Atheist Billboard Hypocrisy! (Or Not)

When they pass the plate on Sunday, and we put our money in,
They assure us that it lets the Church do good
So we dig a little deeper—being selfish is a sin—
And we donate like the Bible says we should.

Though we haven’t got much money, we still give as best we can,
Every Sunday morning, roughly ten o’clock
Now we see our small donations help a much, much bigger plan,
Cos we’ve got the biggest billboard on the block!

Every church around has got one, and there’s some with five or six
Praising Jesus and inviting folks to come
There are dozens in the city, and there’s more out in the sticks
And they must have cost a mighty godly sum!

When “Our Lady Of The Blessed Heart”, the local Catholic Church,
Put their new one by the highway overpass
We just couldn’t let it stand like that, with us left in the lurch;
Our humongous billboard really kicked their ass!

We’ve competed now for decades, with our steeples and our signs,
Till the megachurches left us in their dust;
And it might be steeple envy, if you read between the lines,
But there’s something now that fills us with disgust!

Yes, the godless heathen atheists, the lowest of the low,
Have a billboard that they want to put in town!
If they try it, though, I’m telling you (and really, I should know)
If they put it up, we’re gonna burn it down.

What a waste of their resources! Why, that money’s better spent
Housing homeless, feeding hungry, helping poor;
For a message on a billboard should be strictly heaven-sent—
That for all your problems, Jesus is the cure!

****

I got a comment (thanks, Mariano!) on the “Starving? Have a bible!” thread, linking to a hilarious article accusing atheists of hypocrisy with regard to our reaction to the Audio Bible story. Now, to be fair, the Audio Bible person (not Mariano) who commented assured us that they are not sending these bibles instead of relief items, but along with them, and by request of people in Haiti. Moreover, he or she is trying to get the future runs of the device to include a radio receiver, so that it will be of practical use in disaster areas. I maintain that, although the actions of Faith Comes By Hearing are good, and their intentions perfectly honorable (although they certainly don’t need my approval), the Audio Bible, as is, does nothing to alleviate the real problems in Haiti. (It does work to alleviate some illusory problems, though; problems that stem from their belief in the first place. It may comfort them when they feel they have been abandoned by god; a solution to a problem that never needed to exist.)

From Mariano’s article:

Certainly, atheists, being absolute materialists, do not see how human beings are anything but bio-organisms and require nothing but bio-organic fuel, housing, etc. Yet, the Christian view is holistic and thus, organizations such as Faith Comes By Hearing seek to provide both; food for the body and food for the soul.

Actually, the atheist view is holistic, if by “whole” you mean “all that is there, without making shit up.”

Now, what of atheistic hypocrisy?

The fact is that for at least the last couple of years atheists worldwide have been literally wasting hundreds upon hundreds of thousands upon thousands of dollars in donated money not in order to help anyone in need during times of recession, war, poverty, etc. but in order to purchase anti-theistic and pro-atheism bus ads and billboards in order to attempt to demonstrate just how clever they consider themselves to be.

Now, they suddenly anoint themselves the charity police, complain and condemn based, by the way, on relative-subjective-personal preference based “morality.”

Well, my dear atheists friends; first repent of your own astonishingly wasteful back-patting boasting and then, perhaps, eventually, get around to criticizing those who are feeding, housing the needy body and soul—those who have been doing it for millennia upon millennia by the way.

I’ve seen atheist billboards. None in person, mind you; only online. I’ve seen religious billboards. Hundreds. Online, on the road, on the hill, on the bus, in the paper… By Mariano’s logic, think how much money has been thus wasted, that could have been used to help those in need.

Mariano is right about one thing–the churches have been doing it for millennia. We disagree on precisely what they have been doing. I hope that Mariano himself is free of hypocrisy, and will perhaps join Sarah Silverman’s “Sell the Vatican: Feed the Poor” campaign.

Actually, it kind of sickens me to read the sort of thing Mariano has linked to. The church-going people I knew while growing up were the first to donate, the first to volunteer, and never gave a thought about who else was donating or why. It was their own business. Of course, I found out years later that at least one pillar of that religious community was himself an atheist; the church was simply the best way he could help.

The billboards are up because atheists are treated as second class citizens. It’s nice to see, for once, that we are considered good enough to actually hold to a higher standard than believers themselves.

