Thomas Foley of Virginia is nuts. This is the delegate to the Republican National Convention who has called for increased security. Why? Because he has an irrational fear of us.
On Friday the Catholic League reported that Thomas E. Foley, a Virginia delegate to the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Minneapolis has asked that increased security be considered for the event in light of Myers’ threat to acquire and desecrate the Eucharist.
“I just felt security at the Republican National Convention ought to look at him and his followers,” Foley told CNA in a phone interview on Wednesday morning. He reported that he had not received an update about his request.
Voicing his concerns about Myers, Foley said: “What I think he has done, he’s loaded a cyberpistol and he’s cocked it and he’s left it on the table. He may have set something in motion that no one can stop. It was irresponsible, a hell of a thing to do.”
Foley explained that he thought Myers should not be able to incite such acts with “impunity,” saying that he was especially disturbed by the comments posted on Myers’ blog. He said it was “eye-opening” to read the people who supported Myers’ action. Even at his age of 63, Foley said, he had never “personally encountered such bigotry.”
He also objected to Myers’ recent description of Catholic League President Bill Donohue as “braying,” which Foley, a self-described Irish Catholic, claimed was “a great insult for the Irish.”
Foley said he believes Myers was telling his readers to acquire a consecrated Host at Mass, which Foley thought would result in disruptions.
“What’s he telling them to do? Consecrated Hosts are not just lying around,” he said to CNA, noting that the only other possible way to secure a Host would be to accost a priest, nun, or layman taking the Sacrament to the sick. Even E-bay, Foley emphasized, has prevented the sale of consecrated Hosts.
Wait, what? I’m armed with a cyberpistol? Is that what we atheist brigands use to rob trucks trundling down the tubes of the internet?
I had no idea that “braying” was especially insulting to the Irish. I’m sure it’s a word that is used with great frequency in reference to Bill Donohue, though. No ethnic slur was intended, since I was unaware of any association (and still am) — it’s really just intended to highlight Donohue’s personal attributes as an ass.
I’m baffled by the last paragraph, though. If the crackers aren’t just lying around, how come people are having such an easy time getting them? The people who’ve sent them to me haven’t mentioned having to disrupt anything. And if their availability is so limited, why is he calling for increased security at the RNC? Do Republicans get Christ Crackers on registration, or something?
This is precisely the kind of deranged hysteria we have to protest against, I’m afraid.
“Unfortunately we ultimately bear responsibility for our own actions and those homosexuals who committed those acts will, as well as their accomplices, will eventually face judgement – and rightly so – despite perhaps escaping the wrath of our legal system which pales in comparison”
So in fact you are not a moral person at all. If you think a significant part of the population will face “judgement” for being gay you really lack any compassion or moral sense at all.
And you wonder what our problem is with you ? You really have no insight do you ? If you cannot see many find your views on homosexuality to be abhorrent, and if you cannot see demanding respect for your religion whilst denying it to gays is hypocritical then I really must question your critical faculties. Your brain seems to be broken.
Granted he does have the right to maintain his Godless views in our society but a line has to be drawn when he begins to infringe on the traditions of this Christian nation – of which Catholicism has always played a massive role.
Actually this was never a Christian country. Most of our founding fathers were either Deists (3 of our first 5 presidents) or Unitarians (the other 2). Although Jefferson did tend to go back and forth between the two beliefs and was even accused of being an atheist by his enemies.
“At the Last Supper, on the night he was betrayed, our Savior instituted the Eucharistic sacrifice of his Body and Blood. This he did in order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the ages until he should come again, and so to entrust to his beloved Spouse, the Church, a memorial of his death and resurrection: a sacrament of love, a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a Paschal banquet ‘in which Christ is consumed, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us.”
Does Pete Rooke always manage to compose posts that concentrate that many factual errors, baseless claims, false predictions ?
I’ve already read a few of his posts and I must say he seems to have a particular affinity for this type of super concentrated piece of nonsense.
This sub species of troll should be called a megatroll.
Christ, even more of the blathering torture fetishists are coming out of the woodwork.
“The path to salvation.”
You have just said nothing. It would have meant the same thing, and involved less typing.
@983 that fellow said:
“has no bearing on the overall moral benefit and direction that Catholicism has provided this country – and much of the civilized world – through times of crisis”
What, pray tell, were these times of crisis, and what pray tell did Catholicism do about them?
Somebody also ought to tell him that Catholics in America were widely mistrusted in much of the country until the recent past. Remember that whole JFK business?
Atheist presidents=0; Catholic presidents=1
Apparently, this is a Protestant Nation, eh?
Unfortunately we ultimately bear responsibility for our own actions and those homosexuals who committed those acts will, as well as their accomplices, will eventually face judgement – and rightly so – despite perhaps escaping the wrath of our legal system which pales in comparison.
Peter, you’re so right Allah will surely judge the evil Christians and they will burn in hell.
“Never mind the Crackers — here come the Cyber Pistols!”
Pete Rooke said:
…he might learn something about Christian charity.
I think Homer Simpson said it best:
“Christian Charity… what does a porn star have to do with this?”
Point of fact, being an Atheist Unitarian-Universalist (like 19% of us), you’re full of your own opinion when it comes to UU’s. An opinion that clearly shows you don’t know us. You don’t know what we’re about. But you are willing to, offensively I might add, dump us in with the crazies.
Unitarians have zero requirements in the spiritual area and are, as a denomination, more about inspiration to leading a socially-just lifestyle from whatever source than any of the Christian dogma you wish to hang on us. Taking directly from our Church’s website:
We gather in safe and compassionate community, seeking our spiritual truths. We affirm our interdependence, celebrate our differences, and create a thoughtful and harmonious voice for liberal religion. Through the practice of the principles of our faith, we promote social, economic and environmental justice and continue our legacy of respect and acceptance. We covenant together in a spirit of love and freedom.
