Friday, December 31, 2010

Have A Happy New Year!

I wanted to get this post out before I am too drunk/high to find a keyboard. I am not going to complain about how Obama is a fucking asshole or how the Republicans are trying to rape me up the ass, nor am I going to talk about how every single religious person in the world is a moron. No no, this is a time for happiness!

Happy New Year to all of my friends! Have a wonderful night, be safe, and get wasted! I am going to take some video and pictures of tonight's festivities and my tribute to my wonderful friends and readers.

I, personally, am getting pretty faded already. I have smoked a bowl and had a sixer (it's only 17:00). Tonight is going to be epic! I love you all!

My Year In Review

Well 2010 sure was productive. I started this blog when I found out that there was going to be a traveling creationist museum coming to our town. We had a great time arguing with the "curator" (a.k.a. guy that drives a dirty white van with fake shit in it) and almost got kicked out of the whole event. Perhaps a little dickish, but it was necessary.

This year also saw the first state-wide campaign in North Carolina promoting a secular nation, which came in the form of a billboard on Billy Graham Parkway. The billboard was vandalized the very next day and got us more recognition than we knew what to do with. I was the media spokesman for the campaign in Charlotte and had my ugly mug plastered all over the TV. This lead to some serious problems with my job. I was actually kicked out of my largest customer because they didn't like the fact I was an atheist. Still hanging on to that job, though!

Finally, I saw the end of my hair. Not by genetic disposition, but by choice. Actually, I just said "fuck my job" and shaved a mohawk into my head. It's totally badass! So tomorrow while we are all out getting so drunk that our faces fall off, remember that this was an awesome year. When 23:59 rolls around tomorrow night and I take the last shot of the year, it will be a shot to all of you fine two or three people who read my mind vomit. Cheers!

Thursday, December 30, 2010

When Cancer Makes You Crazy

Ugh! Stories like this make me so very sad. People who are ill will try anything to get better. I cannot let this woman’s illness get in the way of the absolute stupidity of the situation though.

I do not see Jesus in the x-ray. I see what looks like a wire from a pace-maker or some other medical device that loops its way around inside this woman’s chest. There is nothing there. It is called pareidolia and I recommend everyone become familiar with the phenomenon so as to be able to recognize it so that you don’t go on national television and make a complete ass of yourself.

I would challenge anyone who has been diagnosed with cancer to explain to me how they reconcile Jesus being with them and this supposedly benevolent God giving them cancer in the first place. If it’s God’s will, then stop complaining about it give up hope, because obviously God’s will was for you to suffer and die a horrible death for no reason at all.

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

America Isn't A Secular Nation, Unless You Believe In Facts

I wish this article were true. I think the country would be better off if the president was actively pushing for a secular nation. However, anything posted on NewsMax should be treated as if it were a truck load of bullshit, even if it were true. I am, of course, talking about the article titled “Historian Kidd: Obama Pushes US to Secularism.” If only I could dream of such a president.

The article is a stream of consciousness from Thomas Kidd, who is a crazy Christian historian at Baylor University. I am just surprised this guy isn’t at Bob Jones University, as if Baylor is any better. (Note: a quote from Thomas Kidd from the Baylor University website - "I came to Baylor because of the balance the university offered me between teaching and research, and because of the appeal of working at a university with a Christian commitment.") The article amounts to a lot of half-truths or outright falsehoods. What I was most interested in was this niblet:
“This has fueled a concern that many people have that President Obama is at least quietly trying to construe America as a secular nation instead of a nation based on important religious principles like the idea that all men are created equal,” Kidd said. “That principle is, I think, the most important idea that comes out of the American Revolution, and it is an explicitly religious principle, even though it’s a very general religious principle, and I don’t think it’s something that we should give up intentionally or unintentionally.”
Trying to construe America as a secular nation? Oh, the horror! I fail to see how any principle from this guys beloved Christianity, or any religion for that matter, puts forth the idea that all men are created equally. As I recall, in the Bible all men were created equally, unless they weren’t Jews. Women and non-Jews need not apply. What about the explicit endorsement of slavery? It should also be added that this nation was founded on the institution of slavery and was endorsed for a very long time. Women and non-whites need not apply.

