“(she) brings youth and energy,”
“.....it would be wonderful to have a working mom as vice president.”
“We’ve got to vote the way God wants us to vote.”
"She is a Washington outsider."
“She should run for president. I’d vote for her for president and McCain as vice-president. She’s going to be the most beautiful vice-president in history.”
Wow. So this is it folks. Here are the words of our fellow citizens describing a person who could possibly have more power than any other person in the history of the world. This is terrifying and it leads me to seriously question our democracy. Now I'm actually not a socialist or communist, but our political ideology must evolve. I would like to suggest a simple (in theory at least) idea:
Civics tests for voters
The right to vote is at the heart of democracy. It is democracy. But our situation is a dire one when uninformed citizens can stroll into a booth and elect a person to office because they think she's a milf. This is laughable, worthy of parody.......except it's not.
Take her reputation as a "Washington outsider." Ok I'm an "engineering outsider." Anyone want to hire me to work on the next NASA project? Should I wait for Boeing to call for my advice on their new airplane? No? Why? I have flown on many airplanes.......I've even touched one. Doesn't that qualify me?
"She brings youth and energy." Uh huh.......and??? You know who else has youth and energy? Children!!
"Hey Johnny, should the U.S. be responsible for bailing out private companies?"
"I wanna go to McDonald's!"
"Should we talk with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about his country's nuclear ambitions?"
"I don't wanna go to bed! I hate you!"
"it would be wonderful to have a working mom as vice president.” I actually have no idea what the rationale for this is. I've actually asked a few people about this question and they respond with something like "Well it shows she is just like us." I have a radical response for this failure of logic: Our leaders should not be the "guy I wanna have a beer with", nor "the woman next door." Our leaders should not be "just like us."
Our leaders should be extraordinary
That's why they are leaders! George Washington was a general and a diplomat, devoted to civic virtue and respected as a man of extraordinary qualities. He wasn't the local buggy whip maker, raising two kids and tending to his pig farm.
Here is another quote from an obviously well-informed citizen: “We’ve got to vote the way God wants us to vote.” Oh boy.........So God has a horse in this race? What are the odds that this person has any idea that ours is the only constitution in the world that forbids the mentioning of God, except to limit the influence of religion? And keep this is mind: This person is going to vote!
Last one: "She’s going to be the most beautiful vice-president in history.” Now I have to say that she has that sexy repressed librarian thing down pat. The "Tina Fey" look. So if we are nominating her for the local "Miss Dewey Decimal" pageant I'm down. But we are not. Have you ever taken a look at Angela Merkel? Tarja Halonen? Pratibha Patil? All women. All qualified. Not hot. How far has our great country fallen? Put it this way, we have come from: electing candidates based on experience and knowledge........to making the vice presidency the final round of America's Next Top Model.
But to my main point of this article: civics tests for the right to vote. Yes, voting is a right. And that right should be earned.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Here's what I think, Rabbi Dumbass
Hey everyone, do you like the title? I was being kind.......
So here's the premise of this little blog:
I have to drive a little ways to work every day so I figured I'd make a CD of a debate I downloaded so I could have something interesting to listen to on the way to work.
Next thing I know, I'm so goddamn angry at this fucking religious lunatic that I'm practically pounding on my steering wheel and screaming obscenities at the radio like Billy Mays with turrets syndrome.
The debate was between Sam Harris and David Wolpe (author of great literary works such as "Why be Jewish") Yes, why indeed......I'm assuming he doesn't mean Jewish in the racial sense of the word. Otherwise I can't wait for the sequel, "Why be White"
So after somehow managing to calm down a bit, I thought I'd listen to this debate again and take notes of all the dumb shit that flows from this fuckstick. Now I'm not usually this harsh on someone, but what really gets me is when people make verbose and obtuse "arguments". I've heard Christopher Hitchens refer to it as "white noise." And that is exactly what it is. Do you know how frustrating it is when someone TALKS but doesn't SAY anything? Listen to this debate and you'll get an earful of it.
I'm really not sure if the debate is posted on a website or not. I downloaded it from emule so I know that it's there if all else fails..........
Now I hope to hear others' opinions about this contest between these two and let me know what you all think.
But here is my running take:
2:40 - "They don't get that science is powerful, but narrow." Uh oh, here is the Rabbi telling us about science. Things are not looking good.