We have people, in our church, from virtually every mainstream, and many minor, religions – or none at all. Each and every person is accorded respect for, and right to hold, his/her own beliefs, but also may not try to force them on others. We share our beliefs through Religious Education classes which seek to inform, rather then prostelyze/convert, others of our beliefs.
I won’t rehash the Unitarian martyrs. Those that died because the Christians, of whom you say we enable, killed them for being heretics. It’s a LONG story. Full of dead people who paid the price for standing up against religious intolerance and bigotry practiced by mainstream faiths.
What moral direction did the Catholic church provide Spain during the Civil War ? What moral direction did the Catholic Church provide Italy under Mussolini ? What moral direction did the Catholic Church provide after the defeat of Nazi Germany ?
Oh that’s right. It support dictators and helped Nazis wanted for war crimes escape justice. How moral.
I think I figured Pete out. Everything he’s said points to one thing: he is sure that all non-catholics will burn in hell, and he’s gloating over it.
So you derive pleasure at the thought that billions will burn in hell, real christian of you, Pete.
This has probably been answered, but I’m trying to catch up.
The idea is that the bread Jesus used was made with wheat, so that’s what he have to use. It’s the same principle that says since all the disciples were men that all clergy must be men (I don’t know why it doesn’t mean that all priests have to be Jews from Palestine, but I guess that’s just Catholic logic).
From the link:
Matt Penfold: wasn’t it the present pope ex-nazi when he was only cardinal ex-nazi who was responsible for formulating the RC’s policy on handling these criminal priests. A policy which included moving priests around out of harms way, who cares about harm to the children, delay things until the statute of limitation ran out, threaten the victims with the wrath of the church to keep quiet and often as a last resort, allow them to escape to the Vatican when the heat got too close. Imagine if that had been discovered as the policy of a secular organisation, they would have probably been up on RICO charges with international warrants issued for those in charge of the organisation.
But hey, make fun of some of their more incredulous and ridiculous beliefs and we have this filth Peter Rooke up in arms while still defending the church over its policy about the criminal priests. Says it all about his type of
catholic really.
Peter Rooke also said ” as well as their accomplices, will eventually face judgement “.
So Peter Rooke, does that mean that the present pope ex-nazi will eventually face judgement as he is the one responsible for formulating the RC policy on what to do to hide the paedophile priest scandal and you can’t be more of an accessory after and during the fact than that, can you.
The first association I, and many other people with some historical knowledge have with the words “christian nation” is that of persecution of everyone who doesn’t agree with the most powerful sect of christianity involved.
This is the whole reason why secular governments were created in the first place AND supported by all the various religious sects. I guess thats easy to miss for someone who didn’t pay attention to history, and actually believes the founding fathers of the US were model christians who just happened to forget to add their god to the constitution.
From the article linked @1014
Would that it were so.
Brad (1003)
OK. I’m looking back at church history from the 21st century as an unbeliever. I see these problems off the top of my head.
1. the gospels were written several decades after the supposed fact.
2. The gospels were written in Greek while Jesus spoke Aramaic (if he existed).
3. The Catholic Church believes that there is no physical flesh in the consecrated host but it still is flesh.
4. The Catholic Church, with flimsy (at best) historical evidence, states unequivically that Jesus was not speaking metaphorically.
So, please convince us that it’s not just a cracker.
From the Vatican:
So, “However, the fruits of the sacraments do depend on the dispositions of the one who receives them.” and “The lives of the faithful, their praise, their suffering, their prayers, their work, are united to those of Christ.” with “To receive Holy Communion one must be fully incorporated into the Catholic Church and be in the state of grace, that is, not conscious of being in mortal sin.” means you can’t get communal with the church, its members, and its god without being a believer.
Unless perhaps, kmerian, you propose that your god is helplessly trapped in the eucharist, since:
In that case, though, since you know the limitations* of your god it’s no wonder it needs you all to come to its rescue.
*snarky. If you dislike my connections, you better ‘splain it to me, because your stance is inherently heretical.
John Phillips,
Yes the current Pope did have a fairly important role in how the Catholic Church dealt with paedophile priests.
What amazes me is how the likes of Rooke think it is the fact there were paedophile priests rather than the cover up that most angers people. Sensible people realise that in any large organisation that deals with children there will be paedophiles. If the organisation removes the paedophile from a position where they have access to children, and reports the incident to the authorities most people will think it is just an unfortunate isolated issue. If the organisation just moves the person to another post where they can continue their crimes most people think not the paedophile should be in prison, but those who could have stopped him but did not.
Pete Rooke #983,
You mean for example in such moments of crisis when the church signed the Reichskonkordat with Adolf Hitler’s Nazi regime in 1933 ?
Which most historians consider was one of the most important steps which led to the international acceptance of this regime, and later on to the events that we all know ?
Should I give more examples of moral benefits the church has provided civilization in periods of crisis ?
Hey, I’m French, how can I forget, they only killed about 50,000 huguenots in a few weeks after the St Barthélémy massacres, that’s a HUGE moral benefit in a period of crisis isn’t it ?
If you need to refresh your recollection of history, which evidently seems to be very, very, vague.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskonkordat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Bartholomew%27s_Day_massacre
And that’s just TWO very different examples in different periods, off the top of my head, and I’ll stop here because I think I could spend my whole day writing about so called “moral benefits the church has provided civilization in periods of crisis.”
Matt Penfold: exactly, is what sickens me is that so many catholics are still in a state of denial about the whole thing and so many, even senior church officials, still blaming the victims. Peter Rooke is typical of the type, my church right or right, but god help :) any outsider criticise or ridicule the ridiculous in the church.
“The fact that certain homosexual paedophiles (incidentally the two aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive) have infiltrated the church, in small isolated numbers, has no bearing on the overall moral benefit and direction that Catholicism has provided this country – and much of the civilized world – through times of crisis. For that we should all be grateful although that would apparently be too much to hope for.”
