelligent Design and Theistic Evolution

Today on the show: Intelligent Design.

I'm pulling together some topics I have talked about in the past. For more information, see these pages:

• The history of the "Wedge Strategy"
• My review of Darwin's Black Box
• My report on the Texas State Board of Education hearings, September 2003
• Judge John E. Jones' decision on Kitzmiller et al v Dover
• Barbara Forrest talks about her role in Kitzmiller v Dover (explaining the Pandas and People switcheroo)
  
• PZ Myers explains the rebranding of Intelligent Design
• A synopsis of the "new" creationism: Magic Man done it!

Another fun atheism poll

Do vote, won't you?

---

Update — Monday 11:30 AM: After the poll results ended up looking like this...

...Christianity Today took the poll down. Guess they're gonna take their ball an' go home!

Could the Bible be ruled "indecent" in Hong Kong?

This is hilarious. More than 800 Hong Kong citizens are pushing to have the Bible legally classified as indecent material. In actuality, this is all by way of making a point about freedom of speech and of the press. Recently a column in a university newspaper containing frank discussions of deviant sex practices like bestiality was deemed indecent by the ominously-named Obscene Articles Tribunal. In reaction, the complaints about the excessive sexual and violent content of the Bible were filed. I have to admit, the idea of two girls getting their father drunk and screwing him, and all on the orders of God, to boot, might not go over well with many of today's proponents of Biblical "morality." But that, I'm sure, will remain on the list of Bible stories they don't read to you in Sunday School.

It's still all up in the air — and probably not likely; as Christopher Hitchens and others have pointed out lately, you can get away with anything if you slap the label "religion" on it — whether or not the Tribunal will agree with the complaints and actually declare the Bible an indecent publication. But I have to admit the thought of this makes me giggle:

If the Bible is ... classified as "indecent" by authorities, only those over 18 could buy the holy book and it would need to be sealed in a wrapper with a statutory warning notice.

I'm sure Larry Flynt is smiling.

In which everyone's irony meters explode yet again

The latest funny thing I've gotten in my inbox from the American Family Association is a plug for a low-budget Christian movie called Flywheel, an earlier effort, broadcast on TBN back in 2003, from the producers of theatrical release Facing the Giants. Reading the plot synopsis, I wonder if ol' Don Wildmon saw a little too much of himself in the description of the protagonist.

This movie is about a used car salesman, Jay Austin (Alex Kendrick), who uses his smiling face and hasty promises to cover up his dishonesty and manipulation. He does everything his way until his true character is exposed and he becomes disgusted by the masks he wears and the lies he tells.

Gee. Except for that last bit, it could be Wildmon's life story!

What still hasn't been reported about the bomber

The would-be family planning clinic bomber Paul Ross Evans was indicted today on a number of charges, including attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction. He got most of the materials for his bomb at a local Wal-Mart and used his credit card for the purchase. It didn't take too much effort to solve the crime. He faces a potential sentence of life in prison. Apparently, he realized the seriousness of his little stunt while awaiting trial and he made a suicide attempt.

It might be interesting to readers to know that this event occurred in Austin Texas, the home town of the Atheist Experience. While Austin is a great place to live, we have our nuts, too.

The press has been eerily silent about the motivations of this guy. Anybody who pays the slightest bit of attention to the culture war knows that the only people who care about making trouble for family planning clinics are the hard-core Christian conservatives. I'll bet anyone that this guy had some religious indoctrination along the way. I wonder if he didn't get some of that faith-based programming while he was in prison earlier. I seriously doubt the mainstream media will look into the question, given their pro-religion bias. Believers certainly don't like to be confronted with the reality that belief (denying reality) has bad consequences. It's bad for newspaper sales.

The press has reported that the guy has no known affiliations to terrorist groups, but I think perhaps it's time we broaden the definition of terrorist groups to include some more of these religious extremists. It seems that there is some confusion about what kind of crime the Department of Homeland Security is supposed to go after. If this sort of bombing isn't an example of domestic terrorism, I don't know what is. Meanwhile, DHS is apparently charged with going after child predators, yet the leaders of the largest pedophile organization in modern history still flaunt the law, impede investigations, and roam free. Can anybody guess who they are? Perhaps it's time we stop giving religious believers a free ride in the morality department. After all, aren't they supposed to adhere to a higher standard?

Back to the Paul Ross Evans story, I can't help but point out the irony of "pro life" people trying to plot murders. "Pro life" seems to be little more than a marketing device. If you believe that human bodies are just soul traps, that souls are the essence of a person, and that it's the ultimate destiny of the soul to escape the trap, you're naturally going to de-value human life. Not surprisingly, countries with more believers also have more suicides and murders. ...Oh, and higher abortion rates, too. (Too many ironies for one paragraph. That last point really calls for a separate post.) You can bet that Paul Ross Evans believes that humans have souls. He might even believe that he'll have a special place in Heaven because of his actions.

