I have a slightly askew relationship with the “organized atheism” movement, not so much ideologically but tactically – I think some facets of the movement can be a little petty and mean-spirited sometimes (re: the “you know it’s a myth” billboards that amount to a neener-neener against various faiths during their holidays); and I’m unable to subscribe to the tenet that “All religions are bad.” Sorry, I can’t go there – they’re all a little silly, conceptually, sure… but not only are most self-identified persons of faith either decent or at least harmless; the vast majority of the world’s hundreds of thousands of organized-religions are fairly benign.
That having been said, I’m fairly comfortable in my infrequent calculation that while not ALL religions are bad… between three and four of them (the religions) ARE bad – or, at the very least are a net-negative influence on the modern world as a whole to a degree that is not offset by whatever good is done by individual adherents. And this kind of shit is WHY…
That’s Pastor Sean Harris, rather explicitly suggesting that parents should – upon witnessing their children behaving in homosexual and/or gender-non-normative ways – essentially beat the behavior out of them. Charming.
He has, of course, offered a toothless apology on his blog.
There are two kinds of people in the world: Thinkers and Believers. This fellow, and the cheering/clapping ignoramouses hanging on his every word, are Believers; and that designation has NOTHING to do with their being religious and EVERYTHING to do with the words coming out of his mouth.
Oh, and have you heard? Activision has hired right-wing folk hero Col. Oliver North – convicted (later overturned on appeal) in the Iran-Contra Affair – to do commercials shilling next “Call of Duty” video-game.
Yeah, things are goin’ swell…
MOVIEBOB CENTRAL 
inb4 James somehow relates this to Liberals and Obama and blah blah blah BOB PLEEEEZE PAY ATTENTION TO ME HNNNNNNGGGH!
LikeLike
ironically, the dichotomy you keep presenting, “thinkers and believers”, and the way you assert it's truth and what you mean by it…
…it still comes off as a little bit of a belief.
LikeLike
Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true.
What carries the negative connotation is not that people have belief in thing A or thing B. It's that there are some people (I'll add probably a shrinking number but I don't have any hard numbers) will deny any and all reality contrary to that belief. Much like how people believe any 'paranormal' video they see on the internet, and some people believe that any and all 'paranormal' activity is a 100% fabrication.
Believers, in the content as someone unwilling/unable to change their world view, become increasingly rabid in times of change. It doesn't help when a profit motivated jerk pokes their insecurities and make them feel like an issue they may never deal with in their whole lives is suddenly a big deal. (honestly, of people who listen to that preacher would you wager even 2% would ever have to deal with a situation he describes?)
As far as Oliver North, I'm much angrier that another CoD game is being made than him being involved in anything.
LikeLike
No, this guy is not a believer. A believe is someone who looks to something and has faith that following its tenets will guide his actions even if he feels uncomfortable.
This guy is a thinker, a rationalize, a man who hates Gay people and will do whatever it takes to figure out how to make his religion hate what he hates.
LikeLike
For years I tried to have faith. At a very young age I started to doubt the existence of a higher power. Now I am without faith. I wish I could imbue this gift on to others.
LikeLike
“Activision has hired right-wing folk hero Col. Oliver North – convicted (later overturned on appeal) in the Iran-Contra Affair – to do commercials shilling next “Call of Duty” video-game.”
As they say on The Codex, DAY ONE BUY
LikeLike
So does this mean you disagree with Dan Savage calling a room full of high school students “Pansy-Ass” in this rant?
Isn't public ridicule of children the same thing as bullying?
LikeLike
Bob, YOU are not a thinker. You're a believer who poses as a thinker. And you're an arrogant douchebag. So go fuck yourself.
LikeLike
@Ahuviya Harel:
A room full of “journalism” students… who walked out when he started talking about the bible. If you look closely, you'll notice they start to walk out before he starts to even say anything that might offend their delicate sensibilities.
Also, everything he said about the bible and how the religious use it was true. If the students found the FACTS offensive, maybe they should do something about it?
Also, they ARE “pansy-ass”. A journalist who walks out when someone says something he/she dislikes is a coward, and a very poor journalist.
BTW… the public ridicule of stupid ideas is called “free speech”.
@moviebob:
The genral reason atheist activists state that all religion is bad, is because while it may be the fanatics that cause all the evil, it is the moderate religious followers that give them legitamacy. Remove the moderates, and the fanatics would no longer have any power.