3:20 - He is overtly criticizing Sam for being trained scientifically but not philosophically. Does he not know that Sam Harris graduated from Stanford with a degree in......philosophy!?
3:54 - "I challenge anyone to think of a question where we once had a scientific answer, but now the best answer is a religious one." Great job Sam, frankly I wish I thought of this argument. Now how will the dumbass respond to this.......?
6:32 - Marxism is a science. That is his response. Seriously.
7:02 - Sam - "The antidote to bad science is good science, not religion."
7:15 - Rabbi - "The cure for bad religion is good religion and more religion." So a question for the Rabbi: By what process do we determine what is good religion and bad religion? Unfortunately Sam doesn't ask this, but I cannot figure out an objective system for determining what is good religion vs. what is bad religion WITHOUT invoking scientific principles or secular morality.
7:51 - Galileo and the Pope were friends.
"Hey Galileo, it's the Pope writing. Had a great time at your BBQ last month. By the way, you're excommunicated. Have fun in Hell, sinner."
Jesus loves me,
Urban VIII
*Ok, now that was a joke. It is true that Galileo was never excommunicated. Just sentenced to house arrest and his books were banned. See that's not too bad..........
9:00 - Wolpe has taken it upon himself to tell us what a dead Rabbi would say if he came back to life.
13:20 - Here begins a white noise phase........"What evidence do you have that life is worth living?"
As Dawkins would say, "Why are unicorns hollow?" "What is the smell of hope?"
14:50 "Religion is not a belief in a proposition." Yes he really says that. On a related note - trees are not make of wood.
18:14 - "The virgin birth is not a claim about biology." I grow discouraged.
23:36 - "Does the fact that 98% of humans in history have had a sense of a god suggest that there really is a creator?"
It suggests that primitive peoples who had little or no scientific explanation for the nature of the world tried to use reason to explain their world. And using your reasoning without the aid of scientific discoveries naturally leads to a supernatural view of the world. As for modern people, who have the benefits of science and the progress of secular ethics (but don't choose to use it), can't we just say that some people are intellectually lazy and others are just fucking idiots?
26:10 - "Healthy religion is the only cure for sick religion." What nonsense. This is like saying, "Healthy racism is the cure for sick racism."
28:30 - "Would you like to live in North Korea or South Korea? South Korea is Christian." Oh man, someone help me from pulling my hair out. 46.5% of South Koreans are atheists/agnostics, you fucking idiot! And there are almost the same proportion of Christians as Buddhists. Damn it, I hate people who just start pulling statistics out of their ass.
32:10 - We knew it was coming.........The Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot argument. Apparently, according to the wise Rabbi, it wasn't until after the French Revolution that societies became capable of being truly evil. I'll let you come up with a good retort for this one, my head hurts.
32:30 - Listen to this sentence carefully, "The values that you take with skeptical inquiry are values that in fact were taken from the religious regimes that you find unpalatable." Please tell me, when exactly did religion EVER encourage or even respect skeptical inquiry? Skepticism is a one way ticket to hell for unbelievers. Why is the Rabbi afraid to take a stand and admit this?
33:00 - Here is where Sam is at his best
35:25 - My breaking point has been reached. The Rabbi reads the following quote from a Holocaust survivor:
"The gas chambers of Auschwitz were the ultimate consequence of the theory that man is nothing but the product of heredity and environment--or, as the Nazis liked to say, "of blood and soil." I am absolutely convinced that the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek were ultimately prepared not in some ministry or other in Berlin, but rather at the desks and in lecture halls of nihilistic scientists and philosophers."
Ok, no doubt that this man went through an ordeal that is almost as horrifying as anything we can imagine. But if you are gonna take this man's word as some proof that atheists, left to their own devices, will create terrible torture machines to use as they see fit, then you are confusing emotional testimony with fact. It MAY be true that the gas chamber was created in a lecture hall by scientists and it may not. But he can't know it. And if you want to look at devices to elicit pain.........well look no further than the faithful of medieval Europe. The machines used to bring forth confessions of witchcraft and Satanic possession are the most awful forms of punishment I can imagine.
37:08 - Host desecration!! Holy shit, how about this for coincidence. The mistreatment or malicious use of a consecrated Host, or communion wafer. Now this debate took place quite a while ago, and if you listened to it then you might have thought, "Oh that's crazy. I don't think Christians would be that nuts to actually take this seriously." You would be wrong.