This article is also a little confusing. I thought Obama was a secret Muslim. I guess this proves that anyone can be a historian.

Richard Dawkins Has A Holiday Message For The Pope

I don't like to repost entire articles with no commentary, but when you come across something this good... well, see for yourself.
Was it for this that I broke the habit of years and accepted the Guardian's invitation to listen to Thought for the Day? Was it for this that the BBC, including the director general himself, no less, spent months negotiating with the Vatican? What on earth were they negotiating about, if all that emerged was the damp, faltering squib we have just strained our ears to hear?
'A giant of the mind and model of courage'

We've already had what little apology we are going to get (none in most cases) for the raped children, the Aids-sufferers in Africa, the centuries spent attacking Jews, science, women and "heretics", the indulgences and more modern (and tax-deductible) methods of fleecing the gullible to build the Vatican's vast fortune. So, no surprise that these weren't mentioned. But there's something else for which the pope should go to confession, and it's arguably the nastiest of all. I refer to the main doctrine of Christian theology itself, which was the centrepiece of what Ratzinger actually did say in his Thought for the Day.

"Christ destroyed death forever and restored life by means of his shameful death on the Cross."

More shameful than the death itself is the Christian theory that it was necessary. It was necessary because all humans are born in sin. Every tiny baby, too young to have a deed or a thought, is riddled with sin: original sin. Here's Thomas Aquinas:

". . . the original sin of all men was in Adam indeed, as in its principal cause, according to the words of the Apostle (Romans 5:12): "In whom all have sinned": whereas it is in the bodily semen, as in its instrumental cause, since it is by the active power of the semen that original sin together with human nature is transmitted to the child."

Adam (who never existed) bequeathed his "sin" in his bodily semen (charming notion) to all of humanity. That sin, with which every newborn baby is hideously stained (another charming notion), was so terrible that it could be forgiven only through the blood sacrifice of a scapegoat. But no ordinary scapegoat would do. The sin of humanity was so great that the only adequate sacrificial victim was God himself.

That's right. The creator of the universe, sublime inventor of mathematics, of relativistic space-time, of quarks and quanta, of life itself, Almighty God, who reads our every thought and hears our every prayer, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent God couldn't think of a better way to forgive us than to have himself tortured and executed. For heaven's sake, if he wanted to forgive us, why didn't he just forgive us? Who, after all, needed to be impressed by the blood and the agony? Nobody but himself.

Ratzinger has much to confess in his own conduct, as cardinal and pope. But he is also guilty of promoting one of the most repugnant ideas ever to occur to a human mind: "Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Hebrews 9:22)
Thank you, Dr. Dawkins.

From: The Guardian

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Criticize Israel? Jew Hater!

Since when is criticizing the policies of a nation tantamount to antisemitism? When you criticize anything Israel does, of course. A recent bus ad campaign in Seattle has drawn the attention of people from as far away as, you guessed it, Israel.

This past week, a group called the Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign was moving forward with plans to put up ads on area buses that said "Israeli war crimes: Your tax dollars at work" and showed a picture of some Palestinian kids standing next to a pile of rubble. Sounds reasonable to me, especially when you look at the fact that the United States has given Israel over $107 billion since the 1940's and signed a deal to give Israel $30 billion over the next 10 years. I hope no one is deluded enough to think that none of that money is being used to push the Palestinians out of their homes and squeeze the Gaza Strip until the people have no other recourse but to turn to violence.

I guess pointing out that fact makes me a Jew hater, though. Pointing out the fact that the state of Israel is currently stealing property from Palestinians by going in and putting up new settlements makes me as antisemitic as Hitler. But I digress.

The group in Seattle was previously given permission to put up then bus ads, then permission was rescinded when a couple of war-crimes apologist groups like "Stop Islamization of America" and the disgustingly-named "David Horowitz Freedom Center" sent in letters of protest to King County officials. Both groups have since attempted (but were turned down) to buy ad space on the buses to put up parody ads; you know, because nothing says "we are a legitimate group" like satirizing the suffering of an entire group of people. I could only imagine the fallout from a campaign that poked fun of the people that died during the holocaust.