LikeLike
The funny thing is Bob in my personal experience most (if not all) of the Atheists that I've ever had to deal with have shown me that Atheists are just as hateful, bile spewing and ignorant and in many, if not most cases far worst then any militant religious fanatic. Yes it is reprehensible for a religious leaded to advocate violence towards gay teens (and it also speaks volumes about his understanding of the word of Christ, as spoiler alert Christ spoke of loving them and TO NOT FUCKING JUDGE THEM) But just because this guys an asshole doesn't exempt the other side form being the same way.
The recent Dan Savage incident in which a full grown man verbally attacked the Christian students of a Seattle high-school (Ironically while give an Anti-Bulling speech)
illustrates my point perfectly.
Bob I am a Thinker and Believer, I am a born again Christian with an IQ of well over 120.
Honestly Bob you seem more like a hardcore believer whose in denial.
LikeLike
Bob… what kind of mental gymnastics did you have to make to draw a connection between these two points?
I agree, if someone is spewing hate in their church (don't care who), they are a net negative… but I could EASILY draw a much more connected line to this and other figures in the public for SIMILAR actions.
Randomly pointing at someone who had charges against them in something entirely unrelated to either preaching hate or beating anyone for not being in line to whatever reason in your last two sentences is… well… not really related. At all.
Just makes you look overtly like you have a political ax to grind.
LikeLike
Hell, ANImaniac did draw a better line… to Dan Savage. There is just no connection here. (He just didnt mention a toothless apology, which he also made)
LikeLike
@Thorbs
“BTW… the public ridicule of stupid ideas is called “free speech”.“
Ridiculing children with the purpose of making them feel socially ostracized from their peers isn't bullying?
LikeLike
Megabyte: Bob does have an ax to grind. He thinks anyone who doesn't have the same ideology he does is evil/stupid and needs to be demonized, lumping in good people with bad simply for their belief systems. He's a dick, plain and simple.
LikeLike
“The funny thing is Bob in my personal experience most (if not all) of the Atheists that I've ever had to deal with have shown me that Atheists are just as hateful, bile spewing and ignorant and in many, if not most cases far worst then any militant religious fanatic”
Word.
I have no problem with Atheists as a whole. I do have a problem with the ones who are all in-your-face, militant, and use every breath they take to mock theists and anyone who believes in a Higher Power, not to mention mock that Higher Power themselves, whom while they badmouth the RR and certain segments of Christianity and Islam for being preachy and trying to shove their beliefs down people's throats, turn around and do the exact same fucking thing.
What really irks me about them, and makes them worse in my eyes than any hardcore religious fundie, is that I think they should really know better. It's hypocritical.
LikeLike
@ANImaniac
So you're disagreeing with his assertion that as a whole Christianity has done more harm to civilization than good (pretty easy thing to argue), by pointing out that atheists are also people? Because saying you've met some nasty atheists is like saying you met some rude teenagers or that the sun is hot. Atheism doesn't define a person's character or behavior. It's not a set of rules or a moral code. It refers to anybody who doesn't believe in any god, that's all. (a=lack of, theism= belief that a deity exists) And before you point it out without thinking, I know there are some people who sadly use it to define themselves… but that doesn't somehow redefine the broader meaning of the word.
Also, though I'm sure I can't change your mind by pointing this out, you might want to switch the argument up from the “do not judge” thing. I mean, consistency isn't really the bible's strong-suit, and there are plenty of times where God disagrees with his son. Also this guy is not JUST an asshole, when religious extremism reaches a level that people might get hurt or have their rights in jeopardy you get upgraded from “Asshole” to “dangerous fucking lunatic”.
Atheists are the least trusted minority, which is funny because they're some of the only people who might have a shot at making rational decisions ever. Maybe once or twice. Maybe. They are still people.
And “you sound like a believer in denial” stopped being a good fallacy to use in 8th grade. The “honestly” at the beginning is really cute too.
I am not, as demonstrated, against using condescension as an argumentative tool. It's too much fun.
LikeLike
This comment has been removed by the author.
LikeLike
“So you're disagreeing with his assertion that as a whole Christianity has done more harm to civilization than good (pretty easy thing to argue),”
I don't see how it could be an easy thing to argue, given how that statement is uses TWO vague and undefined abstractions, namely “Chirstianity as a whole” and “harm to civilization”.