38:14 - "In what sort of regime are you likely to be able to get a society, ala America, where [the torture of one group by another] is minimized?....The only idea that ties one person to another is God."
Wow. So America is the gold standard for the rest of the world in terms of how we treat one another. And the reason that Americans are so tolerant is due to God. That is the essence of his argument. Using this logic, countries with large atheistic populations should just be bastions of moral deprivation and secular charitable organizations should be non-existent. Help me.
39:11 - Learned something new from the Rabbi. In order to actually understand the OT correctly, you need to filter it through a person. I think the Rabbi's filter needs changed.
39:57 - Sam nails him perfectly.
42:27 - Oh boy does Sam do a number on him here. Talking about the revelation that Mother Theresa lost her faith, Sam says "Ask yourself, when even the doubts of experts are thought to confirm a doctrine, what could possibly disprove it?" When the Rabbi then asks if Mother Theresa would still have done her "charity" work if she still wasn't a Christian despite her doubts, Sam pounces on him by pointing out that many secularists spend their lives devoted to charity and helping the poor. Fucking great. Then, after about two seconds of complete silence, the Rabbi starts talking about "serious percentages." Yawn.
43:22 - Here Rabbi dipshit starts this bullshit about how "in study after study, religious people are happier, feel less stress, etc."
Thomas Gray once said "Ignorance is bliss." And what is with this childlike expectation that you should only concern yourself with happiness? How about truth? My dog always looks happy, does this mean I need to bark at my neighbors and shit in my yard?
51:00 - Here the dumbass essentially asks if we don't have religion what do we have? To which Harris points out that we don't replace the belief in Santa Claus with something that does exactly what Santa does. It's true that some beliefs just fade away and we don't (and shouldn't) replace them.
52:10 - Rabbi: "Where does our moral order come from?"
Oh this is where Sam is in his zone and you just have to listen to him to fully appreciate this part of the debate. Dexter the 17 headed demon, brilliant.
54:44 - For the first time, I actually feel sorry for the Rabbi. His response to Sam is so sad and pathetic.....
58:00 - Are you ready to hear one of the stupidest things that you will hear in a long time? Here it is.....From the Rabbi of course: "My experience of religious human beings and the way they live, and the fact they live in harmony, to my perception, with an invisible order that gives them a life of a certain sanctity."
Got that? "The fact they live in harmony." *sigh*
60:44 - Sam and the metaphysical Elvis. Just listen for yourselves. It's hilarious.
64:00 - The talk switches to human creativity and whether if an end to religion will diminish creativity in the arts. Christian chicken pluckers, lol.
67:10 Here begins a little q&a session so I've decided to stop here.
There is sooooo much more to this than what I have written about. I really hope that other people will listen to it and comment on this blog their own opinions.
Looking forward to hearing from you,
- AQ
So here's the premise of this little blog:
I have to drive a little ways to work every day so I figured I'd make a CD of a debate I downloaded so I could have something interesting to listen to on the way to work.
Next thing I know, I'm so goddamn angry at this fucking religious lunatic that I'm practically pounding on my steering wheel and screaming obscenities at the radio like Billy Mays with turrets syndrome.
The debate was between Sam Harris and David Wolpe (author of great literary works such as "Why be Jewish") Yes, why indeed......I'm assuming he doesn't mean Jewish in the racial sense of the word. Otherwise I can't wait for the sequel, "Why be White"
So after somehow managing to calm down a bit, I thought I'd listen to this debate again and take notes of all the dumb shit that flows from this fuckstick. Now I'm not usually this harsh on someone, but what really gets me is when people make verbose and obtuse "arguments". I've heard Christopher Hitchens refer to it as "white noise." And that is exactly what it is. Do you know how frustrating it is when someone TALKS but doesn't SAY anything? Listen to this debate and you'll get an earful of it.
I'm really not sure if the debate is posted on a website or not. I downloaded it from emule so I know that it's there if all else fails..........
Now I hope to hear others' opinions about this contest between these two and let me know what you all think.
But here is my running take:
2:40 - "They don't get that science is powerful, but narrow." Uh oh, here is the Rabbi telling us about science. Things are not looking good.
3:20 - He is overtly criticizing Sam for being trained scientifically but not philosophically. Does he not know that Sam Harris graduated from Stanford with a degree in......philosophy!?