So there it is, people. You have a group that is trying to bring to light the amount of money that the US gives to Israel and what Israel does with that money. Then you have other groups shut down any conversation by calling them "Jew-haters." Forget the facts, forget the news, just follow Israel blindly and allow them to continue displacing and murdering thousands of Palestinians.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

BoA Stops Payments To Wikileaks. So?

Bank of America decided to take action against Wikileaks this week allowing them join the ranks of such moral internal policy upholding companies such as Mastercard and Paypal.
In a statement, the North Carolina-based Bank of America said it would "not process transactions of any type that we have reason to believe are intended for Wikileaks"
 What are they going to do add a check box to withdrawal slips “Will you be using your funds to support Wikileaks?”

Well I must say I’m impressed. Now people will have to go buy a money order, iTunes gift card, or worse yet use actual cash (how out dated) in order to help support their beloved leak source. Seriously what is it these companies feel they have accomplished? They may have been able to slow down the support process, but they are far from stopping it, and why are they hiding behind ethical policy upholding? Just admit you're mad you may fall victim to bad publicity. A little honesty would be appreciated. If people want to donate money you won’t be able to stop them.

The way I see it if you don’t want your dirty laundry hung out for all to see, find a better hiding place. Even the US government, the most powerful force in the modern world with every resource at it’s helm, can’t fend off a guy with Ass in his last name, Really?

"We ask that all people who love freedom close out their accounts at Bank of America," WikiLeaks said on its Twitter page. "Does your business do business with Bank of America? Our advice is to place your funds somewhere safer."
This is a piece of advice I personally agree with. If everyone their money in local banks or credit unions there would be a lot more money pumped into their communities in the form of small business loans for local business and patrons. That's only one of the benefits of moving your money local. Big banks use risky finical practices and that alone should be enough. This does bring up another interesting point. 

Who cares if wikileaks is shut down? I just demonstrated a much more effective way to stick a thorn in big business than reading. The problem is most of you would rather read about it in your version of a tabloid than sacrifice a lunch hour to actually do something that has an effect. Because that’s hard and it would take time and effort. You’re just a voyeur. Watching from the shadows doing nothing to actually help. Now to be clear I’m no freedom fighter, I’m not starting any revolutions myself. But at least I can admit it, I don’t consider myself noble or well informed because I read about something. Why I don’t care? Simple, I won’t be around to watch the bottom drop. So why worry about it.
"The revolution is just a marketing tool" - Gabriel Saporta
 I don’t think Assange deserves to face an legal action for his role with Wikileaks. I wont say what he has done is profound or a necessity but its certainly not illegal to expose people, companies, or a large organizations for what they are. So what do you think, Wikileaks hero or flavor of the week? Well I certainly hope I've got you thinking about small changes you can make to really have an effect rather that sit around and bitching about it.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Happy Holidays?

It's that time of year again. Christmas, Hannukah, Kwaanza and the New Year all come between the first of December and January. And sooner or later, you're going to face the decision as what to say when giving some kind of greeting that's seasonal. Many people are inclusive by saying "Happy Holidays." It seems harmless and about as innocuous as any greeting you can give. Yet there are some who will sneer and get upset because you didn't say the exclusive "Merry Christmas." A local car dealership will give you a plastic sign for your lawn that has that greeting on it, explaining that it's the "reason for the season."

To those holiday snobs, I say that you need to get over yourselves. Guess what? As much as you'd like it to be so, you're not the only people out there and you aren't alone in your celebrations. By insisting that everyone bow to your whims, you tell the world that nobody's feelings are as important as yours. You are showing an arrogance and pride that seem to run counter to the teachings of Christ.

There is also the problem of whether or not Christmas should be celebrated in December. All indications are that if Jesus existed at all, he wasn't born in December but more likely in the spring or early summer. The date of December 25 was chosen in the 5th century AD as a means of co-opting the Roman holiday Saturnalia, the celebration of the unconquered sun. It was a common practice in the early church to take the pagan holidays and make them their own.

Almost every society throughout history has had some kind of solstice celebration, generally related to making sure the sun started turning back north after descending to its lowest point in the sky. This time of year is all about celebration.

So don't be a holiday snob. When someone tells you "Happy Holidays," be gracious and greet the other person in kind.

