Loss of Fear


Ah yes! It’s been a while since I did something atheist and this one is from the Christian Post and Uri Brito doesn’t seem to understand atheism and indeed “education”. He seems to think that we have lost our fear of religion. That’s true, it’s also that we have gotten more organised and been more willing to (at least in the USA) fight the differentiation of Church and State.

Atheism has become increasingly bold in her declarations and actions over the years. The atheist star, Madylin O’ Hair, who thrived with her vicious condemnation of Biblical Christianity in the 70’s and 80’s has birthed a new generation of God-hating disciples. College professors in public universities have learned that the classroom is the best place for a non-religious experience.

I was unaware that Atheism has become a gendered entity.

Oh… we don’t hate your gods, no more than we hate Santa or the Abominable Snowman. We dislike your belief and what you do with your belief. We cannot hate something we don’t believe in.

And yes. Schools where we teach facts are a terrible place for a imaginary being. Haven’t you read your Bible? What’s the most dangerous thing in the Universe? The thing that Jehovah punished mankind for is the acquisition of knowledge. Why? Because knowledge burns faith.

With knowledge the world becomes less magical, but at the same time more elegant. You understand how it works and it’s principles rather than assuming it’s the machinations of a bunch of gods.

An example of this comes from Florida Atlantic University who contrived the following exercise:

“The assignment called for students to write the name “Jesus” on a piece of paper, put the paper on the ground, and stomp on it.”

Then you have learnt nothing.

“Ask the students to stand up and put the paper on the floor in front of them with the name facing up. Ask the students to think about it for a moment. After a brief period of silence instruct them to step on the paper. Most will hesitate. Ask why they can’t step on the paper. Discuss the importance of symbols in culture.”

This is from their own website. They linked to a post that simply explains the exercise.

Want to know something?

Hindus won’t stand on it either. Not because it has Jesus on it. But because it’s paper. Paper and books represent knowledge and standing on it is a gross insult to the very concept of knowledge.

But here is the thing. the entire point of the exercise was to see a cultural reason as to why a bunch of predominantly Christian people who associate Jesus with holiness won’t step on a arrangement of ink that has a holy meaning. If I wrote Jesus is Arabic/Hindi/Tamil then most of these students would have hopped up and down on the paper with no qualms. Similarly if I wrote Allah or Krishna or Siddarth Gauthama on it these same kids would have jumped on them.

That’s the lesson you should take.

Not “SEEEEEE THEY WANT US TO JUMP ON JESUS’S NAME”.

A halfhearted apology was issued and now classes can continue with their daily scheduled de-christianization hour. The professor does not claim to be an atheist. Former Governor Mike Huckabee “questioned if any program at FAU would have allowed ‘Muhammad’ to be written on the paper and stomped instead.” When they reach that fearless pinnacle, I will write another piece.

Except Mohammed doesn’t have the same cultural significance as Jesus to a bunch of predominantly American students in the USA.

And really? Your actual fucking point is “We should be more like these arseholes?”

And if it’s fearlessness you want?

If you don't get why this is done then you are stupid.

If you don’t get why this is done then you are stupid.

Oh Noes! Blasphemy!

Oh Noes! Blasphemy!

You know what’s annoyed me?

That I wasted paper on demonstrating how utterly meaningless this exercise is. If you don’t value the names there as sacred then you have no issues with standing on a piece of paper. That if it was some character the Christians didn’t believe in they would have no qualms jumping on that sheet of paper.

You can removes these characters from a pedestal and critique them rather than blindly following them.

My point here is not just that education cannot be neutral – that is too obvious – but that public education no longer masquerades her neutrality. There was a time when government curriculum attempted to deny their anti-theistic direction, but that time is past. This is the time when atheists can declare their loss of fear publicly and unashamedly.

Maiori forsan cum timore sententiam in me fertis quam ego accipiam.

Perhaps you pronounce this sentence against me with greater fear than I receive it

Education cannot be neutral around an organisation that is based entirely on superstitious belief. We are educating our children, not teaching them applied theology.

The words above were from a friar called Giordano Bruno. It was one the last on record. You see, he read a lot of “Arab Astronomy” and believed that the Sun was nothing more than a star that our planet revolved around. He also suggested that there may be life on other planets.

And for that he was burned at the stake after being tortured by the Inquisition. In order to prevent him from shouting his last “blasphemies”, his tongue was caged. A procedure that involves driving a spike through it to prevent him from talking.

There is a reason we don’t like religious oversight of education. Because any discovery anti-thetic to religion is quashed and fought. There are still people who consider Smallpox as the punishment of a divine god and that vaccination was to try to avoid punishing the wicked.

Pro-theistic education is not education, but enforced ignorance. Even religious institutions today have to teach sensibly lest they lose their value because they are compared to secular institutions. In a world where everyone is judged by how religious they are then the fundamentalist is king. It’s a world where men rode dinosaurs and biology and geology and all the benefits from those sciences wouldn’t exist because some Christians got insulted by “Science”.

Much like the homosexual community is becoming more and more comfortable coming out of the philosophical and theological closet; atheists today put on a robe and march to their pulpits with their well-scripted homilies. These pastors of the dead are not only situated in the comfortable chairs of the academic halls of well-funded state universities, they also sneak into the high-school curricula with a fancy diversity library card. For an example of this, here is the latest fearless atheistic move:

Then you clearly don’t know how much I wing this blogging malarky.