I have yet to get a definite theological answer on what becomes of the alleged souls of aborted embryos, since Christians seem to think they have them. This question is especially important now that the Vatican has backpedaled on their invention of limbo. If those little buggers go automatically to heaven, then maybe killing them isn't so bad, as Andrea Yates correctly concluded. If they go to hell, as original sin would indicate, then we have to wonder how Christians live with the fact that their "gift" of free will from a benevolent God is the cause of the infinite torture of innocent little babies.

I want a front-row seat to this!

I almost wish I were a musician simply so that I could start a band called Satanic Sodomite Zeitgeist!

Can we get religion to just ... stop?

Here's a sobering report from the front lines of battle in Gaza City between Hamas and Fatah. In this case, the front lines are right at the door of this reporter's apartment, where he spends entire nights with his wife and child huddling in the outer corridor because bullets are blowing out their apartment windows. No matter how crappy your life is right now, I guarantee you've never had it as bad as what these people have to go through every day. And make no mistake, this is a religious war. You've had these two groups of people, Israelis and Palestinians, and they've been killing each other without end over possession of lands believed to be theirs by divine mandate. As a result, horror ensues. If religion did not play such a central role in this area, the hatred and tribalism and attitude of "hey, you have a beard, I have to shoot you!" would not exist. It's as simple as that.

People, could you just please please stop with the religion thing?

Just stop it! Fuck!

Remembering Falwell

Was out to lunch at Cici's when word came over the idiot box that Falwell's ticket had in fact been punched. Fox News currently has nonstop coverage, as if Falwell was some kind of head of state (and I guess in many ways he was), and naturally, spinning a complete hagiography. Just as naturally, there was no mention of what you're going to read here. Remember that the preacherman who's being hailed as "compassionate" by Fox's army of sycophants once made the compassionate remark that "If you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being." Guess that must be some of that Christian Love™ we keep hearing about.

Ganked from the ACT UP site: A partial transcript of Falwell and Robertson on The 700 Club, September 13, 2001:

JERRY FALWELL: And I agree totally with you that the Lord has protected us so wonderfully these 225 years. And since 1812, this is the first time that we've been attacked on our soil and by far the worst results. And I fear, as Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense, said yesterday, that this is only the beginning. And with biological warfare available to these monsters — the Husseins, the Bin Ladens, the Arafats — what we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact — if, in fact — God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.

PAT ROBERTSON: Jerry, that's my feeling. I think we've just seen the antechamber to terror. We haven't even begun to see what they can do to the major population.

JERRY FALWELL: The ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this.

PAT ROBERTSON: Well yes.

JERRY FALWELL: And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way — all of them who have tried to secularize America — I point the finger in their face and say "you helped this happen."

PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I totally concur, and the problem is we have adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government. And so we're responsible as a free society for what the top people do. And, the top people, of course, is the court system.

JERRY FALWELL: Pat, did you notice yesterday the ACLU and all the Christ-haters, People For the American Way, NOW, etc. were totally disregarded by the Democrats and the Republicans in both houses of Congress as they went out on the steps and called out on to God in prayer and sang "God Bless America" and said "let the ACLU be hanged". In other words, when the nation is on its knees, the only normal and natural and spiritual thing to do is what we ought to be doing all the time — calling upon God.

PAT ROBERTSON: Amen!

Falwell later attempted an insincere apology for these remarks.

Another brilliant insight from the Falwellian Hit Parade was his famous remark about the Antichrist: "Who will the Antichrist be? I don't know. Nobody else knows. Is he alive and here today? Probably. Because when he appears during the Tribulation period he will be a full-grown counterfeit of Christ. Of course he'll be Jewish. Of course he'll pretend to be Christ. And if in fact the Lord is coming soon, and he'll be an adult at the presentation of himself, he must be alive somewhere today."

Aaaaand — cue another insincere apology.

Then we get around to Falwell's ludicrous antiscience ravings, such as the time he dismissed global warming as "Satan's attempt to redirect the church's primary focus" from evangelism to environmentalism. Let's see...here we have a majority of the world's scientists agreeing that human activity has led to measurable climate change, we have Al Gore appearing in an intensively researched documentary bringing these facts to the public, and this is in turn dismissed by a clown who thought it was all a big prank on the part of a mythical being with horns and a pitchfork and a pointy tail. Does lunacy or idiocy describe it better? Discuss.