Happy holidays.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

A Deceitful Preacher? Surely Not!

I find small stories to be the most hilarious sometimes, like this story in which a 'reverend' in Watertown, PA plead guilty to stealing from his church and tricking the congregation.
Court documents in Jefferson County accused Marr of soliciting money from dozens of parishioners and friends and turning it over — perhaps as much as $613,000 — to another parishioner, Arthur Eith, who claimed to be investing the money in Nigeria. Sometimes Marr told people he needed the money to help people down on their luck. Other times he said it was for a down payment on a house for himself and another priest.
$613,000?! That is amazing. What I found funny about this is that the aforementioned “tricking” was the lies that he told about where the money was going, not about him standing in the pulpit every Sunday and telling the greatest lie in history. You know, the one about there being a god.

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Atheist Don't Understand Religion?

What a boring piece of tripe I found on the National Post. Charles Lewis wrote a 'scathing' article against atheists, telling us the he doesn't care what we think. Then he goes on a bitching binge for a few paragraphs about how he is all mad and bothered that atheists criticize religion.
But the debate is useless for one simple reason: most atheists do not have a clue what religion is about. They see religious people as blind sheep following a series of incomprehensible rules and dogmas and then scoff at their lack of enlightenment. They find the flaw in the painting and say it is all now ruined. Atheists are utopians who believe a perfect society can be built if only religion was not in the way.
I skipped over quoting this highly quotable square of toilet paper to make one thing clear: most atheists have been religious and know exactly what it's all about. I am never left without wonder when I here the religious idiots say that 'atheists just don't understand because they don't believe in god.' Well, I don't believe in the tooth fairy or the easter bunny but I can come up with a list of logical reasons why they don't exist without still believing in them. I'm not even sure his statement makes any sense.

Are the religious 'blind sheep following a series of incomprehensible rules and dogmas'? They have had thousands of years to prove they are not and a mountain of evidence that says they are. I will stick with the evidence on this one.

By the way, the way to show that you don't care what someone thinks is not to write an article in the National Post.

NCSE Promotes Creationism

Is the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) a parody group that I am unaware of? They seem legit, that is until you find out about this trip through the Grand Canyon they are offering.
Explore the Grand Canyon with Scott, Newton, and Gish! Seats are now available for NCSE's next excursion to the Grand Canyon — as featured in The New York Times (October 6, 2005). From June 30 to July 8, 2011, NCSE will again explore the wonders of creation and evolution on a Grand Canyon river run conducted by NCSE's Genie Scott, NCSE's Steven Newton, and paleontologist Alan ("Gish") Gishlick. Because this is an NCSE trip, we offer more than just the typically grand float down the Canyon, the spectacular scenery, fascinating natural history, brilliant night skies, exciting rapids, delicious meals, and good company. It is, in fact, a unique "two-model" raft trip, on which we provide both the creationist view of the Grand Canyon and the evolutionist view — and let you make up your own mind. To get a glimpse of the fun, watch the short videos filmed during the 2009 trip, posted on NCSE's YouTube site. The cost of the excursion is $2545; a deposit of $500 will hold your spot. Seats are limited: call, write, or e-mail now.
What the hell? A dual-model trip that shows both the creationists view and the evolutionist view of how the Grand Canyon was created? Ok, let me dunk my head in a bucket of ice water to cool down. Now it's time to regulate.

Point 1: Creationism is not only false, it is a fucking joke. It is not serious and should not be catered to even as a joke. It should be ridiculed until it becomes taboo to even hold the thought in your head. For proof that creationism is a goddamned lie, I direct you to this site.

Point 2: The theory of evolution has nothing to do with the creation of the Grand Canyon! It drives me insane that the word 'evolutionist' (which isn't a real fucking word) is applied to anyone who holds a different view of than creationists in any discipline. Think the Grand Canyon was created by a river over a long time? Evolutionist. Think the Earth is warming and god isn't going to save us? Evolutionist. Think the universe is older than 6000 years? Evolutionist. Don't have your head up your ass when it comes to facts? Evolutionist. It isn't a real word. Why don't we call it what it is: those who are creationists shall henceforth be known as “fucking idiots” and people who accept an Earth that is older than 6000 years are called “people who are not fucking idiots.”