LikeLike
@Billy
Agreed, your are right ANYONE who advocate abuse ether physically or psychologically of a child for ANY reason is automatically upgraded from Asshole to dangerous fucking lunatic and should be striped of there ability to speak (in the medieval way)
But your assumption that ONLY an Atheist can make a rational decision is exactly what I mean you believe the your kind is superior because of your point of view.
And for the record I have met Atheists that where decent people that I would even call good friends. But that doesn't change the fact that the other 90% that I've met are straight up assholes, some of which where also upgraded to dangerous fucking lunatic when they vomited out there own special opinions (i.e. Children should be taken away from religious homes, people of faith should be rounded up and put in camps). Funny thing is I'm only counting people I've met in person NOT people met on the Internet, if I did that the I'd have to change the level from dangerous fucking lunatic to dangerous fucking lunatic borderline Nazi.
Sorry had to edit, I'm kind tried.
LikeLike
I would have absolutely no problem with Atheism as a movement if they used their influence to promote a life of reason and enlightenment.
Insulting religion and the religious as a whole just feels counter-productive to me. It makes Atheists look like jerks and doesn't help their movement in a significant way.
While, currently, I really have no specific name to describe what I believe -I just call it non denominational catholicism- I definitely think my beliefs have been a major force of good in my life. Both as a way to make me feel better when I'm really on the brink of madness, and as an encouragement to do good onto others.
Most of the good deeds I've done throughout my life have partly been the consequence of trying to be a good christian, and uphold the values that have been taught to me through it.
Not saying I don't occasionally find a huge flaw in my belief system (Closeted Bisexual Teenager Here!) but I am pretty sure religion has had a mostly good effect on my life as a whole.
Just, well… thought I needed to say my part.
LikeLike
It kind of worries/sickens me that most of the comments here are arguing about the merits of Bob's criticism of religion, and instead of talking about the fact that the guy in the video is gleefully instructing people to violently abuse their children.
It also annoys me that when this kind of thing comes up, the immediate defense is “well those kind of people aren't 'real' Christians,” no matter how many times prominent Christian leaders are the ones saying/doing this kind of thing. You could have the Pope, Jesse Jackson and Pat Robertson leading an army of nuns as they overtake a pride parade with flamethrowers, and the first thing you would hear in the comments would be “Well, those guys aren't real Christians.”
And no, they wouldn't be, and Sean Harris isn't, but maybe you should take a moment to consider that the problem isn't just isolated to this one particular person so you can just shrug him off as not being a 'real' Christian, and ask yourself whether Christians as a whole are real Christians.
LikeLike
Hey Bob, nothing to say about the religions in the Middle East who ACTUALLY make it legal to beat your spouse? No?
What about the cultures of Africa that claims it's okay to mutilate pre-pubescent girls genitals without painkillers OR consent? Nothing?
And THIS dumb shit is what you're trying to get up in arms about? You need better priorities, Bob.
LikeLike
“So does this mean you disagree with Dan Savage calling a room full of high school students “Pansy-Ass” in this rant?
Isn't public ridicule of children the same thing as bullying?”
Uh, did you watch that video? Because Dan is 100% in the right. The Bible DOES cause children to bully each other and he says that that is bad. He is factually correct in that statement. I've been on the receiving end of that behavior. Dan's personally experienced physical attacks and social stigmatization from people who follow the Bible, people who he's done nothing to other than make a harmless lifestyle choice they disagree with. The system of belief that those teenagers ascribe to has ruined the lives of thousands of homosexuals, outright killing some of them. If they can't stand to here the infallibility of that system called into question, then they deserve to be ridiculed.
And don't give me that bullshit about “Christianity didn't hurt those people”. The system legitimizes and provides an outlet for peoples' prejudices and places it's followers as intrinsically better than their out-groups. There's no better recipe for deplorable behavior that a person can feel completely justified in.
“Hey Bob, nothing to say about the religions in the Middle East who ACTUALLY make it legal to beat your spouse? No?
What about the cultures of Africa that claims it's okay to mutilate pre-pubescent girls genitals without painkillers OR consent? Nothing?
And THIS dumb shit is what you're trying to get up in arms about? You need better priorities, Bob.”
He probably thinks those things are bad. And those people should stop doing that.
Also, where the fuck do you get off trivializing the abuse of LBGT children in america?