Ah yes, the old homosexuality-leads-to-pedophilia nonsense. How does it feel being morally and intellectually challenged? Oh but it was the evil homosexual cabal scheming against the peaceful Christocrats, how could you have possible known? Oh wait, your leadership did, and somehow only found the moral will to shuffle them about. So much for that Catholic moral elitism.
As for Catholicism providing “overall moral benefit and direction” to this country, please, stop with the convenient reading of history. The fact is only reason has moved our society forward. Catholicism didn’t end slavery, it didn’t give women the right to vote or desegregate schools, it didn’t defeat fascism or communism, it has done nothing. Its followers (of which I used to be one) think, like other religious sects, that it is the sole reason for all the is good in the world, but this is extremely foolish thinking.
Reason is what saves man, reason is what frees us from our shackles, reason is what pushes us into the future. Reason is what made this country what it is, not blind devotion.
This is about the kind of world we choose to live in. Catholics believe that the host, once concecrated, is sacred. You find that to be foolish. Catholics, by and large do not give a damn what you think; you don’t care what Catholics think.
But we all have to live in this world together. And it is hubris for you to interfere with the rights that others see as sacred simply because you believe them wrong. Apart from simply seeking attention, why would you do this? Why would you interfere with what others see as sacred? The communion right in no way harms you. While you may disagree on certain political issues Catholics sometime puruse, you have a more than adequate remedy in the political arena. This is the way our republic works — disparate groups advocate their views and succeed or fail based upon their ability to convince others.
While I have tried to stay away from the details of this insipid dispute, one statement in your post is so absurd that a response is required. You ask if “the crackers aren’t just lying around, how come people are having such an easy time getting them?” Obviously, they are getting the host at mass, where there is an implicit agreement by those taking the host that they intend to consume it as members of the Catholic faith. The church does not want to have to check ID’s at the door.
By doing this, you have made the world a worse place: less tolerant, less understanding, and less kind. You have made it harder for those with disparate beliefs to live together as a community. Whatever ego thrill you get from this action is no justification.
@1014: “The use of any flour other than wheat flour makes the bread invalid matter.”
I’ve never heard of that category of matter – how does that relate to dark matter or antimatter?
negentopyeater
I don’t think people like Pete can quite grasp history the way reasonable people do. Actually, I don’t think people like Pete can quite grasp reality the way reasonable people do.
And it is hubris for you to interfere with the rights that others see as sacred simply because you believe them wrong.
I think a woman’s right to choose is sacred but you seem to feel it is your right to interfere. In any case, no one is interfering with your right to practice whatever silly religion you want.
AgnoAtheist #1018,
catholic.com has some great articles and tracts on their website that answers these and other questions. Worth a visit if for no other reason than to get a Catholic perspective on these kind of issues that you see problems with… and from people much smarter than me who have spent their life studying it.
I normally don’t post to threads and am swimming in work, so will probably not check back with this, but thanks for reaching out with honest questions. Take care and best of luck to you, Brad.
“This is my cyberpistol, this is my gun … one is for persecuting Catholics, one is for fun …”
Seriously, though. This sounds like a video game in the making, in which a lone soldier, equipped with the best weapons science has to offer, defends the entire human race from a power-mad and deluded alliance of religious fanatics whose delusional thinking has led them on a Great Journey that threatens to destroy all sentient life in the galaxy … if only there was such a game … if only …
The problem isn’t your bible. It’s that you’re ignorant and actually think your bible is, on some level, true or correct and represents “God.”
This is no more convincing than if you sat down with the Bhagavad Gita, Confucian Texts, the Tibetan Book of the Dead or the Egyptian Book of the Dead. They’re all fairy tales and, ironically, though you’re a prisoner of your fairy tale, you can easily recognize those others as fairy tales.
I, OTOH, have spent decades following biblical archeology and know, for certain, that the Bible is a bunch of co-opted fairy-tales from various religions and has as much bearing on the reality of the universe as Magical Flying Unicorns. And, unlike you, I can actually BACK UP MY ARGUMENT WITH FACTS AND DATA. Just like I could, probably to a lesser extent, if I were discussing those religious texts in which we are (likely) in complete agreement are just fairy-tales..
The real problem, is that your internal thought-processes are based on BAD DATA you have incorporated to make your world-view. And thus, from that corrupt world-view, you bad arguments based on these delusions. Really, your mind isn’t working right and your arguments are a classic case of Garbage-In, Garbage-Out.
And you can’t see that. Because you cannot handle the truth of your religious text. All others, you can see the truth. But yours. Not at all.
Andrew: again you don’t get it. Believe whatever stupid nonsense you want to, usually at worst, if you don’t do anything that effect us we might think you a bit touched but let you get on with it. However, in this case, it was the church that offended by first assaulting the student over a misunderstanding, compounding the error with their statements after wards and then other catholics threatening the student. When PZ in disgust made his post to highlight the situation and made his point about threatening to desecrate the host as a point that a student’s life was more important than the host, he also received death threats and a whole lot of catholics rationalising the wrongs done in the name of catholicism. But hey, don’t let the facts get in the way of your feelings of persecution or your ‘truth’.
Andrew, nobody’s right to worship as they choose has been interfered with. What are you smoking and why aren’t you sharing?
Maybe gays should start framing their fight for their rights as being a right over things they hold sacred. That way the likes of Donohue and Pete Rooke would be forced to support them, as they are very clear they disapprove of condemning things people hold to be sacred.
I think I might have finally got this framing thing. We can just call the right of gays to marry a sacred right. Game over for those who oppose it!
“What amazes me is how the likes of Rooke think it is the fact there were paedophile priests rather than the cover up that most angers people. Sensible people realise that in any large organisation that deals with children there will be paedophiles.”