Point 3: Why do we keep allowing these national organizations to set up the false dichotomies between science and religion? There is fact and then there is whatever the hell you want to call the views of fucking idiots. How about we do a tour of concentrations camps, but a dual-model trip that shows the side of holocaust deniers? Or perhaps we could take a tour of NASA with those who think that there is a giant alien conspiracy and we never landed on the moon? Do you know why we wouldn't do that? Because it would be stupid.

So remember, if you have $2545 to burn and are a moron, there is a rafting trip for you to take through the Grand Canyon.

Monday, December 13, 2010

Fundamentalist Jews Becoming As Bad As The Nazis

Just when I think the extremists in Israel can’t be any more loathsome, they do something to prove me wrong. A group of 50 rabbis (who are civil servants, yeat another reason not to mix government and religion) signed a letter that urged the nation not to rent or sell property to non-Jews.
"It is known that due to selling or renting one apartment, all the apartments of the neighbors devaluate even if the buyers or renters are nice at first ... and the one that sells and rents first causes his neighbors a loss and causes others to rent and sell after him and leave the place."
Wow. They just came right out and said it. I have to agree with them about devaluation of property. However, they are directing it at the wrong people. You know who I really don’t want to live next to because they are dirty, filthy things who devaluate property? Jews.

How horrible does that sound? It is horrible and racist. However, when the good rabbis say it, its religious doctrine and must be followed. I remember reading about a country who thought a group of people devalued their land and dirtied everything up.

Jesus Loves Doors

Tis the season for Jesus to start showing up in weird places. As always, he can never appear as himself on the sic o’clock news. Instead he appears on the back of a bathroom door or a grilled-cheese sandwich. Here are a couple of his most recent appearances.

-Joe De Nuncio of Tampa, Florida was recently told do give a bathroom door back to a company that he used to work for. Joe asked for the door and the company gave it to him. Why did he want a bathroom door from a plywood company? Because Jesus was on it, of course! Don't forget to check out the pictures.

-An Irish pub in Australia has found an image of Jesus in the chipped paint of their door.
These types of sightings often lead people to believe the Lord is sending some sort of message of hope. In this case, according to Keohane, the only sign it may be sending is about what's served inside.
I know when I am looking to post a message of hope, I head to the nearest pub in a tiny town in eastern bumble-fuck Australia.
The tavern has no intention of repairing the stripped paint. Aside from enjoying the attention Jesus attracts, it's also treasuring the image at the request of a local parish.
Of course they aren’t going to repair it. They are making money off of a shitty paint job. This is further proof that Jesus is a capitalist and an alcoholic.

-A Bishop in Green Bay has certified that some visions of Mary by Adele Brise were real. This marks the first bullshit claim appearance of Mary in the United States. Mary and Jesus are like UFO’s: They only appear to slack-jawed yokels with no education who live in the middle of nowhere. Maybe they are real and they just like screwing with people.

Saturday, December 11, 2010

A History Of Weakness

Two years ago we had just elected Barack Obama as President. The nation was elated because they thought that finally we would have someone who would change the way the government runs and how we do business as a nation. I, like many people at the time, was fully on board with the President coming into office and getting us back on some sort of reasonable course, a course that had been shifted so far to the right that Reagan started to seem like a left-of-center Democrat. As of this week, what little confidence I had in the President to do the right thing came to a halt.

My discontent had been growing with this administration since the health care debate. I was angry enough to declare that I would not be voting for him again, with good reason. The health care bill gave us so little change that it may as well have not even been passed. Health care costs continue to rise, health insurance companies who are forced to cover preexisting conditions in children are just refusing to cover children at all, and the bill as a whole won't start to take a real effect until 2014. In 2014, the bill will have been gutted because it wasn't strong and it wasn't immediate. This entire episode would have been attributed to a new administration trying to find their way. Things would surely get better after this. Right?

Since the health care debate the President has been cowering in a corner, or more precisely he has been on his knees under Mitch McConnell's and John Boehner's desks. He collapses under any kind of pressure from the right and them throws his arms in the air and says “What could I have done? I had to compromise.” I haven't seen compromise, all I have seen is capitulation. There is a lot of big talk coming from this guy. He says he would love to fight the Republicans on every piece of major legislation that he can. When the opportunity presents itself, he runs and hides behind the curtains in the oval office.