LikeLike
>The Bible DOES cause children to bully each other
Nope.
>”Pansy-Ass” => “Give him a good punch”
Nope.
Where is that documentary, I think it was on TLC or A&E about a sick Canadian psychologist who tried to prove that gender identity is arbitrary and artificial by gotcing a boy who was a victim of a surgical accident to be raised as a girl? The man “changed his gender back” (it never was changed in tue first place) and committed suicide not many years after.
Don't get me wrong, I do not support what this pastor advocates as a solution, but the problem is real. No other higher reasoning mammal tries to make boys into girls or girls into boys. There is no biological basis for such conversions.
LikeLike
>gotcing
forcing. I miss having a phone with a physical keyboard.
LikeLike
Hey Bob, I think we need a good long and clear post about how you define Thinkers and Believers. I understand what you mean by that and a lot of the other subtleties that come along with that view, but I think that the titles can easily be misconstrued. Daniel Quinn had a similar problem when he labeled cultures as Leavers and Takers initially but he found it much easier to engage his audience in a reasoned debate after he spent some more time properly defining these terms in his later books. Although you've already posted what you mean by the terms, I think there are still plenty that can get lost when their definitions don't match your own. We all walk into a conversation with different dictionaries and it's up to us to make our definitions known in order to communicate ideas fully. Other than that, keep up the good work!
LikeLike
@ANImaniac
So where are the videos of atheists blaming lesbians for 9/11? Calling on parents to beat their kids if they don't conform? Disowning their kids for not thinking like them?
For a christian to be called militant, he usually has to call for the death of someone, or stocklpile guns in a bunker. An atheist just has to write a book.
Furthermore, when atheist DO say and do stupid things, the atheist community is often the first to pounce on them for it. Whereas christians play no true scotsman or complain that we aren't saying these things about the muslims.
But yes, the supreme irony of bob's idiotic thinker vs believers dichotomy (I wonder where he'd put Francis collins on that scale. Or Bill Maher for good measure.) is that he thinks he would fall into the “thinkers” category.
People are a mix of both.
LikeLike
@Daniel R
“I would have absolutely no problem with Atheism as a movement if they used their influence to promote a life of reason and enlightenment.”
They do. The problem is their idea of reason and enlightenment is fundamentally the opposite of yours. A lot of groups are simply busy trying to just get the existence of atheists out there. It's quite an uphill battle considering something as non-confrontational as an ad that simply stated “Atheists” has been rejected.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2012/02/28/the-most-inoffensive-atheist-bus-ad-ever-rejected/
“Insulting religion and the religious as a whole just feels counter-productive to me. It makes Atheists look like jerks and doesn't help their movement in a significant way.”
It's impossible to criticize religion in a nice way when all criticism of religion is considered “insulting”. Suggest that priests that molest boys should be punished and Rabbis shouldn't perform a ritual that could transfer deadly diseases to infants? “Stop insulting our beliefs”.
LikeLike
It's kind of funny that this guy is “preaching” about enforcing gender stereotypes that weren't even invented until the 20th century.
Pink was a “boy's color” and blue was a “girl's color” all the way up to the 1940's.
And the whole “girls are supposed to be pretty and attractive and walk and talk like a girl” thing seems pretty subjective in general.
LikeLike
I think I'd have to agree with StudentofB that you need to clarify exactly what your definitions of Thinkers and Believers are if you're going to apply it to so many situations in the way that you have, which I have to say has not always been consistent.
Previously it did seem to be primarily about religion but since you've specified in the case of Harris it has less to do with religion than what they're saying, it would seem to be more a matter of world view, in which case it hardly seems to be a matter of belief and reason since it's reasonable to state that everyone does have some form of world view.
But giving it the benefit of the doubt by defining it as a world view based on ignorance or at the very least not based on facts, this would make the characterization of it as belief make more sense on the surface but then not all homophobia comes from a religious place. Some homophobics would cite what they think are logical reasons for their viewpoints, such as the unclear place of homosexuality in evolutionary theory and such. The same type of rationale has been used in the past for racism and sexism. In these cases, one could argue such disgusting points of view are be based on incorrect or false premises but not necessarily belief.