I agree the worst problem was when church leaders sent perverts to other towns to rape more little boys. I also noticed the little boy rapers seem to be attracted to the Catholic church. I think it’s for good reasons a priest is more likely than anyone else to be pedophile. The reasons might include the fact priests can’t get married, and also anyone stupid enough to be a Catholic is likely to have other problems.
The Catholic church has a long history of child abuse, genocide, and forced slavery. I can’t imagine why anyone would talk about “the overall moral benefit and direction that Catholicism has provided this country”, unless he was a shithead like Pete Rooke.
“Buddhists do not consider Gautama Siddhartha (“The Buddha”) a god, O ignorant one.”
So Buddhists spell the name as ‘buddha’?
There’s a word in the Russian language for people who would desecrate a consecrated Host.
I find this group mostly, but not entirely, very strange. People in the old SU were brought up from infancy in an officially atheist society, and yet I never met anyone who would desecrate a consecrated Host. If nothing else it would be considered the act of a lout, an uncultured person, someone who was an embarrassment to civilized society.
There was a famous priest in the latter days of the SU. His name was Fr. Aleksandr Men. His kitchen sermons were famous, and even Party members would sit around the table and listen intently. I’m quite sure that some, perhaps many, were atheists, because that’s how they had been brought up. But Fr. Men was extraordinary to listen to. And if they disagreed with anything they said, or had questions, it would never occur to them to be disrespectful towards him.
Tom, (#1027) I anticipated your comment when noting the political issue. Obviously many Catholics and non-Catholics believe the unborn child is meaningfully devloped human being worthy of the respect of the law. You do not. That is fine — and if you want to fight that out and attack the Chuch on that ground, enjoy yourself. But obviously, there is no connection between the political issue of abortion and the communion right.
You are also wrong to say that “no one is interfering with your right to practice whatever silly religion you want.” By stealing the communion host Mr. Meyer (or those who act at his request) are breaching the bond of trust between the church and those who receive communion. The host is given freely in the expectation that those who take it do so in good faith. If that bond in broken, it will be very difficult for Catholics to worship as they choose.
“While I have tried to stay away from the details of this insipid dispute, one statement in your post is so absurd that a response is required.”
Actually knowing what the fuck you are talking about before you post is too much for you?
Pathetic
Re 1024:
By doing this, you have made the world a worse place: less tolerant, less understanding, and less kind.
No he is not. It is your choice to be upset at whatever prank anyone chooses to pull on a small piece of unleavened bread. He does not force you to be angry, you choose to be angry. It is like camping in the rain, you can either be wet and miserable or you can just be wet. You have no choice about being wet, but you do choose whether or not to be miserable. Same with PZ’s hypothetical “stunt”. You can either watch and be offended or you could just watch. It is your choice to be offended, PZ is not forcing you. And it is how you choose that determines whether the world is more tolerant, more understanding and more kind or not.
John — I agree with you that this whole dispute is stupid. It sounds like the Florida kid made a mistake and just tried to do the right thing. It should have been left at that.
Bob — your comment hardly merits a response. See comment No. 1036.
Maybe gays should start framing their fight for their rights as being a right over things they hold sacred.
You mean like the right to simply live and exist as gay people? That would still be controversial in some circles, including the RCC.
Tom Foley is from Virginia. VIRGINIA. As in, Virginia, Capital of the Confederacy. And in all his 63 years, he hasn’t seen “such bigotry.”
This is the same Virginia that had one of its counties close its public schools for several years to avoid educating black children.
If this is the worst “bigotry” he’s ever seen, then he’s a typical Republican, with his head shoved up his ignorant, right-wing Christian ass.
Pavel Chichikov (Comment #840):
Quite surprised. And not inconsiderably disappointed to find that the universe really is the playground of a petty-minded cosmic sociopath.
Experience of what, and how do they know that their beliefs have been correctly inferred from those experiences?
@Pavel Chichikov
Look up Overton’s Window and you’ll see why PZ is advocating this now. You don’t see him doing this on a regular basis for fun do you?
Even on a secular level, if someone came into your home, spat on a photograph of your deceased parents, ripped it out of the frame and tore it to bits, wouldn’t you feel at least somewhat offended? Mildly?
Spurge, I did not say that I was unaware of the details of the dispute — only that I tried not to comment on each little piece of it in my post.
Please read and understand my post prior to commenting. It will make for a better discussion.
A constant stream of cat-licks, each one as clueless as the last. Ok, seems that your sheep herder did not inform you correctly of the status of the debacle.
So, why the interest on the wafer?
To make a point: It is wrong to phisically assault a person and then issue the person death threats because they refused to follow the rules in one of your liturgic rituals. PZ went over the top on his denouncement of the fact that a small wafer seems to be way more important to the catholic establishment than the well-being of a young man. And then, the hordes of irrationality were let loose by Bill Donahue, who incidentally IS and ass and DOES prefer braying than structured speech and understanding. And then, the batshit insane fringe of the catholic sheep baclashed with death threats of their own, now to PZ Myers.
THIS is why. Fundamentalist catholicism is very intolerant, possibly as intolerant as the muslim faith that has been so criticised of late. This needs to be known and understood, and an effective way to help people understand it is to povide the fundamentalists with an opportunity to become as vicious and bloodthirsty as they truly are.
Andrew,
In what sense do we interfere with the Catholics’ right to see this Eucharist as sacred ? Nothing stops them to continue and see it as sacred.
Is their faith that weak that it feels threatened by a humble biologist who pledges on his blog to desecrates a cracker ?
What are they afraid of ?
Why do they belittle their own faith in Christ so much ?
For a more detailed explanation read my post #836 and check what their own catechism and their own bible says on the matter.
#1024,
“While I have tried to stay away from the details of this insipid dispute…”
That is evident. Pay attention: The details are that a person was physically assaulted for not immediately consuming a cracker on the spot. He chose to keep it (presumably as evidence of the incident) after the assault had taken place. For this, he was subsequently threatened with violence, and destruction of his livelihood and academic future.