Then there are the areas that he has stood up to fight which is a long list of right-wing goals. He failed to close Guantanamo Bay, he continues to policy of warrantless wiretapping, and seems to be apathetic to the issue of Net Neutrality. The only conclusion I can draw from any of these issues is that he doesn't care. If you do not take a stand against a bad idea than you may as well be a supporter of the bad idea. There is no room for compromise when it comes to failed or bad ideas from the Bush Administration.

Now comes to two issues that the President could have redeemed himself on: Repeal of “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” and repeal of the Bush tax cuts. On the issue of DADT, how can he expect anything to get done while he is doing nothing but sitting on his hands waiting for the turtle of congress to take action? I agree that the bill has to be repealed through congress, but there is the option of enacting a stop-loss in the mean time. Then you start to tighten the screws on congress until they scream for mercy. The public is for the repeal of DADT and so is most of congress, minus John McCain who should be treated like a child and told to go stand in the corner until he calms down. Instead, we get a President who pays great lip service but does nothing in the end. Gays are still being discharged under DADT and congress has still not taken up the issue. You know why? Weak leadership, which also applies to Pelosi and Reed.

On the second issue, why is the President making the case for the Republicans? It doesn't make any sense at all. He went out as he usually does and crumbled at the first sign of pressure from the right. Not only did he crumble, but he gave away all of his bargaining chips before negotiations even started. As with DADT, the repeal of the Bush tax cuts was supported by a majority of the nation. The middle class should get to keep their tax cuts (that's anyone making less than $250,000 a year, which is too high in my opinion) and the wealthiest 2% of the nation has to go back to what their taxes were under Clinton (which is way too low in my opinion). However this President can't seem to wrap his mind around standing on principle. He actually thinks that he lost the House in 2010 because he wasn't enough of a Republican. What really happened was people started to wake up to his bullshit and realize that he has no back bone. The people voted for the Republicans because they had no other choice. Why would they vote for a spineless Democrat?

I can only urge the Democrats to run a primary against the President. After he stood on stage and blamed all of his problems on the liberals (his base, you know the ones who support him most) and said that we were being sanctimonious, the entire party should have started the process of finding someone who wasn't going to be a weakling who cowers in fear every time a Republican walks into the room.

I stick by my decision to never vote for this guy again. He is a lost cause at best and a Republican at worst. The question now is who is going to challenge him? Who can beat him for the nomination or who could run as a viable third-party candidate? I'm looking at you Russ Feingold.

Saturday, December 4, 2010

The Five Homophobes You Meet In A Religion Class

Does anything go hand-in-hand better than homophobia and religion? According to the religion class I am taking right now, not at all. I had an extra elective to take this semester, so I figured “Old Testament As Literature” would be a fun class to take. I knew I would be in for a good time when I found out that the instructor is actually a Baptist preacher. What can I say, I am a glutton for punishment.

Well, not actually. The instructor turned out to be a Francis Collins-style Christian who puts a lot of stock in science. The man is a biologist but just can't seem to shake off the trappings of Jesus. Oh well, I can deal with namby-pamby Christians. Especially ones that think that most of the Bible is allegory and the Old Testament is not true.

Enough background. During last nights class I was able to have an interesting and enlightening argument with another student, which turned in to an argument with all five students in the class. The conversation came out of nowhere and had nothing to do with religion, aside from the obvious fact that the only arguments that can be made against homosexuality can come from the Bible or the Koran.

The argument started with this one imbecile stating that he hasn't been able to run in a local park lately because he has been sick. However, that was the least of his worries since he has notice more and more lately that “the park system in Gaston County is being overrun by degenerate homosexuals. I know that I couldn't get away with saying this is most classes, but I feel like you guys would understand.” What part of that I am supposed to understand is... not understandable.

This devolves into a discussion between the other members of the class about how gay people are everywhere, lurking like some sort of 1930's propaganda piece about Jew's waiting to steal good Aryan children. I should have said something before this point, but it took me a minute to process what was happening and form a coherent sentence. Then came the gem that sent me off my rocker. “You know, not all homosexuals, but most homosexuals' idea of a good time is getting straight guys drunk and raping them. They thing the only thing that separates a gay man from a straight man is blood-alcohol content. That's why we shouldn't drop 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'.”