On the flipside, I'd note that one of the definitions of belief is, and I quote from Merriam-Webster, “the conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence,” a definition that could arguably apply to any social view and even some scientific theories given the part about examination of evidence, in which case all of us are believers of some sort. While I know you've reacted negatively in the past to the word being applied to you in even the most basic, non-religious sense, it's nonsensical and irrational to deny its accepted meaning just because it irks you.
Getting back to the issue at hand though, the best argument against homophobia is one not based on fact or reasoning but the conviction that such discrimination is wrong and unjust.
And if it is a matter of right and wrong, I suggest it comes down to not a matter of belief and thinking but good and evil, as in Harris is an evil fuckhead.
LikeLike
@ fett
You bastard! I was just about to post the billboard example. So instead I'll just agree with you.
The atheist movement has TRIED to be conciliatory. It doesn't work. Neither did silence.
Look at the Dan Savage thing. He specifically went out of his way to show how christians can ignore the stupid parts of their book by showing how they already ignore the even stupider parts. And he gets accused of bullying.
You aren't allow to criticize religion….(well, except scientology and islam) Why? Because you're not.
It's worth mentioning the reverse is not true. Someone can go on national tv and say that all atheists are immoral and there' no controversy. A major news network can discuss the issue of atheism without having any atheist take part in the discussion. What other group in modern society would EVER get that kind of treatment.
LikeLike
gh
LikeLike
Bob's “thinkers vs. believers” seems most comparable to science versus creationism. A proper scientist looks at bio-diversity and asks: what made this? They gather data on all the extant species and look for similarities. They observe populations of species and chart the trends in their traits. They create a thesis, continually refine it, and come to a conclusion that can always be refuted if somebody else can come up with a better one.
A creationist already knows what causes bio-diversity: God made everything. Everything they do is an attempt to explain how god made everything and to disprove anything that does not conform to that belief. Despite their claim of being scientists, they spend pitifully little on research in any area but politics. Their basis is in deceiving people through fake authority, attacking anything that contradicts them, and playing to emotions rather than reason. Everything they do is to affirm one unchanging, unchallenged belief.
There's the crux of “thinkers versus believers”. See also Carl Sagan's “Dragon in the Garage”.
LikeLike
Man, the things I miss when I get up late. *WARNING WARNING: WALL OF TEXT INCOMING!*
@Wendy: So what…he has to condemn EVERY bad thing in the world before he condemns the thing he wants? Christ on sale, do you WANT his posts to be 100 pages long?
Oh and while I'm at it @both Wendy and James: Why do you come here to post if all you're gonna do is get angry? Yes, I've been known to post some negative comments myself, but that's because I don't really feel a need to post if I agree with Bob (and I usually do), so I USUALLY only end up posting if I disagree. So if you're just coming here to get angry…why do you come here? Seriously, do you see me trolling Big Hollywood? No, cuz I don't need to irritation. If you want to engage Bob (or anyone) in serious discussion and try to change his mind…'go fuck yourself' is not a very persuasive argument. I'm just sayin.
Finally @Everyone, since the Atheist perspective is feeling a bit under-represented:
One of the reasons I think some atheists (they know who they are… *COUGHDAWKINSCOUGH*) can be kinda douchebags about it (and they can be) is because they automatically feel on the offensive. There is a STRONG bias against atheists in this country and it's so pervasive and unquestioned that it's actually a little disconcerting (and no, it's nothing on the order of the shit gay people have to deal with, or African Americans or Latinos but that's neither here nor there).
That feeling, the feeling of being cornered all the time, can make you kind of nasty when questioned about it. No, that doesn't excuse anything, but it's an explanation for why they might a little angry.
Oh and while I'm at it @ANImaniac: I'm an atheist myself, my girlfriend is an atheist, several of my closest friends are atheists, I'm active in the Atheist community, and I have never, but NEVER heard anyone say, suggest or suggest to suggest the idea of taking away kids from Religious homes, much less putting Religious people in camps. The fact that you say it happened in person (and is therefore hearsay) suggests to me that either A, that 90 percent is 1 person and the person was being sarcastic or B, you're…being creative with the truth, we'll say to be diplomatic. Either way, even if that did happen and that person was being sarcastic, judging all atheists by that person would be like judging all Christians based on the KKK or the Nazis (both Christian based groups). But I know that most Christians are good people, so I don't judge their entire religion based on those two groups, capiche?