PZ Myers stated his support for the young man and expressed his displeasure of the threats and actions that had taken place. To underline his position, he stated that he’d do much more than not eat the cracker if he had one or more of them (for instance submitting them to scientific investigation á la Mythbusters).
For this statement, on which he has not acted to this day, he received attacks on his professional status, which were officially condoned and endorsed by the Catholic League, character and personal death threats from multiple persons. Death threats detailing the manner in which Mr. Myers would be killed. Got that?
You are, giving you the benfit of the doubt, unaware of all that, and instead choose to condemn the triviality of doing things with crackers that they weren’t intended for, out of utter ignorance of the facts.
It is completely irrelevant how juvenile desecrating hosts (whose status of sacredness is a mere and completely unevidential assertion) may be. It is also at best of tertiary importance that some believers may feel offended by such propositions, when the actions that triggered this ‘affair’ have still not been properly addressed by those who perpetrated the actual violence and further threats of violence in the first place.
Steve (No. 1038) if someone stole your car, would you blame yourself for being upset about that event? You may not agree, but Catholics believe the host is much more valuable than a car. Let them live as they see fit.
“If that bond in broken, it will be very difficult for Catholics to worship as they choose.”
But not too difficult to threaten murder and/or threaten to ruin lives.
Andrew, if a church member didn’t attack the student, and if there were no death threats, and if Catholics didn’t go batshit crazy because of a tasteless cracker, this incident would have been ignored by everyone. The Catholics made fools out of themselves. They proved they’re stupid, insane, and immoral. They deserve the ridicule they’re getting now. I’m not interested in visiting churches to obtain crackers, but I have no problem with other people going in there to annoy Catholic assholes. I’m in favor of the complete eradication of your death cult. In my opinion, ridicule and harassment, combined with better science education, is the best way to get rid of religious insanity.
And they start up the awful analogies. Skim through the threads and you’ll see the numerous times where this has been debunked.
P.Z. Myers said – “This is precisely the kind of deranged hysteria we have to protest against, I’m afraid.”
Actually *this* is precisely the kind of deranged hysteria *we* have to protest against, I’m afraid. . .
“There are days when it is agony to read the news, because people are so goddamned stupid. Petty and stupid. Hateful and stupid. Just plain stupid. And nothing makes them stupider than religion.”
“So, what to do. I have an idea. Can anyone out there score me some consecrated communion wafers? There’s no way I can personally get them — my local churches have stakes prepared for me, I’m sure — but if any of you would be willing to do what it takes to get me some, or even one, and mail it to me, I’ll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare. I won’t be tempted to hold it hostage (no, not even if I have a choice between returning the Eucharist and watching Bill Donohue kick the pope in the balls, which would apparently be a more humane act than desecrating a goddamned cracker), but will instead treat it with profound disrespect and heinous cracker abuse, all photographed and presented here on the web. I shall do so joyfully and with laughter in my heart.”
Allow me to recycle the words of P. Z. Myers’ Atheist Supremacist brother-in-arms professor Richard Dawkins to the above “deranged hysteria” and other such offensive anti-religious attacks undertaken by fundamentalist atheist P. Z. Myers –
“The incompetence, on a public relations level, is beyond belief.” This is “an incredible piece of inept public relations” by P. Z. Myers. . .
Let them live as they see fit.
Why does the Church never apply this to gay people?
Damn, this gets annoying. Fussiness over a cracker versus continual attempts to deny any form of integration into society, as well as very basic rights, and any attempt to diminish discrimination or violence.
You are a moron. Exactly how does someone palming a wafer and taking it home affect how you worship?
It is the duty of the receiver to ensure that he is “worthy” of receiving the host. Not the duty of the priest to ensure that everyone receiving it is worthy. The priest is an enabler, not an enforcer. This “bond of trust” also includes that the receiver has been fasting. Suppose I take the host without fasting, I have broken the bond of trust. Is your ability to worship now compromised?
“You may not agree, but Catholics believe the host is much more valuable than a car.”
Andrew, are you sure you want to compare an expensive car to a cracker that costs less than one cent to manufacture?
It’s the Catholic belief that a cracker could have any value is why they are ridiculed. It’s way beyond insane to pretend a cracker is sacred, and more important than human life.
Moses at 1011,
The local UU bunch in my neck of the woods declared a few years ago that you had to believe in a higher power or you weren’t in the in-group. Bummed secularists bailed out.
So maybe they are UU Heretics?
#1018, for nine days now, PZ has been marching around promising us that he is going to prove “it’s just a cracker”.
The Catholic church and it’s members have rested their case, the “cracker” is in PZ’s court now.
But as yet another day passes, there those captive “crackers” sit, thumbing their metaphorical noses at PZ (and by extension all of PZ’s true believers), daring him to get to it; and nothing.
So, please tell us PZ. Are those “crackers” too hot to touch, or what?
Posts 1046 & 1048 — You have misstated my position. If death threats were issued, those people have also made the world a worse place. Had these individuals a post, I would have said that. But I am here, and respond to what Mr. Meyer has done.
Post 1047 — Catholics are not threated by a “humble biologist.” They simply want to be left alone and have those things they see as sacred not desicrated by thieves.
Andrew
It is all about perspective.
You value a cracker more than your fellow humans.
If you can’t see why that is a problem I feel sorry for you.
If cars were being handed out to hundreds of people every day for the price of simply sitting through a mass, no I probably would not be upset. Try a more meaningful analogy.
By stealing the communion host Mr. Meyer (or those who act at his request) are breaching the bond of trust between the church and those who receive communion. The host is given freely in the expectation that those who take it do so in good faith. If that bond in broken, it will be very difficult for Catholics to worship as they choose.
“Bond of trust?” “Good faith?” Magic crackers are a fraud, a swindle, a scam, a grift, the bunk, and you, Andrew, are a pathetic mark that has been conned.