God Delusion Video (Markella)

I had never heard of this (former opera, now popular) singer, but Podblack told me about her just this morning (er, evening for her). Knowing I have a soft spot for A) rational thought, B) music, and C) Greek women, I can’t imagine what Podblack was thinking. Markella’s site has information about her, but only a brief clip of her song “God Delusion”… but a quick search found this powerful video:

Not my type of music, frankly, but certainly my type of message. Hmmm… ya think she’s do an album of Cuttlefish covers?

If rational thinking you seek
Take a listen to this lovely Greek
If you find, as I do,
That her message is true
Pass it on! Let it grow! Hear her speak!

Danish Cartoonist: 1–Muhammad: 0

It must, at times, be really hard
To be cartoonist Westergaard*.
To be a controversial Dane,
Targeted by religious insane.
Trying to live their normal life,
A normal man and normal wife,
But with a price put on his head—
A million bucks to see him dead.

His drawing was a mortal sin
(To those who need a thicker skin):
The Prophet (praise be unto him)
Portrayed in features rather grim,
With bomb in turban, fuse alight,
Offensive to a Muslim’s sight!
Since such an insult could not stand,
“The man must die.” the cold command.

Islam’s Qur’an, the central text,
Has poor cartoonists quite perplexed—
It calls for peace, or that’s the claim,
While breeding martyrs in its name.
But should one choose to illustrate
This problem, well, we know the fate:
The peaceful clerics draw a breath
And send the artist to his death.

Kurt Westergaard is still alive
His freedom, also, will survive—
He will not bow to terrorists
Although his name is on their lists;
He chooses still, by all accords,
To set his pen against their swords
To freely live, as best he can—
So, fuck Muhammad—Kurt’s the man!

*I have been corrected; my pronunciation of Westergaard is incorrect (thanks for nothing, ITN News!) My apologies!

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. Specifically, a religiously-motivated terrorist tried to murder a cartoonist. God’s very own prophet is apparently so thin-skinned, a cartoon is offense enough to try to kill a 74 year old cartoonist.

I am paying closer attention to Denmark these days; Cuttleson will be heading there for a semester. I am so envious. I suppose, though, I will have to caution him against doodling images of Muhammad.

From the article:

Danish police have shot and wounded a man at the home of Kurt Westergaard, whose cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad sparked an international row.
Mr Westergaard was at home in Aarhus when a man broke in and threatened him. He pressed a panic button and police entered the house and shot the man.
Danish officials said the intruder was a 28-year-old Somali linked to the radical Islamist al-Shabab militia.

Plato, Linnaeus, Darwin, and Atheism

Barbara Bradley Hagerty’s NPR piece, “A Bitter Rift Divides Atheists“, put two thoughts in my head. The briefer first: Taking a look at religious sectarian violence the world over, isn’t BBH impressed at how atheists handle alleged disagreements?

The second will take some time. You might want to pour yourself a drink first.

Plato’s view of reality proposed that there were ideal forms (platonic ideals) which we mere humans could not perceive—our abilities limited to seeing only imperfect copies of these ideals. We did, however, recognize kinds, as approximations to those ideals. We saw and recognized triangles because of their similarity to the ideal triangle, cats because of their similarity to the ideal cat, and so forth.

Linnaeus, in categorizing species, followed the platonic tradition. A species was defined by a representative of that species, a prototype, and by limited variation from that ideal. There was an ideal cat, but of course some are larger or smaller, striped or solid or tortoise-shell mottled or calico, with longer or shorter tails, faster or slower, more or fewer toes. This view of life made it very difficult to conceive of one species becoming another, or splitting into two.

Darwin rocked the world when, in his “Origin of Species”, he essentially rendered the word “species” obsolete, at least as it had previously been known. The average or ideal cat was no longer of any great interest; rather, the population of cats, individuals varying from one another, was what was important. There is, if I may abuse a metaphor, a spectrum of cats, a spectrum of pigeons, a spectrum of finches on each island of the Galapagos. The spectra vary for each species, but we could no more treat one individual as “the ideal” than we could suggest that any one wavelength represents sunlight, or fluorescent light, or incandescent.

Religions, arguably, may be described platonically. Using Linnaeus as our guide, we could arrive at Homo catholicus, “catholic man”; H. orthojudaicus, “orthodox jewish man”; H. australobapticus, southern baptist man, and so forth. We may do this because there does exist a set of beliefs that defines each religion (whether or not its followers adhere to those beliefs). There is no requirement for H. orthojudaicus to believe in the divinity of Christ, nor of H. australobapticus to follow the ex cathedra pronouncements of the pope. Each species religion has its own defining dogma, so a positive definition is quite appropriate. Many individuals fall short of that defining dogma, so variation (or “error”) is also expected.

