Pharyngula

Pharyngula has moved to http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

Monday, August 08, 2005

Warning: this weblog is run by an atheist

I am getting a great deal of angry email because I scorned religion in a few posts this weekend. Some people seem to be surprised to learn that I don't share any of their religious beliefs. Allow me to clarify and pass on a few suggestions if you feel the need to complain.

  • I do not think most religious people are bad. Quite the contrary; I think most people are decent in spite of their religion. I have a higher opinion of most religious people than you may think, while having a lower opinion of religion than you can imagine.
  • Don't try to tell me that the only way to enlist religious people to aid the cause of reason is to keep atheism in the closet. I say the only way for decent people to get over their anti-atheist bigotry is to make them aware that their neighbors and teachers and postal workers and plumbers and carpenters include freethinkers with a wide range of views…that don't include bowing to imaginary beings.
  • Also, don't try to tell me that we atheists must make common cause with sensible religious people. We try. We get along better with the dominant Christian majority than they do with us. Perhaps, instead, those sensible religious people should see atheists as allies who will readily point out the parasites and scam artists and demagogues within their faiths.
  • Please don't lecture me on how to be an atheist. The uninformed biases of the religious on how atheists are supposed to be are about as relevant as the opinions of white people on how the Negro is supposed to behave.
  • To everyone who was compelled by my contempt for D. James Kennedy and his ilk to write and tell me that he is not representative of your faith: how many of you good Christians have taken the time to condemn these hating bibliolators and ideologues of the Religious Right in letters to your congressman or even conversations with your minister? It's easier to berate that outsider atheist than to police your own, is it?
  • Don't damn the messenger who tells you your house of god is a den of thieves and liars. Clean up your mess.

There. Now if I can be comfortable with your belief that I'm going to burn in Hell, you should be able to cope with my belief that your god-bothering nonsense is a steaming heap o' BS. If not, there are plenty of less prickly weblogs out there.

P.S. Those of you sending me all the evangelical crap and signing me up for Christian mailing lists…you are really wasting your time.


Trackback url: http://pharyngula.org/index/trackback/2698/mYgHu7w2/

Comments:
#34400: — 08/08  at  09:10 PM
GWW wrote:
stick around. You're sort of cute.


Well garsh. First sweet bowel music, then sort of flattery. Should I be expecting half-dead flowers next? You atheists sure know how to flatter a girl.



#34405: — 08/08  at  09:47 PM
P.S. Those of you sending me all the evangelical crap and signing me up for Christian mailing lists…you are really wasting your time.


**exist out of the christian mailing lists**

I just thought you'd get a kick out of them... ;)

-----
"As with all of ID, the important thing is first to have the concept. Production can then follow as a matter of course.” -Dembski



#34406: — 08/08  at  09:56 PM
Uh, so I should cancel that bulk order of Jack Chick tracts that I sent to your office!? ;)



#34407: Eva Young — 08/08  at  09:56 PM
#34338: steve — 08/08 at 05:19 PM
I would enjoy reading the more entertaining and uninformed emails you get on this topic, and other topics for that matter. Please consider posting them, anonymously if necessary.

EY: I second that PZ... I also think you are right on about athiests and freethinkers needing to come out of the closet. It's really appalling that politicians have to claim religion in order to be elected.



#34408: — 08/08  at  10:02 PM
Excellent comments PZ! I have no patience for believers. They should understand that faith is a matter of unjustified belief (a Kierkegaardian leap if you will), rather than a verifiable claim. Huh? What? The big bang is a testable hypothesis! Huh? evolution is also a testable hypothesis! god's existence? what about Harry Potter's existence or the Starship Enterprise? Grow up! God is simply one character among many in a fascinating piece of literature. Nothing more. Celebrate truth over psychological comfort. Cheers!



#34409: ekzept — 08/08  at  10:06 PM
Those of you sending me all the evangelical crap and signing me up for Christian mailing lists…you are really wasting your time.
yeah, and i got some Dembski spam today. wonder if it came from a lurker here ... . i did the right thing: bounced the e-mail, and promptly wrote a blog entry.



#34411: — 08/08  at  10:09 PM
Oh, black boy, you did not just say that Star Trek is fiction did you!? Star Trek is real, real, REAL! How else could they possibly know where Scotty was born, eh!?



#34412: — 08/08  at  10:10 PM
I work in the nursery industry, and am fascinated by your bible mulch idea. How might I sign up to receive your literature?



#34413: ekzept — 08/08  at  10:13 PM
... am fascinated by your bible mulch idea
yeah, just imagine the business possibilities: Christmas trees tagged with In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God ....