Congratulations on making it to the end of my post. If you e-mail me, I'll mail you a cookie 🙂
LikeLike
Yes, because the fact that douchebag extremists exist within a movement (if one can really call an un-organized swath of loosely-related denominations with generally similar beliefs a “movement”) totally makes the movement as a whole un-justified in existing. You know, like how PETA's chicanery completely invalidates the animal-rights movement as a whole, or how the fact that most opposition to Internet surveillance and censorship comes from people who want their piracy to remain unchecked means it's not a valid thing to be concerned about. That makes perfect sense!
LikeLike
Oh, and again: “Thinkers and Believers” as a philosophical dichotomy wouldn't pass muster in your local community college.
LikeLike
Wow, his apology is really full of shit. He claims that he doesn't advocate the use of violence but how could anyone one not get that impression from his speech. You could also tell during his rant about effeminate boys that “fag” was right on the tip of his tongue. Also the his laughter is kind of creepy cause it is like he is trying to play off the whole thing for laughs, but he really 100% means it.
@ James
“Bob, YOU are not a thinker. You're a believer who poses as a thinker. And you're an arrogant douchebag. So go fuck yourself.” I see you put a lot of thought into that statement.
“Megabyte: Bob does have an ax to grind. He thinks anyone who doesn't have the same ideology he does is evil/stupid and needs to be demonized, lumping in good people with bad simply for their belief systems. He's a dick, plain and simple.” Do I really have to point out the obvious hypocrisy here?
@Wendy
“Hey Bob, nothing to say about the religions in the Middle East who ACTUALLY make it legal to beat your spouse? No? What about the cultures of Africa that claims it's okay to mutilate pre-pubescent girls genitals without painkillers OR consent? Nothing? And THIS dumb shit is what you're trying to get up in arms about? You need better priorities, Bob”
So you believe that what this pastor said is okay because there are worse things going in the world? Just because it is not the worst thing in world it doesn't make it any better. Also couldn't I just make that argument for just about anything like “Hey, why are you complaining on the internet when there are children starving? Get your priorities straight!” You view Bob's blog post as being biased but have considered that he did this story because it is new and current?
@James and Wendy
Listen guys there is a difference between trying to start a fight and having a difference of opinion. It seems like you guys are less angry with any that Bob's post had to say rather that you are simply angry because Bob wrote it.
LikeLike
All this anger makes me think Bob could really do a good episode about what I've come to call the 'cover' effect. Where the worst people of an argument (choose one, they all apply) hold up the best examples of their side as a kind of bullet proof shield against criticisms of their own behavior.
Of course nobody is going to criticize the best parts of a community. The Atheists who are respectful of other peoples beliefs and Christians who actually follow their faiths to good moral lives deserve better than to be used as a moral rock for scum to hide behind. If you DO belong to a community that's criticized for something, please just stop trying to defend the scumbags that look at your beliefs as nothing more than moral justification to be a jerk.
LikeLike
This comment has been removed by the author.
LikeLike
@Anon,
As is usually the case, my anger with Bob is not his opinion–to which he is entitled. It is the hypocrisy of selective rage wherein Bob always has the energy to bitch about us conservatives and Christians, yet finds nothing of fault about those he prefers or turns a blind eye to something far, FAR worse.
For example, Moviebob adores science and the exploration of space and I applaud his enthusiasm for both, yet such is his hypocrisy that I have yet to see him say a single thing about the president we currently have, in spite of this president ENDING our space program. I'd be willing to bet money if Bush had halted our space excursions, he'd have been decrying it all day and night. (Bush, BTW, wanted us to go to Mars. Obama, not so much.)
Selective rage = Hypocrisy. I won't stand for it or fail to call it out where I see it.
LikeLike
@ Wendy
MovieBob has already on his “The Big Picture” show in the past criticized Obama for ending the space shuttle program and not caring much about space exploration. Either you're new to MovieBob's stuff and his opinions, or not paying close enough attention to his words to get his opinion. Here's the link to his video about Obama ending the space shuttle program.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/2482-Once-Upon-a-Time-in-The-Future
– The Saarai'ari
LikeLike
@ wendy
You are one to talk about hypocrisy. How is he turning a blind eye? Where is it written that whenever one decries christian atrocities one must mention the muslims as well?
Every time some example of christian excess comes up we get another whiner coming out of the woodwork about how them dirty A-rabs are even worst and why isn't the liberal media focused on them.
