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”

Eastwooding Richard Dawkins

I’m not posting this one for you. I’m posting it for me. I’m selfish like that.

It’s a video of the greatest Christian apologist to ever debate as he takes on a chair. Mr. Doctor. William … Lane … CRAIG!!!

And that chair represents Richard Dawkins.

As William Lane Craig proves beyond a shadow of a doubt, he can prove the existence of Richard Dawkins as he sat on stage with him in the video above, just not in person, but in deified spirit.

Who else would believe that someone who isn’t there … is there … unless they already had a foundation of believing in something or someone who wasn’t there.

So don’t watch this video.

I have to post it here, so I can remember to watch it later.

 

 

What the kids are posting

Those terrible, horrible, no good, very bad kids over at reddit.com/r/atheism won’t freaking let up on their insolent secular mockeries of belief.

Check out some of their latest:

IF you really believe that these women don’t have the right to marry… you’re a horrible person

Button reads, “All truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed. Second it is violently opposed. Third it is accepted as being self evident.” 

The Reason Rally landed a corporate sponsor

Over at Skeptic Money, Phil Ferguson is reporting that the Reason Rally, held at the end of the month at the same time as Photoshop World, will have a corporate sponsor.

Was that first sentence long enough for you?

And the corporate sponsor is …

Polaris Financial Planning. Info here. 

Polaris Financial Planning is committed to supporting the growing secular movement in the United States and donates at least 10% of all revenue to support this cause.

I was hoping to go to both of these events — the Reason Rally and Photoshop World — but I have three jobs that weekend. I wish I could have my cake, eat it, too, and swim in it.

All the big guns, if you can call them that, are going to be there, Lawrence Krauss, Adam Savage, Tim Minchin, Eddie Izzard, Richard Dawkins, James Randi and Jessica Ahlquist, the 17-year-old high schooler who defeated religion in her school — as if I want to see a high schooler speak.

Have we not taken enough notes from religion that have to herald a teenager?

Insert rolled eyes.

For full disclosure, I’m pretty sure Polaris Financial Company is Phil Ferguson’s company, which he should probably mention in his post. But you can’t knock it. The way to grow a company is to promote the hell out of it.

Via 

Dawkins and Krauss pompously discuss “Something from Nothing”

This video of biologist Richard Dawkins and theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss discussing the topic of “Something from Nothing” was published while I was out of town.

I’ve been meaning to post it, but haven’t personally had the time to watch it. I’ve got it running in the background today as I’m photo editing.

If I were someone who doubted evolution and physics regarding this topic, I would hope I would watch something like this. The issue is that (especially) Dawkins is demonized and hated by believers. So if you were a believer watching this video, you might find yourself grinding your teeth while watching.

If that’s the case, I hope you can get past that.

I put “pompous” in the header, because (1) I’m snarky and (2) that’s the way it can be construed. However, it’s well worth a watch (or listen).

I find believers who accept evolution admirable. But the great majority of believers — especially in America — don’t accept evolution or the Big Bang. But I have hope.

Whether you accept it or not, I hope you give this video a whirl.

Via

George W. expands his direction and target audience

Regular reader, blogger and interim Le Café Witteveen rockstar George W. announced today that he’s opening up his blog to more topics, namely parenting.

George has, what, a zillion kids now. And surely having a zillion kids and living as an atheist has some kind of learning and teaching potential.

How many times did your parents, or some sitcom parents, say something like, “Parenting doesn’t come with an instruction manual.” Parents often take the generational memes of their parents and pass them along to their kids.

That’s most of the reason why Christian moms and pops raise their kids to become Christians. Muslims, Muslims. Hindus, Hindu.

It seems as natural as cats raising cats. Or giraffes raising giraffes.

Doesn’t it?

I know there’s some offensive syntax above that someone is going to get all Richard Dawkins on me about.

But most of us don’t have non-believing parents. And that idea of the Instruction Manual gets tougher with the absence of this huge part of lots of our upbringings.

I’ve given the idea of atheist parenting a lot of thought. And I would be proud to exchange bible verse memorization for poetry memorization. In fact, I would have bible lessons, and koran lessons. But we’d learn math, science, English, French, etc.

There wouldn’t be a limit put on what could be learned or taught.

But since my efforts for fertility have turned up dry, I like the idea of living vicariously through George.

So go get ’em, Gee Dub. We’ll all look forward to it.

In case you missed it, here’s the link for George’s blog.

News flash: atheism is a mental disorder. In other news, Vox Day trolls his own blog.

According to le Café Witteveen’s blog stats, I’m getting incoming hits from Vox Day‘s blog. Here’s the post in question, but I can’t figure out who or what is linking to le Café. If you can figure it out, I would be much obliged.

But there have been 46 hits so far from Vox Day. And for this blog, it’s a noticeable amount.

