Many new readers may not know that I am a guest author over at Canadian Atheist. This is a blogging collective of atheist authors of a wide variety of stances from across the country, offering perspective on news items and national developments. While I do most of my blogging here, I do represent the ‘extreme anti-theist’ position there whenever I find a story that so moves me. A story has crossed my desk that is so revolting that I felt it deserved as much contempt as I could express in my limited command of the English language, so I posted it over there:
I haven’t really believed in any theistic concept of a god for many years now. It took me a while to admit that I was ‘an atheist’, but I was one in fact long before I was one in name. It wasn’t until I rounded that corner that I began to really think of the implications of theistic belief. I fully participated in the ‘pick and choose’ attitude that I now find so galling in others – taking the bits of the articles of faith without fully thinking them through.
Now that the wool has been fully removed, however, I will not hesitate to lambaste believers in the same way I wish someone had lambasted me when I took the easy duck-out routes from having to deal with the full implications of the god I believed in. An all-powerful being that sees human suffering, suffering that it created itself, and does nothing to intervene – or does intervene but only in the most inconsequential ways – is a monster. To call your god “love” is a complete betrayal of everything virtuous and honest in that emotion. This grotesque perversion is on display no more obviously than in the headline of this story:
Go check it out and read the rest. The other bloggers on the site are also worth checking out, particularly if you’re interested in the happenings in Canada.
Like this article? Follow me on Twitter!
The only anti-theists are theists. They hate competition for the holy trinity of money, power, and sex (often with children) and would eliminate each other if it were possible.
Religions are only peaceful when they are in the minority or they don’t have military strength to back up their intentions.
.
I actually didn’t even know that the site existed. How insulated I have been!
I’ve got your back, buddy
Go Crommie!
Not only does this evil god relish the suffering of a baby who ought to have been relieved of its pain long ago, but it relishes in all manner of other suffering, human and non-human, too. And it’s not only the priests that don’t deserve the titles, but I don’t think the parents of this child deserve them either. At least the Canadian doctors in this story were on the side of the child, even if they couldn’t prevent the parents from being cruel.
Priests for Life raised a large sum of money to bring Baby Joseph to the states for a tracheotomy so that he could go home to die. Lots of babies die in the US from preventable diseases, because their parents can’t afford medical care. But the Priests for Life chose to prolong the suffering of one doomed infant rather than save any lives.
Yeah, they are truly disgusting.
But what do you say to the parents, who had a previous child die of the same inherited disease?
Stop them, before they breed again.
My stepsister and her husband are both carriers for a genetic disorder. They wanted to have kids so badly, and kept trying. It was incredibly tough on them. I’m sure you didn’t mean it this way, but saying something like “stop them before they breed again” is unbelievably dehumanizing and insensitive. I don’t personally understand the powerful yearning to have children, but I have seen how strong that impulse is, and wouldn’t wish this kind of suffering on anyone. This is why genetic screening is so useful – but of course it would require the abortion of any fetus that would be born non-viable, and that wouldn’t be an option for them.
Perhaps adoption is the best way? I don’t really know.
As someone who does not believe in wizards, but does believe that all religions should be scoured from the earth with the cleansing flame of rational scorn, I have to state that I disagree with you and you are dumb.
Note that the childish insult was intentionally childish for comedic purposes.