3:54 - "I challenge anyone to think of a question where we once had a scientific answer, but now the best answer is a religious one." Great job Sam, frankly I wish I thought of this argument. Now how will the dumbass respond to this.......?
6:32 - Marxism is a science. That is his response. Seriously.
7:02 - Sam - "The antidote to bad science is good science, not religion."
7:15 - Rabbi - "The cure for bad religion is good religion and more religion." So a question for the Rabbi: By what process do we determine what is good religion and bad religion? Unfortunately Sam doesn't ask this, but I cannot figure out an objective system for determining what is good religion vs. what is bad religion WITHOUT invoking scientific principles or secular morality.
7:51 - Galileo and the Pope were friends.
"Hey Galileo, it's the Pope writing. Had a great time at your BBQ last month. By the way, you're excommunicated. Have fun in Hell, sinner."
Jesus loves me,
Urban VIII
*Ok, now that was a joke. It is true that Galileo was never excommunicated. Just sentenced to house arrest and his books were banned. See that's not too bad..........
9:00 - Wolpe has taken it upon himself to tell us what a dead Rabbi would say if he came back to life.
13:20 - Here begins a white noise phase........"What evidence do you have that life is worth living?"
As Dawkins would say, "Why are unicorns hollow?" "What is the smell of hope?"
14:50 "Religion is not a belief in a proposition." Yes he really says that. On a related note - trees are not make of wood.
18:14 - "The virgin birth is not a claim about biology." I grow discouraged.
23:36 - "Does the fact that 98% of humans in history have had a sense of a god suggest that there really is a creator?"
It suggests that primitive peoples who had little or no scientific explanation for the nature of the world tried to use reason to explain their world. And using your reasoning without the aid of scientific discoveries naturally leads to a supernatural view of the world. As for modern people, who have the benefits of science and the progress of secular ethics (but don't choose to use it), can't we just say that some people are intellectually lazy and others are just fucking idiots?
26:10 - "Healthy religion is the only cure for sick religion." What nonsense. This is like saying, "Healthy racism is the cure for sick racism."
28:30 - "Would you like to live in North Korea or South Korea? South Korea is Christian." Oh man, someone help me from pulling my hair out. 46.5% of South Koreans are atheists/agnostics, you fucking idiot! And there are almost the same proportion of Christians as Buddhists. Damn it, I hate people who just start pulling statistics out of their ass.
32:10 - We knew it was coming.........The Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot argument. Apparently, according to the wise Rabbi, it wasn't until after the French Revolution that societies became capable of being truly evil. I'll let you come up with a good retort for this one, my head hurts.
32:30 - Listen to this sentence carefully, "The values that you take with skeptical inquiry are values that in fact were taken from the religious regimes that you find unpalatable." Please tell me, when exactly did religion EVER encourage or even respect skeptical inquiry? Skepticism is a one way ticket to hell for unbelievers. Why is the Rabbi afraid to take a stand and admit this?
33:00 - Here is where Sam is at his best
35:25 - My breaking point has been reached. The Rabbi reads the following quote from a Holocaust survivor:
"The gas chambers of Auschwitz were the ultimate consequence of the theory that man is nothing but the product of heredity and environment--or, as the Nazis liked to say, "of blood and soil." I am absolutely convinced that the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek were ultimately prepared not in some ministry or other in Berlin, but rather at the desks and in lecture halls of nihilistic scientists and philosophers."
Ok, no doubt that this man went through an ordeal that is almost as horrifying as anything we can imagine. But if you are gonna take this man's word as some proof that atheists, left to their own devices, will create terrible torture machines to use as they see fit, then you are confusing emotional testimony with fact. It MAY be true that the gas chamber was created in a lecture hall by scientists and it may not. But he can't know it. And if you want to look at devices to elicit pain.........well look no further than the faithful of medieval Europe. The machines used to bring forth confessions of witchcraft and Satanic possession are the most awful forms of punishment I can imagine.
37:08 - Host desecration!! Holy shit, how about this for coincidence. The mistreatment or malicious use of a consecrated Host, or communion wafer. Now this debate took place quite a while ago, and if you listened to it then you might have thought, "Oh that's crazy. I don't think Christians would be that nuts to actually take this seriously." You would be wrong.
38:14 - "In what sort of regime are you likely to be able to get a society, ala America, where [the torture of one group by another] is minimized?....The only idea that ties one person to another is God."