Note, though, that these positive definitions are quite limited. To know that someone is H. catholicus tells us a few things to expect about this person. Knowing only that someone is not a member of this species tells us very nearly nothing at all. The non-catholic may be Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Pantheist, Wiccan, Polytheist, Deist, any of thousands of other belief systems… or may be atheist. The non-Sunni may be Muslim, Christian, Jew, Hindu… or atheist. The non Orthodox Jew may be Jew, Christian, Muslim… or atheist. A negative definition (non-X) tells us almost nothing at all about someone.

Atheism is, and must be, negatively defined. It is the “none of the above” alternative to the list of thousands of religions and sects. There is no creed to which all atheists must cling, even in theory. There is no defining characteristic shared by all atheists—even “they don’t believe in god” is incomplete, as the majority of religious believers also do not believe in the other religions’ god(s). (Recall that the first people to be called “atheist” were early Christians, because they did not believe in the Greek pantheon!)

As a privative category (defined by what it is not), there is no ideal atheism from which to have schisms. There is, instead, a spectrum of beliefs. To the extent that we take this spectrum and attempt to split it into black and white (or any segments, even ROY G. BIV) , we are artificially imposing boundaries where there are none naturally. The “hard atheism” and “soft atheism” dichotomy is not about atheism, but rather about the presence or absence of a completely different and orthogonal set of beliefs—after all, the people most likely to positively affirm the statement “there is no Zeus” are people who also positively affirm that there is a Yahweh. “Hard” atheism can only be defined one deity at a time, which makes it something other than “none of the above”. It is an attempt to use the vocabulary of religion to describe the absence of same.

A Darwinian, population-centered approach, is more accurate. Atheists are bigger or smaller, smarter or stupider, louder or quieter… pretty much like the rest of H. sapiens is. And, in truth, H. catholicus varies pretty widely from its alleged ideal form, so much so that the term “cafeteria catholic” is commonplace. The entire Order Religiosa will, in fact, contain tremendous variability, both within and between species. We should not expect all catholics to behave alike, nor all jews, nor all muslims, nor all protestants (let alone all denominations within these broader groups).

The truth is, no matter where we look, we see spectra. We see variability. It is not unexpected; it is not diagnostic; it is not evidence of schism. It is nature.

Writingly, Bitingly,
B. Bradley Hagerty
Writes about Atheists,
Finding a schism;

Godlessness, organized
Quasi-religiously:
All of humanity
Seen through her prism.

Share/Bookmarka2a_linkname=document.title;a2a_linkurl=”http://digitalcuttlefish.blogspot.com/2009/10/plato-linnaeus-darwin-and-atheism.html”;

Offensive Billboard Removed By Courageous Bigot(s)

Before:

After:

Story.

It almost made me ill, Lord,
What I saw up on that billboard
Down at Poplar Ave and High Street, as I drove along today;
I was passing by, commuting,
When I saw a man saluting—
In a uniform and everything—but doing it while gay!
It’s offensive and disgusting,
How he’s standing there, just lusting
(You can see it in his eyes, I think, or maybe in his smile)
We must all protect the children,
Who must find such smut bewild’rin’,
And remove these homo billboards as offensive, crude, and vile!
Must we really see gay faces
In our normal, public places?
Must they rub it in our faces that they’re living in our town?
It could jeopardize the traffic,
Standing there, all pornographic—
For the benefit of everyone, I had to tear it down!

I’m all for the First Amendment
But the messages these send, meant
That my children might think homos are the same as you and me
So I used my free expression
To remove their indiscretion
Now the Memphis that we live in is decidedly more free!
There are other billboards out there
That the world can do without, where
People see them on their way to work, with children in the car—
Why, it’s bordering on criminal:
A sign on which two women’ll
Be saying that “We’re married, and God loves us as we are”!
I’m not normally so pensive
But these signs are so offensive,
And what’s worse, they’ve got me thinking, which I really hate to do!
If the message is far-reaching,
What a horror that they’re teaching—
What if people start believing it… that gays are normal, too?

