Secular Pro-Life “Fetus Worshippers”?

Should we defend freethinking spaces from anti-choicers like Secular Pro-Life? I wanted more information on this organization as I have seen them at conventions.  Lucky for me, I know you-tuber True Pooka, who as he will tell you, shares the same concern. He has more experience investigating anti-choice groups than I do. He has shown me things I wouldn’t have seen; even though SPL hides them in plain sight. So I asked him to help me gather information in order to share it with our community. I don’t have faith in anything, but I trust in the people I have communed with at gatherings that they are an intelligent bunch, and can make up their own minds. So here is his first post in a series on what he found when looking at Secular Pro-Life…

We report, you decide, right?

This is his rationale for investigating SPL’s claims…

This is a topic that I’ve always found rather fascinating. I was raised in a strict Judaic upbringing so I’ve always considered the pro-life position on abortion law to represent a two-fold threat; a threat to not just the rights of women but to the right of my religious group of upbringing to practice their religious beliefs when it comes to abortion.
I was also once one of those young men who were placed in the unfortunate position of having to fight his way past protesters to help take a loved one to have a needed abortion, an abortion that she would die without. So I’ve always had a multi-faceted interest in the abortion issue and over the years have done a certain amount of study on the topic. I was genuinely curious because while I’ve heard quite a few arguments against abortion that claim to be secular in nature, as of yet none of those arguments that have been presented to me have been logically consistent. In fact the presentations of the majority of alleged secular arguments against abortion are distinctly religious in nature.

He will get to the meat of what he found this week in the next post.

Lucky for you, you can get a peek of what’s going on in their rationale because Matt Dillahunty is debating one of their openly Christian members this next week on March 25. His last debate with a former SPL member was more like debating someone, who argued like a Christian.

SPL has also taken umbrage at PZ, Greta, and Avicenna’s post on their blog.

Breaking Love and Reproductive Rights Out of the Christian Frame

I have been pleasantly surprised that the youtube comments on my speech on The Heart of Humanism at The Southern California Secular Humanism Conference are mainly addressing the topic.

We joked that now James Croft could add it to his CV that he spoke at an event with me.

We joked that now James Croft could add it to his CV that he spoke at an event with me.

Especially because I addressed how secularists need to examine where their beliefs about love in particular may be influenced by Christian culture such as ideas about purity. I used a rather pointed example by looking at the Secular Pro-Life Movement. Their stance is not categorically different from Cathy Ruse of The Family Research Council’s advice on making secular anti-choice arguments. Ruse’s Christian influence is clearly seen in her advocacy for state’s rights on marriage equality as discussed in my speech and her advocacy against buying Girl Scout cookies on the basis of their support of Planned Parenthood. Cuz unplanned parenthood is so much better, right?

One commenter though accepted the challenge to produce a secular anti-choice argument.

My concern isn’t from a Christian purity standpoint, it’s an issue of the meaning of human rights. We used to believe that people of different skin colors didn’t deserve legal protection because the ‘rights’ of rich white people were more important. I worry that abortion is not dissimilar.
It is a bit incoherent.  I also asked the humanists there what they thought of the anti-feminist canard
“I am not a feminist; I am a humanist.” We were short on time, but a few people afterwards said that the word feminist is like identifying as an atheist; it has taken on very negative associations over time.  I wish I had thought to record some responses afterwards.
Anyways, I hoped in this speech to help people see that sometimes the culture we are raised in can still affect how we see the world and prevent us from being better humanists. Just like I would like to help re-appropriate the word atheist from atheist bashers; I would like to help re-appropriate the word feminism from feminist bashers.
More important than the words themselves are the ideas that left unquestioned get in the way of progressing to a better society than the overtly Christian one we now live in today.

 

 

 

 

Tips on Evangelizing Evolution from Aron Ra

Ray Comfort noticed that a lot of atheists visited his Facebook page, and it occurred to him that he could train other Christians to witness to the “unsaved”.

“The average Christian can’t stand on a soapbox at a university and preach, but he or she can now engage the unsaved and have their comment read by multiple people, all from the comfort of their own home. It means that a stay-at-home mom can reach out to the lost during a break from the kids. It means that those who are busy at work can reach the unsaved during their lunch breaks.”

Here are a few nuggets from his page to tempt atheists to believe…

That which is considered by those who are anti-God to be hateful threats of torture, are loving warnings of justice.

He isn’t so much threatening you with eternal torture; he is simply lovingly warning you about justice. And just for fun another nugget…

Your casket isn’t the end. Think outside the box

So far, I am not convinced.  May be other atheists just groan when they hear about Ray Comfort’s antics because they are passe. Have you ever groaned when he gets a nonbeliever on the street, and they can’t answer him especially when it is well known science?