Wow. So America is the gold standard for the rest of the world in terms of how we treat one another. And the reason that Americans are so tolerant is due to God. That is the essence of his argument. Using this logic, countries with large atheistic populations should just be bastions of moral deprivation and secular charitable organizations should be non-existent. Help me.
39:11 - Learned something new from the Rabbi. In order to actually understand the OT correctly, you need to filter it through a person. I think the Rabbi's filter needs changed.
39:57 - Sam nails him perfectly.
42:27 - Oh boy does Sam do a number on him here. Talking about the revelation that Mother Theresa lost her faith, Sam says "Ask yourself, when even the doubts of experts are thought to confirm a doctrine, what could possibly disprove it?" When the Rabbi then asks if Mother Theresa would still have done her "charity" work if she still wasn't a Christian despite her doubts, Sam pounces on him by pointing out that many secularists spend their lives devoted to charity and helping the poor. Fucking great. Then, after about two seconds of complete silence, the Rabbi starts talking about "serious percentages." Yawn.
43:22 - Here Rabbi dipshit starts this bullshit about how "in study after study, religious people are happier, feel less stress, etc."
Thomas Gray once said "Ignorance is bliss." And what is with this childlike expectation that you should only concern yourself with happiness? How about truth? My dog always looks happy, does this mean I need to bark at my neighbors and shit in my yard?
51:00 - Here the dumbass essentially asks if we don't have religion what do we have? To which Harris points out that we don't replace the belief in Santa Claus with something that does exactly what Santa does. It's true that some beliefs just fade away and we don't (and shouldn't) replace them.
52:10 - Rabbi: "Where does our moral order come from?"
Oh this is where Sam is in his zone and you just have to listen to him to fully appreciate this part of the debate. Dexter the 17 headed demon, brilliant.
54:44 - For the first time, I actually feel sorry for the Rabbi. His response to Sam is so sad and pathetic.....
58:00 - Are you ready to hear one of the stupidest things that you will hear in a long time? Here it is.....From the Rabbi of course: "My experience of religious human beings and the way they live, and the fact they live in harmony, to my perception, with an invisible order that gives them a life of a certain sanctity."
Got that? "The fact they live in harmony." *sigh*
60:44 - Sam and the metaphysical Elvis. Just listen for yourselves. It's hilarious.
64:00 - The talk switches to human creativity and whether if an end to religion will diminish creativity in the arts. Christian chicken pluckers, lol.
67:10 Here begins a little q&a session so I've decided to stop here.
There is sooooo much more to this than what I have written about. I really hope that other people will listen to it and comment on this blog their own opinions.
Looking forward to hearing from you,
- AQ
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Biblical Ignorance
After some recent conversations with some religious people I have made a rather surprising discovery: A great deal of people who profess themselves as Christian have NO DAMN IDEA about the bible. I mean, wow.....
So I did a little research on this issue of biblical ignorance and found out that this is quite common. The percentages are stunning to me, and you can read more about it here (http://www.bible.org/illus.php?topic_id=152).
Now I split my time between living in China and the US although currently I'm living in western Pennsylvania (where I was born and raised), and there are no shortages of churches around here if you know what I mean. And as far as I know, I am the only atheist at my job, and even within my own family. But I'm really curious to know about others' experience in different parts of the country. What do you find to be the level of sophistication of Christians (or in fact any religion) in your area? Does anyone feel discriminated against at work or school?
I hope to hear from you all,
Thanks,
- AQ
So I did a little research on this issue of biblical ignorance and found out that this is quite common. The percentages are stunning to me, and you can read more about it here (http://www.bible.org/illus.php?topic_id=152).
Now I split my time between living in China and the US although currently I'm living in western Pennsylvania (where I was born and raised), and there are no shortages of churches around here if you know what I mean. And as far as I know, I am the only atheist at my job, and even within my own family. But I'm really curious to know about others' experience in different parts of the country. What do you find to be the level of sophistication of Christians (or in fact any religion) in your area? Does anyone feel discriminated against at work or school?
I hope to hear from you all,
Thanks,
- AQ
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Debate anyone?
Now maybe because it's 4 am and I can't sleep and I might be a little wacky due to my wisdom teeth meds, but is anyone out there interested in organizing an atheist debate group.