Spurge, how do I value a “cracker” more than my fellow humans? I have simply said that simple courtesy would suggest that no one should steal (or encourage others to steal) a host from a Catholic mass. Please tell me how that values a “cracker” over other people?
Andrew wrote:
In a really round about way, yes.
All of them?
Yes.
You’re apparently wrong about that when it comes to PZ. Bill Donohue appears to care about something, you care about it in some way too, else you wouldn’t have bothered to come here and post your message. The people who threatened PZ must care.
Not exactly true either.
Yes. That’s why we care.
Rights? Excuse me, do we not have a right to do what we want with crackers you can buy easily online and say mumbo-jumbo over?
Do we not have a right to take a cracker freely given to us and do what we want with it?
What’s wrong with attention? If I would have wrote what PZ wrote few people would have cared. I know, I’ve said worse than PZ on my blog. Getting attention isn’t as easy as you think.
To point out how crazy it is to think a cracker is sacred.
Not directly, but it is part of the madness and insanity that is religion and that infects politics and everything else. I used to be Christian myself, and it was the absurdity and craziness of the things I was asked to believe that made me wake up and rely on reason.
This is the political arena.
And PZ is gambling on his ability to convince others just how crazy religious people are by provoking crazy reactions… like yours.
One kid did. There are other ways. You can also buy the crackers, get a $15 universal church of life degree and then bless your own crackers.
Of course, because that would look crazy.
Worse in the sense that you can’t go around acting nuts and not be noticed. So, worse for who is the question.
That’s what religion seems to do.
You did that PZ? Wow! That’s impressive. I would have blamed the crazy religious beliefs people threaten each other over for that.
It’s freaking cracker!
#1057
The Catholic church and it’s members have rested their case
They have??? All evidence to the contrary. Please do a little reading and keep up. Or does “wilfull ignorance” for you go beyond unsubstantiated, unprovable belief in a magic sky fairy and extend to the inability to read that which you don’t like?
Not surprising. “Irrational fear” is the Republican credo these days.
Andrew, yes I understand your belief that the wafer is the body of Christ, but the only wafers you can really value are the ones you yourself are actually receiving. What happens to any of the others really does not affect you at all.
You know those free newspapers? The one I pick up and find something of value in makes that copy valuable. Why should I care if you come along, take the next one from the stack and burn it? How does that change the value of the one in my pocket?
The point, Steve, (# 1038) is that the host is sacred to Catholics. You may not agree or understand, but they do. The analogy is a strong one.
As for Post # 1061, there is no need to respond, as it adds nothing substantive to the debate.
Even on a secular level, if someone came into your home, spat on a photograph of your deceased parents, ripped it out of the frame and tore it to bits, wouldn’t you feel at least somewhat offended? Mildly?
Sure. But suppose you took a picture from my house in order to show your friend. And then I called you up and threatened to have you killed unless you returned that picture. Then I hired armed guards to kill anyone who attempted to take a picture from my house. Would you think I was over-reacting?
So here’s a few questions for you, my old friend Pavel. Do you agree that desecrating the host is the most vile act that a person can do? Do you agree that placing armed guards in a church is the correct response to prevent a host from being taken? Do you agree that threatening to kill people who take a host is appropriate? Do you think that it is fair to mock people who value a piece of bread above human life?
“…if someone came into your home, spat on a photograph of your deceased parents, ripped it out of the frame and tore it to bits, wouldn’t you feel at least somewhat offended? Mildly?”
Yes I would, and I’d have certain rights to defend myself and my home and property from such actions. But that has nothing to do with what actually happened. You’re already going over the top with your martyr complex.
If I invite someone into my home, and then gave them a picture of my deceased mother as a present, telling them to put it in their right breast pocket, and they’d choose to put it in their left pants pocket instead, would I have the right to assault them, restrain them, trying to rip the picture out of their hands and afterwards threaten their physical wellbeing and their job after they left? This is similar to what actually happened, and I would definitely not have that right.
The church is supposedly God’s home. Let him deal with it. Is he so weak that you need to defend him? Can he or can he not choose to remain or leave the cracker whenever he likes? Can he or can he not punish anyone at any time and any place if he wants to?
Someone invited to my home or workplace can offend me in the worst imaginable way and do whatever he wants to a present I give him in trust. That still does not warrant any sort of physical assault or subsequent threats I may want to make against him. If I want my property back or compensation for destruction of that property (which I gave to him as a present), I can try to do so by hiring a lawyer etc. That’s it. It’s called the rule of law, and apparently certain religious people feel free to disregard this basic principle of our western societies.
“Stole your car”…??? Again with the horribly inapt analogies.
For the car analogy to work, I would have to GIVE somebody my car, with no expectation of ever getting it back, but only on the condition that he immediately have it towed to the car crushing machine. I would then call him a car thief because he a) tried to drive it around the block once before calling the wrecking company, and b) then drove off to escape me when I came after him and tried to physically drag him out of the driver’s seat.
Robin E:
Thank you for your comment. Since you only added your own irrelevant cluelessness, don’t feel slighted when we consider you to be sub-troll and unworthy of further attention. Oh, and your website is pure shite.
“Quite surprised. And not inconsiderably disappointed to find that the universe really is the playground of a petty-minded cosmic sociopath.”
There is a legitimate problem of theism and evil. There’s also a problem of atheism and evil. How is is it that atheists have acquired a sense of what is evil and what is not?
That the Church is aware of the problem of evil is putting it mildly. It’s been under discussion for two thousand years.
“Experience of what, and how do they know that their beliefs have been correctly inferred from those experiences?”
Iain, I really don’t know how to answer that question, because experiences of that kind are impossible to describe. You have a right to suppose that those who have these experiences are deluded, and we who have them may reserve the opinion that you are blind.
The Pope in a recent encyclical speaks of being embraced by totality. I think he knows what he’s talking about.
I will say this: The more a person is full of himself, the further he is from God, the Glory (the Hebrews called it *kabod*), light, totality, or whatever completely inadequate term you want to use.
