Thoughts on assholery

There’s been something bothering me. Or maybe it’s some things.

Maybe it’s the Christmas season. Maybe it’s spending more time with friends and family.

Maybe it’s the idea that this economy is so tough, I have no idea if next week I’m going to have to find a job in the “real” world.

Last night I was listening to music that reminded me of an old girlfriend and I found myself a bit more emotional than usual. It wasn’t a longing for my ex-girlfriend. It was a return to emotions that I felt during our breakup.

But there are a zillion things are bringing the emotion right now. This blog for example.

I mean, Le Café represents ideologies that are completely contradictory to my upbringing. Some of the biggest readers of this blog are family, like my dad, my brother, my sister in law. I think my mom either reads it, or gets second hand info from my dad. But regardless, it’s understood that the universe-sized elephant in Chicago is the asshole who battles his former belief in Christianity via a public blog on the internet.

While I don’t sit here saying, “I’m going to hurt my family’s feelings today,” I can honestly say that my motivation is not to hurt them. I realize that it would be difficult to separate self from faith, as most people identify their person with faith.

My criticisms are surely offensive. (More below the fold).

Continue reading “Thoughts on assholery”

Skatje Myers reviews Harris’ The Moral Landscape

Sam Harris
Image via Wikipedia

This is probably a futile post, but I want to recommend reading Skatje Myers’ (PZ’s daughter) review of Sam Harris’ book “The Moral Landscape. Click here.

She rips it and Harris a new one. And she lays pretty hard into atheists for our collective ignorance about philosophy and our unquestioned love and affection for one of the four hoursmen.


From my ignorant rooftop, I enjoyed the good ass whipping.

Should I repent for Poe’ing it up?

Yesterday was busy. I had a photoshoot in the morning and then we met with a couple about shooting their wedding in the afternoon. I had scheduled two posts to hit in the morning, and then in the afternoon, I found this infographic doohickie to post, and it raised some eyebrows.

I’m not accustomed to bringing atheists out of the woodwork to comment on a post. But all night long, I got some great responses from strangers who didn’t know I was joking.

At first, I felt badly. But then I thought, it serves these morons right to jump to the conclusion that this blog — of all places — isn’t posting something so ridiculous as a joke.

It shows me at least one thing, it doesn’t matter what team you’re on, there are still dullards who jump to conclusions and respond without doing just a teensy-weensy bit of research.

And frankly, that pisses me off. Atheists are supposed to be the smart kids. Atheists see through the haziness of what’s right in front of them, and they search for the truth, no matter what it is.

I’m not saying we’re exempt from the occasional April Fool’s Joke or a weak moment of gullibility, but for Pete’s sake, grow a brain muscle between them ears of yours. Think before you write.

And if you’re not willing to do so, then get off the fucking Atheist bus and ride the short one where you belong.


Audio from William Lane Craig vs Sam Harris

Last night, Sam Harris and William Lane Craig went head to head at the University of Notre Dame over the topic: Is Good From God? In other words, “Are the foundations of moral value natural or supernatural?”

Let’s hope that everyone agrees that the foundations of moral values aren’t supernatural.

I am listening to the audio now in the background of my morning work load. The audio for last night’s debate can be found here.




I have had this debate running in the background most of the morning. I haven’t been listening to every single word like I want to, but that’s what happens when you multitask something as heavy as this topic.

I am at minute 46. I’ve listened to Craig’s and Harris’ opening and I’m in the middle of Craig’s first rebuttal.

Craig just said (again), “If God exists, than we have a sound foundation for objective morals and duties” (quote might not be exact). We’re assuming Craig is referring to the Christian God and that that God inspired/wrote/communicated the contents of the bible to humanity. If that’s the case, there is in no way a responsible, thoughtful person can agree with that statement as the bible is not a moral framework for proper behavior. If it is, we would be doomed.

I find Craig’s statement to be riddled with error, as even he wouldn’t follow the laws written in the bible.

He said in his opening statement that God is love and all that is good. But how can this be true? Should I take Craig’s word for it? The bible’s word for it? From what I know of the biblical God, he is not loving or all that is good.

His people tend to exhibit good, moral behaviors. God’s people tend to be the bee’s knees.  But the written record of god’s behaviors fall very short of how I hope a “loving” being would behave.

Carl Sagan sings the hits


I see the emergence in our consciousness of a Universe of a magnificence, and an intricate, elegant order far beyond anything our ancestors imagined. And if much of the Universe can be understood in terms of a few simple laws of Nature, those wishing to believe in God can certainly ascribe those beautiful laws to a Reason underpinning all of Nature. Those wishing to believe in god can certainly ascribe those beautiful laws to a reason underpinning all of Nature. My own view is that it is far better to understand the Universe as it really is than pretend to a Universe as we might wish it to be.