Share/Bookmarka2a_linkname=document.title;a2a_linkurl=”http://digitalcuttlefish.blogspot.com/2009/09/offensive-billboard-removed-by.html”;

(I could have sworn I saw this story on CNN.com, but it is not there now. Poor memory? I certainly hope so.)

“Is God Dead?” Redux

At the US News & World Report website, the “God & Country” column has a couple of recent stories of interest. Of course, there is the poll that PZ links to, but there is also a brief bit on the recent death of John T. Elson, the Time magazine editor responsible for the “Is God Dead?” issue. Poking around through various different obituaries (here, for example), I find (not surprisingly) that the firestorm that erupted around that issue has not subsided. People are using the comment threads to Elson’s obituaries as a forum to continue their arguing (I almost said “continue their debate”, but that would not be true).

So, is God Dead? I say no. Something which was never alive cannot properly be said to be dead; trees may be dead, but not stones; birds may be dead, but not clouds; people may be dead, but not living-room sofas. If we may say God was alive through the thoughts of believers (the “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus” version of being alive), then God is still not dead, because there are still believers.

Which brings us back to the poll. “A new survey says a quarter of all Americans are likely to claim to have “no religion” within 20 years. How do you view the boom in Americans without a religious affiliation?” With fewer and fewer believers, is God (in the “YVtiaSC” version) dying? Answer: mu. The question is useless. What matters is the actions of those left who do believe, whether they are a huge majority, a bare majority, a large minority, or even a handful.

The sort of true believers who will never spare the rod
For they know that they are following the sacred will of God;
Devout and faithful followers, the ones for whom Christ died,
Or the ones who know that Allah will be watching them with pride,
The servants of Jehovah, who see prophecy fulfilled
When they look upon the legions of the heathens that they’ve killed,
The good and gentle pilgrims who burned witches at the stake
Which was only right and proper, and was done for Heaven’s sake;
The powerful inquisitors, the torturers, the beasts,
The sexual molesters who still hide among the priests,
Fanatic true believers, who, as part of Allah’s powers
Would hijack planes and crash into the World Trade Center towers
The actions of believers, and the deeds of the devout,
If you’ll pardon me, are things that I could really do without.

The Digital Pack-Rat, vol. 9

All the xmas verses that got away–starting with a response to a youtube clip of ignorant buffoons pontificating on how the true meaning of christmas was being destroyed by having other belief systems … basically, do what christianity had done in its turn.

I do not think highly of Mr. O’Reilly
(That’s fine–he can do that himself)

And Gretchen’s kvetchin’ just pure leaves me retchin’

My guts out, the bleached little elf.

They do love the season, but don’t know the reason

Their holiday comes in December

It was stolen from Norse, and from Romans, of course,

But these “journalists” must not remember.

These pinheads demand, but the Puritans banned

The observance of Christmas, you know:

True Christians could see that a creche or a tree

Was improper, and really should go!

So Gretchen and Billo, go purchase some brillo

And use it to polish your brains

So that maybe next year we can live without fear

Of your ignorant, selfish refrains.

As part of that continuing saga, you may recall, the (horrible, deplorable, sacrilegious, whatever) sign that the atheists put up beside the creche… was stolen! And yes, I stole the melody.

They came upon a midnight clear
Unto the Olympia Square
The night disguised them while they took
The sign the godless put there:
“It is our wish this Solstice time
That reason should prevail”
With hardened hearts and minds enslaved
The thieves may land in jail.

Still, tis the season to forgive;
To turn the other cheek.
Let’s hope they’ve learned their lesson if
It’s wisdom that they seek:
“Be kind unto your fellow man;
Treat them as you’d have them treat you”
There’s room for you in the public square
But only if others fit, too.

The right to different views is where
The strength of our nation abides
The First Amendment makes it clear
The government cannot take sides;
The tyranny of majority
May change with the whim of the day
And someday you may need it too–
Don’t throw your rights away.

My last (I hope) comment on this particular silly nonsense. This year, at least:

The traditional creche, to my thinking, is fine;
I won’t mess with theirs if they don’t mess with mine.
Not even the one at my town’s public square
So long as my own has an equal place there.
If you want the display to be yours, and yours only,
Then keep it at home; hope you like being lonely.
Or join with the rest of us–come and have fun,
If you want a real party… invite every one!