I'd like to think that things will change with Falwell's passing. But of course, fundamentalist tribalism, hate and intolerance, and its concomitant superstitious tomfoolery will continue unabated. Who will check out next — Pat, Tim, DJK — and how many contortions will the lapdogs in the mainstream media twist themselves into, to convince viewers of what shining examples of unimpeachable rectitude they were?

Falwell found unconscious in office, rushed to hospital

An alert on CNN has just mentioned this. Yeah, we hate this guy. He's an anti-Semitic, homophobic scumbag who blamed Americans he didn't like for "allowing" 9/11 to happen. But we don't gloat over people who might be passing out and dying. I'll leave that to the Coulters and Phelpses of the world; they do it so well. Every time someone dies there are friends and families involved, and we hope they are spared any tragedy.

But this event does bring up an interesting point in regards to fundamentalism in America: the old guard is getting old indeed. Falwell, Robertson (who's had prostate cancer), D. James Kennedy (who's been hospitalized lately), Paul Crouch and Tim LaHaye are all well past that three-score and ten. When they're gone, what will the next generation look like? Harsher and more openly theocratic, subtler, or just more of the same?

Somehow, this completely escaped our notice

Christopher Hitchens debated Marvin Olasky in Austin last night, and for some reason, no one in the local atheist community — neither in the ACA nor in the CFI-Austin group — seems to have known it was going to happen at all. According to the brief and rather shallow article in the Statesman, it sounds like it was one of those "lots of heat but little light" affairs, with Hitchens deilvering his usual acid-tongued snark (which can be quite entertaining in its way; I'm about three chapters into God Is Not Great and am enjoying it much more than I anticipated), and Olasky whining about what a big meanie Hitchens is. If anyone reading this actually did manage to go see them, we'd love a detailed report.

A right way, and a wrong way, to protest Ken Ham's fantasy "museum"

On the one hand, I fully believe that Answers in Genesis' new "museum" of creationist quackery in Kentucky (as if the south didn't have to deal with enough ignorant-hick stereotypes) ought to go down in flames as any monument to folly and ignorance should.

But I worry about the effect a formal protest will have, which, I think, will be next to none at all in terms of letting the public know about real science, and instead give Ham and his other little Hamsters plenty of material to work with in order to mount one of their famous "Oooo, the godless Nazi evilutionists don't want us around because they know we're telling the truth" lines of nonsense. Anyone who has ever dealt with creationists will know that they lie and lie and lie again, as if they are drawing from a bottomless well of rank dishonesty which is entirely justified, to them, by the belief they're saving people from their God's hell. Lies are to creationists as water is to fish. Even a court of law will not stem the tidal wave of their falsehoods, as the Dover trial proved.

Ham and his ilk have a common ancestor: P.T. Barnum. And this "museum" is little more than the present-day equivalent of the Cardiff Giant rolling tent show. Not only are there thousands of uneducated people who will lap up Ham's nonsense as eagerly as people lapped up the Giant hoax back in the 1800's, but they'll be all too eager to buy the conspiracy/persecution theories offered by Ham once supporters of real science allow themselves to be made angry and come out with signs. All Ham has to do is tell the flock that the protestors hate Jesus and are out to take away everybody's Bibles and turn their children gay, and the airlocks will slam shut on everyone's ears and minds.

I say if we're going to do this, is ought to be with mockery. (And maybe that's the protest's real plan.) Don't just stand around holding a sign. Go into the "museum," tour it, and ask the tour guides (if they have those) pointed scientific questions they won't be able to answer. Challenge them on their knowledge. Every time a creationist used to call the TV show when I was host, and claim to be very knowledgable about evolution, I'd ask him a simple Biology 101 question: what's the difference between a genotype and a phenotype? I never got a correct answer, and mostly got indignant huffing and puffing. (This isn't to say that no creationists know the answer, only the ones who called us.) The point is to let these people know that evolutionary biology is a vast field of science they just don't know. And that actually knowing facts should not be a scary thing. Remember the myth of Eden: the tree Eve ate the fruit from was — all together now — the Tree of Knowledge. That myth is at the root of all fundamentalist antiscience right down to the present day. Reality must be denied in favor of "faith," because that's what keeps the sheep in line and the collection plates full. Knowledge = bad = going to hell, Belief = virtue = going to Heaven.

That's a seriously emotionally powerful meme to have to overcome with, you know, boring stuff like evidence.