#34416: Dan S. — 08/08  at  10:39 PM
" I say the only way for decent people to get over their anti-atheist bigotry is to make them aware that their neighbors and teachers and postal workers and plumbers and carpenters include freethinkers with a wide range of views."

And maybe one day they'll even allow us to marry! and adopt children!

(whisper)yes, I know we can already . . . but don't tell them . . .(/whisper)

But honestly, PZ, what is this unreasoning prejudice against "codawful ugly fanged lizardoid monster bab[ies]"??

And where is that post about the library of human evolution hiding? I can't find it anywhere on site . . .

*blog update!*



#34417: — 08/08  at  10:44 PM
Kudos to Thelma Richards. Really good parody. I knew I was in the presence of a master as I read it, and this was amply confirmed by the later poster who *took it seriously*!

And thanks, PZ, for being an unashamed atheist.



#34418: Constantine — 08/08  at  10:47 PM
That wasn't a throwaway comment, nor was it made in ignorance.

Well, generally, I take such sentiments as the LGFers who opine about what they'd like to do to the Koran. I just expect it less out of an ostensible liberal intellectual. And it was made in ignorance, because the statement is, itself, an ignorant one. In all seriousness, generally the "Bible in a woodchipper" comments are best left to the kid who, after being dragged to confirmation by his parents, suddenly discovers atheism and starts expressing such sentiments.

And, of course, no good was done by the "well-meaning" Christians who decided to use your statement as (a) an evangelism opportunity or (b) a chance to tell you how much they "weren't like" the people you decried, in the hopes that it would make you seem more favorable to them... but "pleading reasoning" isn't called for when someone makes such an appalling, ignorant statement as yours. Like the guy who tells Jewish jokes at a dinner party or utters the "n-word," he needs public reproach or at least awkward silences and coughing to express that this sort of thing just isn't done. Yes, no amount of reasoning is going to get you to change, but a public reproach may at least make it clear that such sentiments are unacceptable, at least to educated audiences.



#34421: — 08/08  at  11:07 PM
PZ: You're quite a good counter-puncher (certainly useful in the classroom, I'm sure) and seem to believe that science will answer all questions given enough time (including the creation of the universe and life). However, I'm curious as to what you believe in in terms of a moral code. As an atheist, what is your good?



#34425: — 08/08  at  11:53 PM
What's being good? That's a loaded question. The thing with atheists is that being good doesn't go hand in hand with the fear of God. It's got more to do with simply using your brain.



#34426: — 08/08  at  11:54 PM
I also find it odd that non-fundies often seem to consider criticism of fundamentalism much worse than fundamentalism itself, even though the fundies themselves repay that consideration with calling non-fundies hell-bound fake Xians, atheists in disguise, etc.

As to how we ought not to throw the (metaphorical) baby out with the (metaphorical) bathwater, those who make that complaint have a hard time separating the two, and often act as if the baby comes with the bathwater, and that it would be wrong to separate them.



#34427: — 08/09  at  12:06 AM
constantine, why should irreligioists respect religionists? They don't respect us. A president of the United States notoriously said that non-believers could not be moral, and his views are widely endorsed by American believers.

Then Lyons pops us with a reference to the widespread belief of believers that no one would or could be moral without the threat of eternal punishment.

Well, both of you, I take you at your word. I do not believe people like you have any internal controls and are never moral because you think moral behavior has any intrinsic value.

I listen to Christian sermons (on radio) nearly everyday. The easy assumption of ALL these preachers that people who are not saved are inferior does not lead me to think that they are admirable and to imitated.

It leads me to despise these hypocrites, poseurs and frauds.

Why should righteous atheists get down in the mud with these pigs?



#34428: Drunken Lagomorph — 08/09  at  12:07 AM
What a bunch of fucking hypocrites. You're not skipping around the blogosphere sending harassing emails to THEM and signing THEM up to atheist mailing lists.

People who are that hateful and vindictive to someone just because that someone has a different belief system should worry about their own souls first.



's avatar #34429: Virge — 08/09  at  12:10 AM
Constantine, you've stated that you feel the bible-mulch comment was "ignorant," even "appallingly ignorant". You're trying to imply that your reasons for that assertion are obvious. They are not.

The quote you're objecting to is:
"A single tree is a greater marvel than the thousand bibles that could be printed from its pulped-up trunk; if we mulched every Bible published to foster the growth of a single blade of grass, we'd be the richer for it."

The implication of this quote is that the Bible is contributing nothing positive to our lives. Its net effect is zero or negative.