And something tells me that Uri here wouldn’t want to trade for my comfortable chair.

Robes? I think you are confusing us for something else. Jedi Knight perhaps?

We don’t sneak into High School Curricula, we don’t think kids should be learning the bigoted teachings of 2000 year old people claiming to be the sole source of all human morality while actively participating in divinely mandated slavery, genocide and rape.

We instead think that kids should learn about different people and different cultures and know that sometimes some kids have two mummies or daddies.

The California Department of Education has revised the statewide recommended reading list for its 6.3 million K-12 students, adding roughly 40 titles focused on homosexuality or gender confusion.

I am sorry? My qualifications are Medic and apparently “Pastor of the Dead” (The Dead Sexy More Like!)

The recommended reading list is impossible to read in total.

There are above 7800 books on the list. Nearly 40 Books? That’s around 0.5% of the total books. 99.5% of the books don’t mention the GLBT and just 1 book out of more than represents the trans.

Chances are these kids will NEVER ever read these books because it simply doesn’t interest them. You make it sound like these are Julio von Manfuck’s Cornocopafeelia of Man Candy rather than “I am J” – The Story of A young Male to Female Transgender. These are books dealing with themes the GLBT kids can identify with.

I have never read a book with a homosexual in a positive light and come away from it thinking “I wish I could fuck a dude right now”. And I am sure a lot of gay kids have never read a saucy romance novel and gone “I want a woman!”.

These books instead help kids understand what a group of people who are poorly represented in society go through and either help them understand what’s going on with themselves or with those around them and to hopefully hammer in a sense that the GLBT aren’t to be fucked with just because your magic book tells you to do so.

One example will suffice:

The Bermudez Triangle, by Maureen Johnson. “Since childhood, the Bermudez Triangle consisted of Nina, Avery, and Melanie. But when Nina leaves for a summer-school program, all three experience changes in the way they view each other. The three teenage girls explore the meaning of friendship and love while trying to keep long-distance relationships intact. Avery and Melanie begin to understand their homosexuality, and Nina feels left out. This novel illustrates the stresses, jealousy, and anxiety of teenage girls trying to understand themselves as they mature.”

And how is this pro-lesbian? This is just pro-teenage angst. Oh Edward! Why must you sparkle so sparklies! Oh Native American dude! Why must you be so shirtless…

NOW WRASSLE FOR ME! (I assume this is the hook in Twilight?)

If this is not sufficient to detail the loss of fear in the anti-Christian establishment, media, and the country’s education system, then nothing will convince the reader. “These are just isolated examples,” some may argue. If so, their PR team is performing a stupendous job.

It’s not PR.

It’s just basic humanity. It’s like how we included black authors post apartheid in the recommended reading lists.

I understand that Richard Dawkin’s atheist camp is not drawing the masses, but can we assert at the very least that atheism is losing its fear? As their platforms increase their hunger for converts becomes insatiable. They want our children and they want them now.

If our children stop being bigots then they will realise how dickish we are and not want to believe in a god that encourages them to be dicks.

And Camp Quest is not Richard Dawkin’s Atheist Camp. It’s just something he supported.

And the most amusing thing is? I have never knowingly converted someone to atheism. Or you know. De-converted. Restored to Factory Setting. Set Free…

Hinduism states that this existence is an illusion or “Maya” and that if we achieve enlightenment we can see past it and leave this existence. If what I write helps someone stop struggling with their faith and realise there is more the tired illusion of religion and helps them see past it and leave that existence for one where they are comfortable with no gods then that’s a bonus. But I have never sought converts. I have never regaled friends with all the tastiness of beef and the joys of ditching Hinduism.

Even though I could convert people using charity, I have not. Despite standing on the names of gods, I am more respectful of other people’s religions than the religious.

As pietistic Christians become more and more fearful of the world around them, non-Christians continually gain intellectual ground. As the Easter Season approaches, we need to be reminded once again that the tomb is empty and the world is filled with the glory of the risen Christ. Let us not fear. Our faith is not in vain.

You write down a number of hours on a piece of paper and pray to your gods for that many hours.

I will do the same amount of work with my own hands and we will see if your god beats humans.

Comments

  1. Carol Lynn says

    If you don’t value the names there as sacred then you have no issues with standing on a piece of paper.

    Even if you do value the names as sacred – get over yourselves. It’s a piece of paper not the god-entity itself.

    I would have no trouble stomping on the paper no matter what was written on it, because I know the difference between the symbol and the thing. Would I *ever* kick a cute kitten? No! Never. No matter what inducement I was offered, I could not wantonly kick an animal. Would I step on a piece of paper with the word “cute kitten” written on it or on a picture of the same kitten if someone put it on the floor in front of me and asked me to? Sure! It’s not the same thing as a kitten. It’s a piece of paper! If the picture itself had intrinsic value, say as art, I’d probably step on it carefully so as not to damage it or decline to step on it, but it would be because the thing on the floor had its own value that I was hesitant to damage not because I didn’t want to do the symbolically voodoo action of kicking an animal.

    It’s one of things wrong with a religious outlook; the symbol is mistaken for and treated as the thing itself.

  2. PatrickG says

    Dick Cheney? I’m all for the floor stomping of that name, but who on earth would worship such a man?

    I laughed, I must say.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>