I think it'd be a good exercise to come up with funny ways to demolish the "museum" with satire, and then submit those ideas to people actually planning to attend the protest. If our side is shown to be confident in the facts, rather than being scared of a potential threat to "Darwinist dogma" (because remember, that's always how the creationists frame it), then a good dose of sarcasm and wit will go much further than you'd think. Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert and South Park hit bullseyes as often as they do for a reason. Their way of treating things that are stupid really works. We ought to model after their example.

Carnival of the Godless #66

Welcome to The Atheist Experience, and the 66th Carnival of the Godless. We are proud to be hosting this installment, which I confess I wish had an extra digit in its issue number.

If you've never read our blog before, or seen the Atheist Experience TV show, or listened to the Non-Prophets podcast, or read the Iron Chariots wiki, I think your visit here will add quite a lot to your online atheism activities. I hope that you will excuse the liberal dose of self-pimpage, but below is a quick "best-of" compendium of AE blog entries from the last few months, which I'm sure you'll enjoy reading and will perhaps persuade you to bookmark us. As one person of discriminating taste to another, I'm sure you will!

• First, you can read all my coverage of this year's The Amaz!ng Meeting 5, hosted by the James Randi Educational Foundation in Las Vegas back in January, by clicking here.
• You can also watch several video files of Atheist Experience TV episodes by choosing this tag.
• Pat Robertson predicted the US would fall victim to a nuclear — or is that "nucular"? — terrorist strike this year, and I had, shall we say, a little fun with it. Previously appeared in COTG #57.
• TV show host Matt Dillahunty has a word or two in response to the hysterical overreaction by some Christian groups upon the discovery of — gasp! — an actual real-live atheist holding public office! Clearly the fall of the republic is at hand, and the barbarians are at the gates!
• Stephen Rogers crucifies the Crucifixion.
• In our most linked-to and highly-trafficked post (over 1000 hits from Pharyngula alone), we present a series of YouTube clips revealing Kent Hovind's phone calls from jail. They display the infamous YEC's delusions and disconnection from reality to a truly sad degree. A number of comments have also been left by Hovind defenders, some earnest, some sad, most just as deluded as Hovind's own ravings. As PZ Myers described them, these tapes are a real window into fundamentalist creationist pathology.
• Stephen again, presenting an example of what he calls "half-hearted evangelism."
• I walk all over a popular Christian retort, that there are no such things as atheists, or that atheism presupposes theism, here. Ray Comfort likes to use this one a lot. It's as dumb as most of what usually comes out of his mouth.
• Don Baker examines The "Thou Shalt Not Judge" Mind Game.
• And last but not least, me again, refuting the "appeal to free will" rebuttal to the Problem of Evil.

---

Now onto this edition's submissions. Thanks to all the fine godless bloggers who've participated. And yes, I actually read all of these before adding them to the list below, because, hey, blog carnivals are all about reading great stuff! Please note these are in no particular order. Just peruse at will. There's a load of stuff here to choose from, and it's full of awesome!