Talk about dishonesty. You know full well that the reason people focus more on christian extremism is that it is closer to home and actually affects their lives. And your whining about poor women's rights in the arab world ring hollow when you christians and conservatives are actively trying to roll back women's right in the us.
FFS sake the VAWA just made it through the senate. Every single nay vote was republican.
It's common sense that he is going to focus more on the fanatic jackholes trying to destroy his country than the fanatic jackholes who already destroyed their own.
LikeLike
@dave
The point is that he says because of the extreamists, it would therfore be better if Christianity never existed. Which is stupid.
LikeLike
@ Wendy
Hold here Wendy, Bob isn't exactly CNN, FOX, or MSNBC here. It is not like his blog is a news source that is expected to report on anything regardless of his own opinion. This is his own personal blog so why wouldn't he post things that he directly makes him upset or has a reaction to? Plus, if you happen to make a criticism of one side, you shouldn't automatically have to come up with a criticism of the other side just to not appear bias.
Now be honest here. Do you go to conservative blogs and tell them they are not pointing out all the flaws within their own party or people who share the same philosophy as them?
It seems like you are more angry at Bob because he has a different opinion rather than his hypocrisy.
“That having been said, I'm fairly comfortable in my infrequent calculation that while not ALL religions are bad… between three and four of them (the religions) ARE bad – or, at the very least are a net-negative influence on the modern world as a whole to a degree that is not offset by whatever good is done by individual adherents.” Now that was a quote from him in the article. Does it basically say that he doesn't like religion and thinks a lot of aspects are bad? Yeah. But then he basically has to go out of his way to say that is some good people in there. The article wasn't about how every single thing about religion is bad. It was about the overwhelming negative aspects of religion that hates. I mean the priest is saying that you need to “straighten out” you kids if your son is acting a little girly or if you daughter is obsessed with trying to look pretty and acting manly (cause apparently all lesbians are ugly and butch). You can't find anything wrong with that?
LikeLike
@Anonymous (7): Who's defending? Of course this guy is scum. That goddamn goes without saying (though it certainly doesn't hurt to reiterate.) But taking issue with Bob's claim that Christianity as a whole is in a state of moral deficit simply because people like this asshole exist within it (while simultaneously claiming that the majority of religious folks are alright, however he reconciles these two claims) is hardly defending the scum.
And if we really want to get down into the dirt and start judging whole belief systems (or lack-of-belief systems, if you're the insistent sort) by the worst people to belong to them, I'd like to just note that atheism is hardly clean-handed on the abuse-of-homosexuals front. Stalin was an atheist and Hitler's only use for religion was as a tool for the state, and both of them were notoriously anti-gay. Just sayin'.
LikeLike
It really seems like a lot of the oppressed groups are going on a belligerent offensive right now.
The transsexual community has a pretty big movement going on called “Die Cis Scum”. Basically all Transgender people think that Cisgender people are scum…and should die…. That sounds peaceful…
LikeLike
@antecedentless:
Please cite your sources for saying the bible does not cause children to bully each other. I'm calling bullshit unless you have some evidence.
As for gender in biology? The animal kingdom is far more creative in this respect than we humans have ever been. Check out:
http://www.comicsalliance.com/2012/04/14/animal-gender-roles-cartoons-humon/
http://carinbondar.com/2012/03/transvestites-in-the-animal-kingdom/
@Ahuviya Harel
“Ridiculing children with the purpose of making them feel socially ostracized from their peers isn't bullying?”
It's bullying to point out the religious-right encourages bullying on the basis of race, gender and sexuality? We wouldn't want to offend the sensibilities of all the bigots would we?
Besides, the religious-right is against anti-bulling legislation. Bullying isn't a big problem… the victims should just man up.
Accusing people of bullying you, while defending your right to bully others is not at all hypocrytical is it?
Don't believe me? check out:
http://www.pfaw.org/rww-in-focus/updated-big-bullies-right-wings-anti-anti-bullying-strategies
LikeLike
@biomechanical923:
“The transsexual community has a pretty big movement going on called “Die Cis Scum”. Basically all Transgender people think that Cisgender people are scum…and should die…. That sounds peaceful…”
Crossdressing is the feminist equivalent of blackface.
LikeLike
@Thorbs
I doubt most bullys care about God and religion. It has more to do with being “different” then anything.
LikeLike
This comment has been removed by the author.
LikeLike