Like Ryan the agnostic in this video…

Comfort starts off with the question, “Why do you believe in evolution.”  Ryan flounders a bit about logic and finally adds that there is a similarity between chimp and human DNA.  Comfort comes back with no that is actually evidence for a common designer, who used DNA to create life. Let’s be fair to Ryan, he is on the spot and Comfort is interrupting and shouting at him.  Ryan still fumbles the ball though.

Let’s ask Aron…

This unsupported hypothetical magical designer put into our DNA genetic markers, dysfunctional genes, ERVs, sequential mutations indicating our ancestry with other apes and confirming our classification as primates?!

 May be you are at a level where that is low hanging fruit for you too. Perhaps, you’ve run across a person who has been taken in by more advanced pseudoscience.

For a lot of evolution supporters there can be different reasons why you can’t answer pseudoscience swiftly and adeptly.  You may know it sounds wrong but you can’t articulate why. Sort of like how I grew up around the Vietnamese language, but I speak barely any of it.  So if someone jokingly makes fun of an Asian accent; they have a chance of getting a laugh.  I can’t joke like that because it sounds wrong to me, because I’ve heard a genuine Asian accent. It just doesn’t sound right, but I can’t articulate why it is incorrect. Similarly, evolution supporters often want to defend evolution against annoying pseudoscience especially from family members and authorities, but can’t articulate why the pseudoscience isn’t correct science.

When it comes to evolution, we all have different starting points.  Growing up in the South, I was almost completely ignorant of my own biological origins, when I met Aron in the Crevo forum of Christian Forums. I still have complete noob posts that embarrass me to this day.  The point is everybody is at different levels, which is something you have to bear in mind when you try to convince people about evolution.

Anyways, Aron often gets emails from people, who are really interested in how to answer a question about evolution that is stumping them from a believer.  Obviously, he can’t come in and debate everyone, and in a lot of cases the person is better off doing their own research because they will learn better what to say to people.

However this weekend, he has graciously in his own surly way agreed to give tips to people to help them be better defenders of anti-faith. You can post questions here on his blog or join us in a Google Hangout this Sunday at 12:00 PM. Event location: https://plus.google.com/u/0/events/cmgcc50rv9t5ae884sv3eh6286k

It will be my second podcast of the n0nes.

Send us your google hangout information to [email protected] if you would like to join in the discussion.

 

 

Why did I think I could watch this video about Fish Tongue Eating Isopods?

Lilandra is a username from a little known comic book character.  In real life, I named my children after comic book characters, so my geek credentials cannot be questioned.   My husband is a large biker, cyber-viking ape, that opines about religion, and knows his place in a cladogram. Read the comment policy before posting.

Lilandra is a username from a little known comic book character. In real life, I named my children after comic book characters, so my geek credentials cannot be questioned. My husband is a large biker, cyber-viking ape, that opines about religion, and knows his place in a cladogram. Read the comment policy before posting.

Warning! Do not be fooled by the cartoon fish.It is not for the squeamish.

Thanks to Meg of The Thinking Atheist for the scare…

This is Meg with a video for you to share the next time one of your friends starts in about how a god must have made the world because look at the pretty trees and blue sky and rainbows and baby animals and whatnot.

This is the Cymothoa exigua, otherwise known as the tongue-eating louse.

If you’re squeamish, you might want to skip this. When they call it “Gross Science”, they’re not kidding.

- Meg

She warned me.  I thought I could take it because it is a cartoon, but then they showed an actual picture of the louse in a fish. I actually jumped in my chair.

So Aron and young MiniRa came home, and I showed it to them expecting a reaction. I covered my eyes when it got to the picture. They didn’t bat an eye.  Aron was like…

“What? Isopods are cute.  Roly Polies are the only land-based crustaceans. “

I replied that that is what made it so gross because it was cute.  In the picture it looks as if to say, “Oh, hi there! Welcome to my home.”

Then MiniRa added…

“I have mucus. Would you like some mucus?”

This delightfully cute, little creature lives on mucus and fish blood. Yuck!

A new meaning for right-brained vs left brained

I hardly have time to do or read anything anymore, so I haven’t read the associated study behind this article from Discover magazine, only the article itself.  Past experience has taught me to cautious of conclusions based only on that.  The interesting implication herein is that having more gray matter in the anterior cingulate cortex grants more tolerance of uncertainty, making one more likely to consider extenuating circumstances rather than permitting only simple dichotomies.  Having more grey matter in the amygdala instead implies more fear and loathing and a greater likelihood of being a paranoid disgusted fundamentalist.  So whether you’re a reasonable liberal or a conservative bigot isn’t determined by the size of your brain, but rather how bent out of shape it is.

As an amusing coincidence, associated articles indicate that college students question the conflict between religion and science, while Rush Limbaugh talks out of his ass in on how to use any weak excuse to justify your Dunning-Kruger level of overconfidence.