• In this hilarious post, "The Continuing Saga of the Bible Faith Handkerchief," Akusai takes you on a guided tour of a preposterous, money-grubbing Christian pamphlet called "The Seed Principle," which is so laughably egregious it could only be viewed positively by someone who aggressively refuses to think in any way, shape or form. Posted at Action Skeptics. Akusai was one of the readers here who participated in the now-legendary comment threads in which we had to deal with a fundamentalist troll suffering from some pretty profound personality disorders. His whole blog is really good, particularly this post about his efforts to hold off a planned visit to his hometown by crazed hatemonger Fred Phelps.
• Mike Haubrich asks: "Atheists: Persecuted or Merely Annoyed?", posted at Tangled Up in Blue.
• Stephen Littau discusses "The Mysterious Ica Stones", another fraud championed by some YEC's to bolster their anti-evolution claims. Posted at Fearless Philosophy For Free Minds.
• In rebuttal to religionists who claim only their fantasies can lend a person a sense of wonder and awe about life, the universe, and everything, Greta Christina presents "Dancing Molecules: An Atheist Moment of Transcendence" posted at Greta Christina's Blog. Greta finds much that is awe-inspiring in the fact "that out of atoms and molecules, here we were managing to create the experience of joy."
• John mocks the dogmatic predispositions of Christian apologist Alvin Plantinga in "Plantinga and the Xtians" posted at hell's handmaiden, and wonders how foolish actual scientists would be if they adopted Plantinga's methods of arguing.
• Michael DePaula offers three articles posted at MichaelDePaula.com.
  • "Letter to a certain christian radio talk show host" reprints, as the title indicates, part of an e-mail exchange with syndicated Christian radio host Todd Friel.
  • "The little radio station that couldn't, then could" discusses the efforts of another tiny Christian radio station to get off the ground.
  • And finally, Michael gives us his own personal testimonial in "Why I am an atheist."
• adam H from Athens, GA, wishes the self-imposed barriers we use to divide each other could just go away in "...and that's how we'd live without a curse" posted at ...And That's How You Live With A Curse.
• vjack asks, "What Have I Learned About Evangelical Christians?" and tells us, over at Atheist Revolution.
• Shalini, about whom Dembski sycophant DaveScot once made a nasty racist wisecrack over at The Sandwalk, presents "The Rapture and the usual Biblical plethora of contradictions" over at Scientia Natura: Evolution and Rationality.
• steppen wolf has some ideas on how atheists can disabuse people of their prejudices against us in his "framing atheism challenge - part 1", posted at the skeptical alchemist.
• The Atheist Jew has some witty things to say about a woman who didn't like something she read on a coffee cup in "Starbucks, Believers Don't Like It When You Provoke Thought" posted at THE ATHEIST JEW. However, of equal interest is a pompous and completely off-topic screed in the comments by some believer named Raymond, who hasn't, so far, had the stones to stick around and respond to other commenters' rebuttals of his tautological nonsense.
• For those of you in the mood for some Biblical exegesis, Avery Archer has a very good piece: "The Philosopher vs. the Biblical Fundamentalist" posted at The Space of Reasons. Got some good discussion happening in his comments thread, too.
• dikkii investigates "The meaning of life" (not that again!) over at Dikkii's Diatribe.
• alun presents Religious Virulence posted at Clioaudio, saying, "One feature of the religion as virus idea is that, if its vertically transmitted, it would be expected to evolve to become more benign. Recent research suggests that viral fitness is not related to virulence."
• Toby Selwyn brings us Book Review: The Dawkins Delusion, by Alister McGrath posted at A Load of Bright, saying, "This is my review of Alister McGrath's book The Dawkins Delusion, which was a response to The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. I show how McGrath fails to achieve his declared goal of refuting Dawkins' arguments."
• Prup (aka Jim Benton) offers a compelling series of posts from over at Debunking Christianity. In a personal email to me, Jim says, "...it's an honor for a 60-yr old autodidact to have been invited to join the crew there. I just wanted to say that these are the opening of what will be a five-part series on ethics. (Part I and Part II A are up and being submitted, but I hope to have Part II B up before next Sunday, so if you mention it as well — assuming you choose to include them at all — I'd appreciate it.) And if you mention that almost any post on DC is worth noting, and especially the comments sections, which have become serious dialogues, not just collections of one-paragraph comments, I'd also appreciate that. I don't know if John [Loftus] is submitting his pieces on slavery, but they deserve honorable mention." So, dig in!
  • ...Unless a Better Be Provided. I: "Moral Creationism"
  • ...Unless a Better Be Provided. IIA: OT Stories. Are the morals moral?
  • ...Unless a Better Be Provided. IIA (section 2)
  • ...Unless a Better Be Provided. IIA:(section 3)
  • ...Unless a Better Be Provided. IIA: Finale
• Aaron Powell informs us of "What Atheism Offers: Justifying a Life’s Purpose" over at Symbolic Order.
• Mark A. Rayner warns us to look out for the "Forty-seven signs of the Apocalypse (#42)" posted at the skwib.
• Does the world need a Christian version of Linux? Someone seems to think so, and No More Mr. Nice Guy! lives up to his name by snarking all over it in "The Official Linux of Jesus"!
• MartinC gleefully offers "...a quick piece I wrote to tease the IDiots," in "Is Intelligent Design Anti-Christian?", which you can read at Sneer Review. I imagine it would indeed make Casey Luskin sneer!
• Here's another local boy I'm happy to promote! Austin Atheist cautions believers — particularly those dazzling clods Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort — "How Not To Persuade An Atheist #1: Bypassing the Intellect," posted at ΛUSTIN ΛTHEIST ΛNØNYMØUS. He tells us, "This is the first of a series of post I hope will continue well into the future. I may have one or two more by the time the next COTG rolls around. So, I might submit more than one. I'll leave it to you to post them all or only the first. See you there!" This is a very funny and entertaining post!
• Dale Smith critiques the poor attempts by New Age huckster Deepak Chopra to refute Richard Dawkins in a very good post, "Chopra v. Dawkins," over at faith in honest doubt.
• In a very fine piece, Jeff Hebert tries to help religious parents overcome the anxiety they might feel when a non-believing child "comes out," and helps to dispel stereotypes about atheism. Go read "So Your Child Told You He or She Is An Atheist — Now What?" over at A Nerd's Country Journal.
• Also in the parenting vein, David Johnson warns theists to "Keep Your God Away From My Child!" at The Jesus Myth. I think he means it.
• Richard discusses "The Problem of Unfreedom" at Philosophy, et cetera. As he describes it, it's "a new twist on the old 'Problem of Evil' argument against God's existence: Argues that cognitive deficiencies impede our free will in a way that's inconsistent with the existence of a perfect being." While I think Richard's critique of free will is imperfect, it provides a good springboard for discussion, and there are some worthwhile replies in his comments thread.
• An Anonymous Coward (not a religious troll, as a matter of fact) discusses the similarities between belief in angels and space aliens in "Basis For Belief, Part Five: Angels and Aliens" over at Confessions of an Anonymous Coward.
• CapeTownDissentator is, like all sensible people, bemused and embarrassed that after 150 years, Americans still question a scientific principle as fundamental as biological evolution, and that we can get three presidential wannabees admitting outright to not believing in it on television, in "No More Monkey Business" posted at The Dissentators.