Another in the long line of back-and-forth regarding the Cinci Zoo and FantasyGodLand or whatever it was called…

I’m looking for some funding; gonna open up a zoo
With cages of creationists, all blithely flinging poo
They’re much more fun than pandas–much more active in their cages
With a longer line on Sundays, when they all sing “Rock of Ages”
The children love to point and laugh–they say “Hey look! They’re praying!”
And when they talk, you almost feel they know what they are saying
But clearly it’s just gibberish, not language like a man’s;
(It shows itself–in transcripts, it comes out in comic sans!)

And lastly (this time, anyway), a response to an editorial. This year is Darwin Year, but sadly, it seems that some of those who will speak at Darwin Year events are (gasp!) atheists! Why can’t those militant atheists be more like, say, Darwin himself, and act like the second-class citizens they are? Won’t somebody think of the children!

I thought I saw an atheist, who dared to speak aloud,
Who did not meekly bow his head–oh, no, this man was proud!
Who, rather than–like Darwin–hold his tongue and keep his place,
Demanded equal membership among the human race!

I thought I saw an atheist–a scientist, as well–
Who dared to mention Darwin in the stories he would tell!
Whose glib association with the noble Darwin name
Would tar it with comparison to atheistic shame!

I thought I saw an atheist who read what Darwin wrote,
Who did not have agenda or religion to promote,
Who, on this anniversary, will stand in line to thank
A man who saw a view of life inside a tangled bank.

Happy Christmas To All Of You (From Your Atheist Friend)

I just got a nice “Merry Christmas” this morning
From someone who calls me his “atheist friend”;
He jokingly added, as if for a warning,
His greeting was truly not meant to offend.

He assumed that an atheist hated this season,
Or else he was joking, or just didn’t see;
He was wrong, though, that’s certain, whatever his reason–
Cos Christmas is really quite special to me:

We’ll all open presents, and cook a big dinner,
And share in traditions we learned long ago
But Christmas is different for this humble sinner,
No “birth of the saviour”, just people we know.

It has nothing to do with a babe in a manger
Or kings being led by a star up above,
But rather in family, friend, and in stranger,
In kindnesses done for the people we love.

A spirit of hope, and a spirit of giving,
A promise of peace in a troubling day,
A chance to examine the way we are living–
The courage to say what we’ve wanted to say.

You don’t need to think there’s a god up above you
To want to be good to your fellows on Earth.
To give to your friends, and to tell them “I love you”
Has nothing to do with some son of god’s birth.

For love, and for giving, we say “tis the season”
For caring, for kindness, for sharing good cheer
But why limit ourselves? I mean, what is the reason?
Why can’t we be giving the rest of the year?

This Christmas, my wish for each sister and brother,
To you, and to everyone you may hold dear;
Remember, this Christmas, to love one another—
Not only this season, but all through the year!

I’ll happily send him my own Christmas greeting,
And wish him a good one, and Happy New Year,
And hope he remembers, so next time we’re meeting
He’ll talk as he wants to, with nothing to fear.

The “War On Christmas”, Explained.

So it’s Christmas—my Christmas—my secular day;
The Supreme Court decided it must be that way.
As a secular holiday, Christmas can stay,
With department-store Santa Claus, there on display,
Or with Rudolph, or some other TV cliché,
And your photograph taken in front of the sleigh.

If you want, you can use this occasion to pray;
Even atheists know such behavior’s okay—
Just as long as you don’t expect me to obey,
And admit that your version of Christmas holds sway;
The establishment clause means I don’t have to play
By your rules, because every belief gets its say.

If you really think Christmas is in disarray,
That it’s war, and it’s time to make somebody pay,
Then I humbly submit, you’ve been led far astray
By some ignorant pundit who airs his dismay
By the grace of that same First Amendment that “they”
Get to hide behind, here in the U. S. of A.

National Day Of Prayer

No, seriously. It’s the National Day Of Prayer. Not everyone is happy about it.

It’s time to raise our voice in prayer,
And pray to–well, there’s no one there.
No god to urge to do our bidding;
Go on and pray–just know you’re kidding.

It’s time to all sit on our asses,
And pray forgiveness for trespasses
(Or is that to forgive our debtor?
Who cares, as long as we feel better.)

It’s time we all embrace god fully,
Feel all righteous, good, and holy–
Or be some atheistic jerk,
Roll up your god-damned sleeves, and work!

It’s time to say “I do not care
To join you in this day of prayer.”
Sure, a day off looks like fun,
But there is work that must be done.

Our problems will not fix themselves
There is no god to send in elves
To do the work of human ranks
So… join, today, in prayer? No thanks.