If you don’t know who Vox Day is, join the club. I only know about him, because when I read The God Delusion, I wanted to read as much against the book as possible. Vox Day wrote and self published a free PDF book defending Christianity against Richard Dawkins’ oeuvre — but I cannot find it at the moment. Perhaps it was an early edition of this book called, “The Irrational Atheist,” which trollishly features cover art like Sam Harris’ book, “The End of Faith” (see above).

When I read Vox Day’s book, I was appalled by the sheer amount of grammatical errors. Not that I don’t have grammar errors here, but this was a published work. I edit my work, and admittedly have a tough time with it.

I have no room to talk, I guess.

Vox Day’s book was a long, meandering rant against Dawkins with little to no citation. And when he wrote Dawkins in the possessive, he typed out, “Dawkins’s.”

What a moron. 

Continue reading “News flash: atheism is a mental disorder. In other news, Vox Day trolls his own blog.”

Why I’m an atheist

PZ Myers at UofT
Image by hyfen via Flickr

If you’re not following the “Why I’m an atheist” series at Pharygula, you’re missing out. A few weeks ago, PZ Myers made a request for submissions and was overwhelmed with the response. The call was for stories about people’s personal atheist story. Pseudonyms, partial or full names could respond.

He intermittently posts one of the submissions, and they are worth a read. Testimonies are a large part of the Christian culture. They encourage other believers to take a more serious look at their own views.

I can see why this effective and popular on PZ’s site.

Here are three recent ones:

I would like to make one “Master of the Obvious” observation. Lately, it feels like we’re getting some responses from the believers’ camp. It strikes me how absent of criticism these people are toward their own belief system.

This may be revisionist history on my part, but the way I was taught was to look critically at my faith. I was able to point out what other people would find wrong, but somehow be able to justify it.

Lately, it seems like no one is able to view their faith with a critical eye.

I think it hurts the cause.

One thing I have found about atheists, and many Christians in my life, is that it feels like at least they can admit certain weaknesses in their views. Why are the vocal kids on this blog unable to do that?

Richard Dawkins: Why I refuse to debate with William Lane Craig

“I refuse to debate William Lane Craig, because I’m a pussy,” says famed atheist biologist Richard Dawkins in a recent un-televised and fictional interview.

Honk.

Joking aside, there is an editorial in which Richard Dawkins explains his position not to debate WLC.

You can read it here.

In case you don’t know, WLC is a babbling brook of nonsense who is heralded as the goto guy in destroying non-Christian thought. He’s an apologist with a lot of support.

A lot of blind, dumb-information loving support.

Unless you’re a believer, William Lane Craig sucks ass.

If you’ve ever heard him debate, he’ll numb your mind worse than thirty-three shots of tequila on an empty stomach. And you’ll be just as sick by the time it’s through.

To atheists, muslims, Buddhists, and average thinking people, he’s not effective.

I imagine he’s not effective just like Richard Dawkins isn’t effective to believers.

The thing is, Richard Dawkins isn’t black or white. WLC is.

WLC is us vs. them.

Many believers disagree with Richard Dawkins atheism, but not his science. That’s a big difference between him and WLC.

Dawkins can talk logically (somewhat) to many church leaders, because evolution is accepted by those church leaders.

The origin of life is the dispute.

I don’t give a flying fuck if you think god did it at the beginning. That’s not the question. Evolution is what most people agree on as how people came about from other animals.

WLC believes strictly in creationism — that man sprang from god’s utterance — which can neither be proved nor disproved; it must be “accepted”. Evolution has mounds of evidence behind it. And to dispute it is like telling a person with a green shirt on that he’s not wearing a green shirt.

The American dispute over evolution is just that … American.

Yes, that last sentence a generalization. There are many creationist Muslims. And there are lots of ignorant people arguing for all kinds of myths.

We should all remember that — to the American Christian — evolution is a myth. And no amount of science or evidence can change their mind. It’s not a matter of evidence. Because when all the evidence you need for the Yeshua’s resurrection is a sermon, some Sunday School lessons, and four poorly edited books of the bible, there is never going to be evidence to the contrary.

The invisible of the Bible is the most convincing truth of all.

While it’s sad, it’s understandable right? I mean, look at the people in your family who believe. They’re not going to believe differently. They can’t criticize their faith.

And that’s why a debate between WLC and Dawkins is out of the question.

I read today on a business blog about how the great creator made women to be creative. I read it to Tina and we’re in awe wondering how any woman can read the bible and think they are loved by the god of the bible … new or old testament. The atheist movement should be lead by women. At least the agnostics.

I have no idea what PR agency works for the church, call it the “holy spirit,” but damn he’s worth every penny he gets paid.

Women of faith? Men of faith?

Damn straight, they cannot criticize their views.

Me? You? We can point out more errors in our ways of thought than a redneck can shoot holes in a can of coke with his Magnum Pee Eye 57 Chevy Shotgun.

But the believer, unless pressed hard over a bottle of strong beer, can’t find a damn thing wrong with his thought trajectory …

And these are all reasons why Richard Dawkins won’t debate William Lane Craig.

Remember you read it here first.