---

And that's a wrap for this edition! Submit your blog article to the next edition of Carnival of the Godless, which will be hosted on May 27 by Letters from a Broad, using the carnival submission form. Past posts and future hosts can be found at the blog carnival index page. Thanks again to all the participants this time, and we'll see you readers back here again very soon.

I understand it's a "religion of peace"

Check this out. Pakistan, I am told, is our friend in the War on Terror. That's what they say. Bush says it, and we know what a stand-up guy he is, so it must be true. And we know the Bush administration takes a hard line against those Islamofascists, too, because they're always saying so on Fox News. And we know how fair and balanced they are, so it must be true. I mean, the Islamofascists are why we can't leave Iraq, right? Because that's where they all are, and so if we leave, well then, they're just going to swarm the globe in their millions, and it'll be Islamofascism here, Islamofascism there, Islamofascism everywhere!

So I wonder just how our fine, courageous, standing-up-to-the-terrorists president is going to react if our good fellow-Islamofascist-terrorist-fighting friends in Pakistan pass this bill that would make it a capital crime for a Muslim man to decide he wanted to leave the faith. Hey, at least they're going easy on women, who would only get life in prison. I suppose this is what passes for "progressive" in an Islamic country. After all, Islamofascists aren't known for making women's lives very pleasant. I mean, for real. Like, if you're a woman, and you live in an Islamic country, it pretty much sucks to be you. So for women who want to leave Islam to get off so lightly with a mere life sentence seems to indicate that Islam has made a bold step forward into the 17th century, at least.

But come on. Really. To pass a law saying that we'll fucking kill you if you don't want to belong to our religion any more is pretty barbaric even for Islam, which is already just about the most barbaric belief system any bunch of barbarians ever practiced barbarism under. And I say this as someone who has lived in the Middle East, known plenty of the "good" Muslims, knows what good and kind people they can be, and remains utterly nonplussed that decent folks can continue to live under the yoke of such a totalitarian, anti-human, tyrannical religion. Hell, maybe that's the problem that has motivated Pakistan's desire to draft this law. You wouldn't think they'd need it if there weren't the real threat of mass defections by good Muslims who have concluded they simply cannot stand by and be part of something so evil any more.

Well, I'm sure Bush'll give ol' Musharraf what-for over this. Won't he? He will, won't he? Sure he will.

A good excuse not to swallow!

A study that will no doubt transform some religious fundamentalists into ardent supporters of scientific research overnight finds that oral sex puts people at high risk of throat cancer. HPV infection seems to be the big culprit, again, lending more support to the vaccine that fundies have vocally opposed. So expect a renewed vigor to be applied to opposition to the HPV vaccine. The Landover Baptist Church could very well do good business in these. If good Christians don't want their little girls to grow up to be fluffers, then by all that's good and holy, keep them away from modern medicine!

In the meantime, I'm sure all socially conscious women out there will rush to get the vaccine as soon as possible — for the pubic, erm, the public good, don't you know. After all, a humming society is a happy society! Or something like that.

Abortion still condemned by head of church that enabled rapist pedophiles

Yes, I suppose if you abort them now, it makes it hard to sodomize them later.

Joseph Ratzinger, known to millions of Catholics around the world as "the Pope," has immediately touched off what melodramatic journalists love to call "a firestorm of controversy" over his condemnation of politicians upholding reproductive rights. He has said in effect that Catholic politicians who do not take a stand against abortion have basically excommunicated themselves and should not receive communion, a mad creepy ritual in which believers drink wine and eat little crackers and imagine themselves to be eating Jesus's flesh and sipping his blood. Again, the moral confusion of the Vatican is enough to make your head reel. What possible system can condemn abortion but sweep pedophilia under the rug and hold entire services for people to perform pretend-cannibalism? (Yes yes, I know they don't see it that way, but that doesn't lessen the bizarreness quotient.) And they call us "moral relativists."