This is the point where I lost my mind. Here is a summery of what I said to this schlemiel: “You are telling me that you have never served with a gay person? Bullshit. Gay people are in the military, they just can't be open about it. If they are allowed to be open about it tomorrow, they still aren't going to find you, or any of you attractive. Your are all a group of bigoted assholes who can't come up with an argument against homosexuality that doesn't involved your stupid, fictitious religion. Have I ever tried to rape anyone in this class? Guess what; I am fucking gay! The lot of you are just as bad as the racists in the 1950's who argued against integrating black people in the military because of the looming spectra of the black rapist, coming to tear your white wives open from the bottom up. Spare me your bullshit.”

I am pretty sure that effectively shut down the conversation. I am not interested in sounding like a diplomat when idiots spout their opinions and expect everyone to go along with them. Would any of you handled it differently?

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Physicists Have Morons Amongst Them

There was a lecture given this past Tuesday that I am sorry I missed, not that I am anywhere near where the talk was being given. It was a lecture by a physicist named Dr Don DeYoung about... creationism. What, you thought that a physicist would be giving a lecture on physics? What would give you that idea?
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg, says Dr. DeYoung, who is a professor, author and current president of the Creation Research Society (CRS), a 1700-member international group that funds research and publishes a peer-reviewed scientific journal. The fact is, the designs of nature are so perfect for their purpose that they have inspired countless innovations over the years.

This phenomenon is one of the topics Dr. DeYoung will present to the Creation Science Society of Milwaukee. ...For this part of his talk, he will draw from his fascinating book 'Discovery of Design: Searching Out the Creator’s Secrets'

I found this interesting, "They say that if you’re looking for a scholar to debate a creationist, don’t bother asking the Physics Department – physicists tend to side with Creation Science."
None of the physicists I know side with creationism, not that that means anything. I am trying to figure out why anyone would listen to this quack just because he has a Ph. D in physics (which someone should get on checking that out to make sure it didn't come from Liberty University). Does the nature of physics give this guy some peep into the mind of gawd? I am a physics student and have yet to see anything that would make me believe in a god.

Besides, what does physics have to do with creationism and god anyway? If there is a god then physics are rendered useless when trying to understand the beginning of the universe. Way to work yourself out of a job.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Lack Of Basic Understanding Strikes Again!

Lack of basic scientific knowledge has struck again! Some buffoon named Parrish Myers wrote in the Gainesville Times that atheist don't believe in god, but we believe in air, gravity, and magnetism. I think this guy has been listening to too much Insane Clown Posse.
You can't see air, yet you breathe it and it sustains your life. You can't see gravity, but jump off a building and you'll find out just how real it is. Germs are too small to see with the naked eye, but get one and it will make you sick. Magnetism is an invisible force, but it attracts and repels whether we see it or not.

Personally, I have never known anyone who has denied the existence of things such as air, gravity, germs and magnetism. Yet I have known plenty of people who have denied the existence of God. The reason they deny his existence? Because they cannot see him.
OK you troglodyte, here is the difference between the list of things we can't see and god: we can actually observe the effects of gravity directly, we can observe the force of magnetism directly, we know what air is and can observe it, and we can see germs. Anyone with a third grade science education that wasn't given in a Christian school would be able to tell you that. Just so there is no misunderstanding, let me direct you to the Wikipedia entries on air, germs, magnetism, and gravity.

Do you know why you have never met anyone who denied the existence of air, etc? Because we have proof of such things existing. They actually do have a measurable effect on the physical world. What about God? Anything? Can anyone give me any kind of proof that doesn't amount to a feeling they get or some grand delusion that is all in their head? I'll be waiting, but I won't hold my breath.

Atheists are not a group of babies who have yet to develop object permanence. We understand that on a cloudy day that the sun is still there just as we understand that the air we breath is real and the force of gravity is real. I wonder if Parrish Myers would lock himself in a closet somewhere, would anyone believe he still existed? Let's give that experiment a shot.