You have to be very small. You have to need an answer. If you lock yourself in a room and dare God to come through the keyhole, He will respect your privacy and you will be left to yourself. In that sense, you are completely free.
But I will say this: It’s all OK. Very. You will see it, and all you will want to do is praise it in joy forever. Nothing on Earth is like it. Nothing.
I have my own moments of despair. Most of us do. And then I remember.
Andrew, if the catholics hadn’t acted the way they did in the first place with assaulting the student and calling for his expulsion none of this would have happened as nobody would have heard of it. However, they then compounded the error with continuing calls for the students expulsion as well as death threats which is when PZ got involved in support of the student. They (Donohue and his lackeys) then started a campaign to try and get PZ sacked and censured in any way they could and finally, to top it all, death threats sent to PZ. Thus, ultimately it is the catholics themselves responsible for this brouhaha and nobody else.
Steve — I appreciate your tone. It is good to have a discussion rather than merely hurling invective. I have not been without reproach during my posts, and apologize for that.
The point is that for Catholics, the Host is sacred — a divine gift. It would be gravely wrong to ignore that fact simply because the host is not one I am consuming. Again, you may not agree — you may find it foolish — but why can this belief be respected?
As for Post # 1061, there is no need to respond, as it adds nothing substantive to the debate.
The con of the sacred cracker is the subject of the debate, you witless pawn. That the magic of the sacred cookie was violated by a student who wouldn’t let the Nun pry it from his hand is full of so much juju that Catholics are braying for his expulsion from school, and PZ is getting death threats for supporting Webster Cook and promising to demonstrate that there’s no way to tell the difference between a magic biscuit and one that didn’t have the hocus pocus magic words mumbled over it–so you go all apeshit demanding that we be as reverent toward your nonsensical totem as you do! That’s the very substance of the debate, you twit!
Say, Celtic?
What I read here is a whole lot of blah, blah, blah.
PZ said he was going to teach that “cracker” it’s place, but there they sit.
For nine days now, they’ve been sitting there peacefully, while you and your ilk throw feces at Catholics; Okee-Dokee, fine by me.
But it’s game time, boys. Put up, or shut up.
Brad (1028)
If I am off target please forgive as I have no intention of hurting you. Are you running away? If so, I hope you will find the courage to face what you fear.
Andrew,
Who is the Mr Meyer you keep mentioning ?
I thought at first you might Professor PZ Myers, but then being the honest and decent person you claim to be, and given that his name is at the top of this page, I realised that you did not mean PZ but someone else.
What has this Mr Meyer done to do annoy you ?
Andrew (#1049) Corrected:
If someone stole your imaginary car, would you blame yourself for being upset about that event?
Pavel:”That the Church is aware of the problem of evil is putting it mildly. It’s been under discussion for two thousand years.”
Only 2000 years? The Greeks and Hebrews beat your puny musings all to hell.
Maybe that’s your problem. Pure drivel, Pavel.
“You’re already going over the top with your martyr complex.”
C’mon. Nothing I wrote suggests that I feel like a martyr.
I met atheists in Russia who were excellent people. There was one whom I trusted with my life, and she came through. Not one of these people would dream of offending believers.
Yeah Andrew, they just wanted to be left alone, that’s why they tried to ruin the careers of that kid in florida and PZ, and sent them death traits.
One side is issuing death threats to people, the other is threatening a cracker. You think the anti-cracker crowd is in the wrong. How the hell does that not imply that crackers are worth more then people to you?
Oh I’m sorry I forgot to your mind atheists aren’t real people so it’s OK for them to be valued less then a cracker am I right? If it was nice christians then maybe we’d be more worried about them then the crackers is that it? How moral of you.
BobC, are your arguments so weak that you have to resort to personal insults, and your vocabulary so inadequate that you must use profanity every post? (BTW thanks for the blog visit!) And no, I have no right to order anyone around. My post was a suggestion to PZ, he can follow it or not, his decision.
True Bob,
We do not believe that Jesus is “hopelessly trapped”. He is in the Eucharist, but he is also omnipresent. His being there is not dependent on the belief of the recipient, but an unbelieving recipient receives none of the fruits of the Eucharist (that is, grace).
John — I cheerfully agree that the Florida student should not have been attacked (so long as, as it seems, he was merely acting out of confusion rather than malice). But I am not on the blog of those who attacked him.
I’m dismayed to see this; that what some hold sacred is fodder for others be it for 15+ minutes of fame, ridicule or derision – or hate and bigotry against Catholics? Most people have something, someone, perhaps a belief, that they value. Threatening to desecrate or harm that which another holds sacred to make whatever point it is you wish to make is just hateful, and seems petty. Aren’t there more constructive ways to make your thoughts and positions known without causing pain and anguish to others through your words, threats and actions?
From your words, threats and actions, it is clear that you don’t care or don’t appreciate “the big deal”, i.e., the meaning of the Eucharist, the consecrated Host. Nor do you seem to care or comprehend that your words and actions are causing Catholics who do believe, to suffer? If one’s actions cause suffering to others and one persists, is that not hateful? At the very least it is hurtful. Respect for one another is a basic right for all, is it not? If Catholics are telling you that your actions, words and threats pains and hurts them, why are you so callous as to persist in causing such anguish?
There may be analogies that may make more sense to you, but as a Catholic and person of faith, I would not desecrate that which others hold sacred to make a social or political point. For example, I don’t believe in Islam but that does not mean I would act in such a way to desecrate that which Muslims hold sacred to protest some socio-political policy of an Islamic sect or government.
Please reconsider your actions, and if you are not willing to try and understand what this means to Catholics, at least please try to appreciate that your actions are causing genuine pain and anguish to Catholics around the world. As a professor and scientist, please use reason to respect that which you find unreasonable and do not understand or appreciate.