Ratzinger's remarks were occasioned by his first visit to Latin America, an area populated by almost half the world's Catholics, and yet one which is undergoing a sea change where women's rights are concerned. In Mexico, they've just legalized abortion. The Vatican is losing followers to Protestantism, particularly this fad called "liberation theology". (Would that they were losing more to rationalism, but hey, you know, baby steps.) Liberation theology in particular drives Ratzo crazy. Part of what he is trying to do in his Latin tour is jerk a few million leashes and scare all the backsliders back into line.

Amusingly, the response from other prominent Catholics is to scramble to "clarify" Ratzinger's remarks. This is funny, as I always thought it was part of the Catholic rulebook that their "Pope" is supposed to be God's mouthpiece and thus infallible. But Papal infallibility doesn't exactly seem to be in vogue in a part of the world where hardline adherence to the most intractible and medieval Catholic doctrines about sexuality could prompt even more mass walkouts then the Church has already suffered there.

This pope's apparent candor can get him in trouble, said John L. Allen Jr., a reporter with the National Catholic Reporter. "Benedict doesn't seem to distinguish when he is speaking as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and when he is speaking as the head of the Roman Catholic Church."

Oh, there's a difference? I thought that once Ratzinger got Popified, he wasn't a mere cardinal any longer. But what does a heathen like me know about it? I must confess I have little interest in the carryings-on of a gang of medievalists who like to dress up in funny robes, give themselves pompous titles, and declaim as if they had any authority over anyone or any expertise to speak on any subject other than their storybook. I might as well take an interest in what a bunch of LARPers tra-la-la-ing about the woods in tights and chain mail and frilly blouses pretending to be Robin Hood and His Band of Merry Men have to say about abortion or human rights or geopolitics, for all that's worth.

Another humorous comment from Ratzo: God, unlike what most Christians have been led to believe, is not in fact omnipotent.

"In all parts of the world, there are those who don't want to hear," Benedict said on the plane. "Naturally, even our Lord did not manage to make everyone hear."

Naturally? Naturally. So there you have it, from his Infallible Mouthpieceness Himself: there's something God cannot do. Ta-ta, omnipotence.

It would appear that, while most of Central and South America remain devoutly Catholic, there is growing courage amongst those who would stand against the policies and practices of an oppressive Church, that, ever since the pedophilia scandal of a few years ago, has as far as I'm concerned lost any moral authority it ever had to lecture anybody on anything. As Mexican legislator Leticia Quezada, herself one of Ratzo's self-excommunicating Catholics, and one of the sponsors of Mexico's new abortion law, has said, "I voted to address a crisis of public health…. I will continue to be a believer. The church has no right to interfere in my conscience." Go, girl! It's high time — centuries overdue, in fact — for the Vatican and its gang of thugs to be handed their walking papers by the human race. Let's sweep the bums out, turn the Sistine Chapel into an art museum, and move forward with education and humanitarian aid efforts for delevoping countries that aren't based on scaring them into submission to men in robes and their invisible magic capo in the sky.

Hovind in the hole

Word is getting around the blogosphere that creationist Kent Hovind, currently doing time for violating numerous tax laws, has been thrown into solitary confinement, though reasons for this are obscure. One explanation is that Hovind has been trying to run his own prison ministry without approval, though to what degree that is true is up in the air.

Given Hovind's penchant for portraying himself as an innocent martyr to the faith who's being victimized by an evil government trying to silence him for preaching "the truth" about evolution, and the brainless eagerness of Hovind's wide-eyed followers to parrot this self-serving delusion (seriously, check the comments in the link above, as well as some of those that have turned up even here), it's likely any story that comes along as to why Hovind has been so incarcerated — if he even has — will have been thoroughly run through CSE's distortion machine.

Naturally, I feel about as much sympathy for Hovind, let alone his claims of martyrdom, as I do for Paris Hilton. Neither an imaginary deity nor spoiled-brat celebutard status puts anyone above the law.

Maybe not the best sales pitch...?

Uh....What exactly do they do to you at these services!?

Atheist Experience #495-496 double feature

In the interests of catching up, two more shows for your pleasure.

---

Atheist Experience #495: 4/8/07. Ashley Perrien talks about god & evolution polls and the local $500 non-abortion incentive.

---

Atheist Experience #496: 4/15/07. Deconversion II. Tracie Harris continues to discuss the process through which believers become non-believers.