We can travel around like those dumbass rednecks that go on tour together. You know those guys who tell jokes to people that begin with "So I was at the Piggly Wiggly......blah blah.....GIT-R-DONE!!!" And it just wants to make you stab yourself in the fucking head when you realize that these people are having kids?!
Ok I digress......but it just seems to me that, at least for the time being, we need to get the word out to people that you are not alone in your unbelief. Possibly we could help organize debates at local colleges....
Although nearly a lifelong atheist myself, I have to say it wasn't until I watched the video of Dawkins at his lecture in Virginia that I began to feel passionate about the damage that religion is doing to our world. It was a wake-up call for me and I'm quite sure there are many like me.
As I said I'm not exactly in the clearest of minds at the moment, but does anyone have any ideas as how to get our arguments out and being discussed by people who aren't sure where they stand in religious terms?
We can travel around like those dumbass rednecks that go on tour together. You know those guys who tell jokes to people that begin with "So I was at the Piggly Wiggly......blah blah.....GIT-R-DONE!!!" And it just wants to make you stab yourself in the fucking head when you realize that these people are having kids?!
Ok I digress......but it just seems to me that, at least for the time being, we need to get the word out to people that you are not alone in your unbelief. Possibly we could help organize debates at local colleges....
Although nearly a lifelong atheist myself, I have to say it wasn't until I watched the video of Dawkins at his lecture in Virginia that I began to feel passionate about the damage that religion is doing to our world. It was a wake-up call for me and I'm quite sure there are many like me.
As I said I'm not exactly in the clearest of minds at the moment, but does anyone have any ideas as how to get our arguments out and being discussed by people who aren't sure where they stand in religious terms?
God is an American?
Funny thing happened at work today.......
A while back I let it slip that I am an atheist. Uh oh, it seemed my suspicion that there were other atheists in my midst was sorely misplaced. Anywho, cut to today and I happen upon a "joke" that someone at work had printed out and just left on a table.
A college professor, an avowed atheist and active in the ACLU, was teaching his class. He shocked several of his students when he flatly stated that once and for all he was going to prove there was no God.
Addressing the ceiling he shouted: "GOD, if you are real, then I want you to knock me off this platform. I'll give you exactly 15minutes!!!!!
The lecture room fell silent. You could hear a pin drop.
Ten minutes went by. "I'm waiting God, if you're real knock me off this platform!!!!"
Again after 4 minutes, the professor taunted God saying, "Here I am,
God!!! I'm still waiting!!!"
His count down got down to the last couple of minutes when a SEAL, Just released from the Navy after serving in Afghanistan and Iraq and newly registered in the class, walked up to the Professor.
The SEAL hit him full force in the face, and sent the Professor tumbling from his lofty platform. The Professor was out cold!! The students were stunned and shocked. They began to babble in confusion. The SEAL nonchalantly took his seat in the front row and sat silent. The class looked at him and fell silent...waiting.
Eventually, the professor came to and was noticeably shaken. He looked at the SEAL in the front row. When the professor regained his senses and could speak he asked: "What the hell is the matter with you? Why did you do that"?
"God was really busy, protecting America's soldiers, who are protecting your right to say stupid stuff and act like an asshole, so he sent me!!"
OK......are you done laughing yet?
Did you know that God was an American? I didn't. I always thought that God created humans,
not Americans. Seems odd that he would protect only those born in the old USA.
Of course I didn't know Jesus spoke English either. Back in the 1920s Miriam "Dubya" Ferguson, Governor of Texas, was reported to have said "If the King's English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for the children of Texas!"
When I sometimes ask myself if I'm not just overreacting to other's beliefs, this kind of thing just gets under my skin.
A while back I let it slip that I am an atheist. Uh oh, it seemed my suspicion that there were other atheists in my midst was sorely misplaced. Anywho, cut to today and I happen upon a "joke" that someone at work had printed out and just left on a table.
A college professor, an avowed atheist and active in the ACLU, was teaching his class. He shocked several of his students when he flatly stated that once and for all he was going to prove there was no God.
Addressing the ceiling he shouted: "GOD, if you are real, then I want you to knock me off this platform. I'll give you exactly 15minutes!!!!!
The lecture room fell silent. You could hear a pin drop.
Ten minutes went by. "I'm waiting God, if you're real knock me off this platform!!!!"
Again after 4 minutes, the professor taunted God saying, "Here I am,
God!!! I'm still waiting!!!"