Now tell us why you think it's ignorant. Is it based purely on the idea that Bible-based religions are doing more positive than negative?

A supported argument will carry far more weight than repetitive assertions and comparisons to childishness.



#34430: Cameron — 08/09  at  12:10 AM
Once again, thank you, Constantine.

This
I also find it odd that non-fundies often seem to consider criticism of fundamentalism much worse than fundamentalism itself...

is false.



#34433: — 08/09  at  12:28 AM
PZ:
you are sharp-tongued, blunt, straightforward, and dead on. Were Mt. St. Helens not erupting, Pharyngula would be my home page. (Gotta get my daily fix of steaming volcano). It is certainly one of my daily reads.

One quibble, though, about the "lizardoid" monster bible baby: I spent the last week on the California coast enjoying, among other things, spotting lizards near hiking trails. I think you owe collective lizardkind an apology.



#34434: Cameron — 08/09  at  12:34 AM
I guess you also wouldn't accept the idea the Bible is important in the lives of actual human beings--insofar as they make it important--as a positive value. (When you attack the things someone believes in, you can actually cause him/her pain. Maybe you think that pain is acceptable or due, in some medicinal sense, but y'all have a strange way of going about it.) The fact that there are some actual moral lessons in there--which were even totally novel when the thing was written. The fact that some people sometimes do need reminders about what moral behavior can look like. Oh well.

You seem to have this bizarre idea that the Bible or a religion can do something. Like any other ism, religion doesn't do things. People do things.



#34435: John Wilkins — 08/09  at  12:37 AM
But Karen, collective lizardkind is a paraphyletic assembly, so not natural. PZ needs to apologise to nothing that is not natural...

John S. Wilkins : evolvethought.blogspot.com



#34438: — 08/09  at  12:55 AM
i can sometimes stop a conversation cold by saying that whoever is right, me based on my observable evidence, or they, based on their faith, they’re in a win-win situation. if they're right, God is real, then someday they can stand in the gateway and say “i told you so”. if i’m right, then neither one of us will ever know.

and they smile, usually a “have i just been slimed?” smile and walk away.

meanwhile i’m taking advantage of every single second i have, while they fritter away their time waiting for something.



#34442: John Wilkins — 08/09  at  01:37 AM
Trouble is, tony g, you may both be wrong...

http://www.cthulhu.org/

John S. Wilkins : evolvethought.blogspot.com



#34444: — 08/09  at  02:33 AM
Cameron, Constantine:

I think you two don't understand the key point in question, and so you keep begging the question. PZ and the rest think that the Bible is at best useless, and at worst a book filled with hate and cruelty and nonsense. You might disagree, and think that the Bible is a sublime book filled with sound moral guidance. But at least recognize that there's a disagreement here. Why did PZ say what he said? Because he thinks the Bible is not a good thing. There should be no mystery about this.

And given that this is a substantive point of disagreement, I can't imagine why Constantine would insist that PZ's remark was "made in ignorance" and "unacceptable... to educated audiences". Are there some well-known facts that PZ is neglecting, facts that straightfowardly disprove the claim that the Bible is no good? And why the comparison to racist and ethnic bigotry? Again, I can't imagine what you are getting at. (Do you have a similar problem with the claim that the Qur'an is no good? The Tao Te Ching? The Communist Manifesto? Dianetics?)

A few related points:

Just because something is important in the lives of human beings doesn't mean that it's actually valuable. It's very easy to come up with examples of detestable things occupying first place in people's lives -- people dedicate themselves to all sorts of ugly and contemptible pursuits. So the mere fact that people cherish the Bible does nothing at all to vindicate its status as a valuable feature of the world. (This obvious point holds no matter what you think of the Bible)

Some things are so abominable they need to be attacked. Naturally, this can pain those who cherish the abomination in question. And, to be sure, their pain matters (at least much of the time), and this should be taken into account by any responsible and mature moral agent. But the fact remains, some things need to be attacked. (Again, it's very easy to come up with examples). Consequently, just because attacking the Bible causes people pain doesn't mean the Bible doesn't need to be attacked. (This also holds no matter what you think of the Bible)

Finally, I'm curious as to the "totally novel" moral lessons found in the Bible. And of course, we should bear in mind the obvious point that novel moral lessons aren't necessarily good moral lessons.



Page 3 of 23 pages « First  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  Last »

Next entry: Now we're really outgunned

Previous entry: Secularism…it's the right thing to do

<< Back to main

Info

email PZ Myers
Search
Archives
UMM—America's best public liberal arts college