Austin's Joe Zamecki interviewed in Telegraph article

The ACA's Joe Zamecki is prominently interviewed in this piece in the UK's Telegraph, which discusses the rise of atheism as a very public and politically active movement in the US, spurred on, of course, by the depradations of the Christian Right and the Bush administration in this decade. Congratulations to Joe, and it's always great news to see the favorable coverage the growing trend towards godlessness has been getting in the media (even if you have to go out of the country to read it). As the article notes — and as we all know to our chagrin — there is a long way to go to overcome the sheer volume of religious ignorance in this country, as indicated by the recent Republican debate in which no fewer than three candidates proudly announced their stupidity for all the world to see by admitting they were evolution deniers. But it's a start. The theocons know we're out there, and they aren't happy, which means, of course, we are. Reason may yet triumph over darkness one day after all. (Yes...the eternal optimist...that's me.)

Russell and the Jehovah's Witnesses

I apologize for the blog pimping, and I try not to do it too often, but...

Yesterday I had my first experience with JW's at my house, and I wrote all about it on my blog.

National Day of Prayer never had a prayer

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

To Christians, it's "common sense" to shove religion down our throats

The latest blow against religious freedom and diversity and in favor of theocracy was struck here in Texas, when the House voted by an overwhelming margin (of course — they want to get re-elected, after all) to add "under God" to the Texas pledge.

First off, it's news to me that there was a "Texas pledge". I don't recall reciting one when I was a student way back when, so this must be a new development in the last decade or so.

Mirroring the current trend among social conservatives to force unanimity of thought as regards religion upon schoolchildren everywhere, the House had precious view members with the integrity and character to speak up against this bill. Lon Burnam, a Fort Worth Democrat, floated the idea that this just might, you know, impinge on the individual religious freedoms of students.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, rejected that argument and said adding the words was simply "common sense."

So there you have it. Suck it up, rationalists. It's just "common sense" to go with the fundamentalist flow and shoehorn acknowledgment of an invisible magic being into a daily school activity. And now that that's out of the way, this intelligent design stuff looks pretty nice, too, don't it...

Here is Debbie Riddle's contact information. Let her know, in polite but unflinching terms, how you as a Texas atheist feel about her bill. Tell her how proud you are that the legislature has done such a fine job of solving all of the state's other pressing problems that they had sufficient free time to devote to Godding up the Texas pledge. And here is a choice quote, on another matter entirely, reflecting on Debbie's loving, Christian nature.

• "Where did this idea come from that everybody deserves free education, free medical care, free whatever? It comes from Moscow, from Russia. It comes straight out of the pit of hell. And it's cleverly disguised as having a tender heart, [but] it's ripping the heart out of this country." Source.

Oh, this ought to be fun!

Ray Comfort, easily the lamest Christian apologist in the business this side of Jack Chick, is moist with excitement over an upcoming debate in which he claims he will prove, without recourse to the Bible, the existence of God. I wonder what it will be this time? A kumquat?

From a WorldNutDaily article:

"The network originally offered me only four minutes to present my case," Comfort said. "After speaking with Kirk [Cameron, former Growing Pains and Left Behind series movie star] and conferring with the atheists, they settled on 13 minutes. I'm ecstatic. I can prove the existence of God in that amount of time."

Well! There you have it. Ray Comfort will achieve in 13 minutes on ABC what no theologian or apologist or scientist or philosopher has done since the beginning of human civilization! I can't wait! Sounds like must-see-TV to me.

Mark your calendars: May 9 at noon Central on ABC.com.

This Saturday, see author Victor Stenger in Austin

Jeez, I've been slacking bad on this. Those fine folks at the Center for Inquiry Community of Austin are sponsoring a visit by Victor J. Stenger, author of the new Prometheus title God: The Failed Hypothesis this Saturday morning at 11:30 AM at Book People. So if you're an Austin atheist, and I hear we have a few, this would be worth waking up for. Do come.

MST3K, please come back!

This is why we need you, Satellite of Love! Don't let the floodtide of filth get me!

glumbert.com - Perversion for Profit: 1965 anti-porn film.

Okay, everyone: comments challenge! Let's see who can come up with the best MST-ed responses to this. Bonus points for actually using Crow and Servo in your riffing.

---

Dug up a little more info on our boy George Putnam. An intriguing data point about the little masterpiece we're streaming here is that according to the Wikipedia entry, it was financed by Charles Keating, who would go down in ignominy in the 1989 savings and loan scandal. Putnam, amazingly, is still alive and working in his mid-90's, and has a right-wing radio talk show.

Here also is Wikipedia's interesting entry about the film.

And then enjoy this to see how much fun you can have with editing software.