His count down got down to the last couple of minutes when a SEAL, Just released from the Navy after serving in Afghanistan and Iraq and newly registered in the class, walked up to the Professor.
The SEAL hit him full force in the face, and sent the Professor tumbling from his lofty platform. The Professor was out cold!! The students were stunned and shocked. They began to babble in confusion. The SEAL nonchalantly took his seat in the front row and sat silent. The class looked at him and fell silent...waiting.
Eventually, the professor came to and was noticeably shaken. He looked at the SEAL in the front row. When the professor regained his senses and could speak he asked: "What the hell is the matter with you? Why did you do that"?
"God was really busy, protecting America's soldiers, who are protecting your right to say stupid stuff and act like an asshole, so he sent me!!"
OK......are you done laughing yet?
Did you know that God was an American? I didn't. I always thought that God created humans,
not Americans. Seems odd that he would protect only those born in the old USA.
Of course I didn't know Jesus spoke English either. Back in the 1920s Miriam "Dubya" Ferguson, Governor of Texas, was reported to have said "If the King's English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for the children of Texas!"
When I sometimes ask myself if I'm not just overreacting to other's beliefs, this kind of thing just gets under my skin.
Are Christians Good?
Are Christians good?
You might think the tricky word in this question is "good." After all, "good" is a topic of philosophical debate, and there can be no better indication that a word is tricky. But, in fact, the problem lies not with "good" but with "Christian." However challenging it is to define "good," most of us share a sufficiently common understanding of the word to agree in most of its applications. And, more importantly, it is not ambiguous. There are not two or more clear and distinctly different meanings of the word.
"Christian," however, is ambiguous. It can be used to refer to a person who holds certain beliefs, such as that God created the universe and that Jesus is His son (and also God Himself, if our Christian is a Trinitarian). If this is how "Christian" is understood, then the question "Are Christians good?" is an interesting one. They might be or they might not. To find the answer we will have to look for evidence, such as a lower than average proportion of Christians in prison or higher than average donations to charity or some other such fact.
There is another common use of "Christian," however, on which our question is not in the least interesting, namely, the sense in which "Christian" just means "good." This is employed when people describe immoral acts as "un-Christian," or when Father Ted's congregation responds to the revelation of his pederasty by declaring that he is not a "real Christian" after all. If someone qualifies as a Christian only if he is good, then of course Christians are good—it is true by definition. On this interpretation, it is an open question whether those who believe in the divinity of Jesus tend to be Christians.
This ambiguity is harmless, provided we keep clear about which meaning we are using. Trouble comes when we slip between the two meanings, despite the validity of our argument, requiring us to keep to just one meaning, that is, when we equivocate.
Suppose, for example, that Jack recommends Christianity to Jill on the ground that it is the path to virtue. Jill expresses some doubt about this, pointing out that most mafia assassins are Christians. Jack responds that Guido cannot be counted a Christian; no Christian would have whacked the Don's nephew.
Jack has equivocated. He uses "Christian" in its first, belief-based sense when he recommends Christianity as a path to virtue. Then he employs its other sense, on which it is definitionally true that Christians are good, to eliminate an irritating counter-example. Properly, to eliminate Guido as a counter-example, Jack would have to show that he did not believe in the divinity of Jesus—which is not entailed by the fact that he whacked the Don's nephew.
If Jill points this out, Jack is likely to protest that Christianity is more than mere belief in the divinity of Jesus. It also involves a moral code, the ten commandments and all that. Guido clearly broke the code, so it is no cheat to deny him the status of a Christian. Alas, Jack has again changed his definition of "Christian." Now it requires believing in the divinity of Jesus and being virtuous (assuming the Christian moral code is correct). And this makes Jack's advice worthless. On this interpretation of "Christian," telling someone who seeks a path to virtue that she should be a Christian is no better than telling someone who seeks a third leg that he should be a tripod.
Jack cannot have it both ways. Either he is making an interesting claim about a means to an end or he is simply defining that end. If the former, then he will have to deliver evidence for his claim. If the latter, then, though he may have eliminated the possibility of wicked Christians, he will have rendered Christianity a badge of honor for those who attain virtue, not a path to it. Either way, Jack must pick one interpretation of "Christian" and stick to it.
Full credit goes to Jamie Whyte for this. Keep up the good work.
*This post was taken from the book Crimes Against Logic. Highly recommended.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