Peace,
Richard
Does Foley and the wing-nuts in the GOP realize that the Science Museum of Minnesota is located directly across the street from the Xcel Center? Just wondering… All those “evolutionists” is such close proximity surely pose a threat to security issue, eh?
Watch out, Republichristians! PZ’s got a cyperpistol!
He’s going to use it to disrupt religious services at a Catholic church.
That makes it… a weapon of Mass destruction!
Pavel Chichikov, do you eat beef?
Sorry Matt, Professor Myers. I am typing while doing other things, and did not proofread correctly.
As for Post 1079, you really don’t get the point, do you? Step outside of yourself and realize that others have beliefs that are different that yours.
“You will see it, and all you will want to do is praise it in joy forever. Nothing on Earth is like it. Nothing.”
My goodness, you people scare me. Your willful clinging to empty myths and traditions because it makes you feel good is tragic. Your disrespect for the earth and all its creatures in favor of your imaginary friend is dangerous.
I’m still surprised people think knowing the difference between right and wrong requires a supernatural component. All it takes is stuff like empathy, sympathy, a concept of teamwork, and such.
Of course, we’re facing off against people who don’t think such threats of violence are wrong (the crop of barbarians and their apologists who happen to be Catholic, not Catholics in general), I guess they have to have some imaginary, absolute threat of eternal torture to keep in line, since they can’t see the benefits of altruism. I wouldn’t expect them to understand morality.
@ Laughin_guy
For nine days now, they’ve been sitting there peacefully, while you and your ilk throw feces at Catholics; Okee-Dokee, fine by me.
Are you on laughin_gas?? Cause that’s the only way you could possibly be ignorant enough to believe that. So, sending death threats and calling for PZ’s job and the myriad of other “acts of christianity” are “sitting there peacefully”? Are you deranged?
As for your question… yeah, I’m sure PZ’s gonna jump into action with whatever he plans to do or not do with the jesus-jerky because of your not-so-veiled attempt at goading him into it. Please. Get over yourself.
I like Bacon. And Pie. I really like Bacon Pie. Yum.
BTW, you can get a FREE SPELL CHECKER from Google.
Richard,
As a member of the Catholic church you DO hurt people. You belong to a church that seeks to deny gay people human rights, that seeks to stop women having abortions and does not care that the opposition to contraception is killing people through allowing HIV infection to spread as the result of people not using condoms.
Do you not see that we find those things hurtful ? Unless and until the Catholic church reverses its positions on those, and other issues such as stem cell research and infertility treatments, why should we respect you ?
What PZ has been saying will not kill anyone. The positions taken by your church will. I know which I find worse, and the fact you do not tells us how fucked your moral system is.
You belong to a church that does not care it kills people through its actions.
“Threatening to desecrate or harm that which another holds sacred to make whatever point it is you wish to make is just hateful, and seems petty”
But threatening a college kid and a professor with DEATH is just fine by you.
I’ll say it again. You people scare me.
“So here’s a few questions for you, my old friend Pavel. Do you agree that desecrating the host is the most vile act that a person can do? Do you agree that placing armed guards in a church is the correct response to prevent a host from being taken? Do you agree that threatening to kill people who take a host is appropriate? Do you think that it is fair to mock people who value a piece of bread above human life?”
First of all, a consecrated Host is not ‘ a piece of bread.’ Aside from that, I would say that desecrating a consecrated Host is one of the saddest things a human being can do. But no, I wouldn’t harm anyone who did it. They would have done enough harm to themselves, and who am I to punish or mock anyone?
I think Christ would feel sorry for you. He did so enough to die for you.
“Sorry Matt, Professor Myers. I am typing while doing other things, and did not proofread correctly. ”
Well that really shows a lot of respect doesn’t it.
Corrected for Pavel:
“That the Church is
aware of the problem ofevil is putting it mildly. It’s beenunder discussionevil for two thousand years.”“Your disrespect for the earth and all its creatures in favor of your imaginary friend is dangerous.”
We’re environmentalists around here.
“Your willful clinging to empty myths and traditions because it makes you feel good is tragic. ”
I think you misunderstand. I’m talking about experience, not a text or a tradition.
Am I deluded or lying? Suppose I’m not?
” consecrated Host is not ‘ a piece of bread.”
You’re right. It’s a wafer that tastes like cardboard.
“I would say that desecrating a consecrated Host is one of the saddest things a human being can do. ”
Yeah, nothing worse than not eating a wafer that tastes like cardboard. I mean, the nerve of some people not eating wafers!
“They would have done enough harm to themselves, and who am I to punish or mock anyone?”
True, they might be hungry and have denied themselves a bad-tasting, woefully insufficient snack.
“I think Christ would feel sorry for you.”
Too bad he never existed.
“From your words, threats and actions, it is clear that you don’t care or don’t appreciate “the big deal”, i.e., the meaning of the Eucharist, the consecrated Host.”
No shit sherlock.
“Nor do you seem to care or comprehend that your words and actions are causing Catholics who do believe, to suffer?”
Don’t care? That’s correct.
Comprehend the fact Catholic assholes suffer? We sure do comprehend it. That’s what the ridicule is for. Catholics are offended when their crackers are not respected. The fact they are offended is what deserves ridicule, especially after the death threats and the violent assault of the student.
Also deserving ridicule is the armed police they now have guarding their crackers. The stupidity and insanity of Catholics is breathtaking.
Richard, again, it is you catholics who don’t understand why PZ made his post. A student took his cracker innocently back to his seat to show his friend who was not a catholic what it was about before consuming it. A church official then assaulted him and after he left the church they tried to get him expelled and he even received death threats. PZ then made his post to highlight how ridiculous it was that the church and catholics apparently felt that a host was more important than a human life. They then attacked him in the same way, campaigning to get him sacked and he also received death threats. If your catholics hadn’t overreacted in the first place none of this would have happened as nobody would have heard anything about it. So again, it is not us shitting on your parade but you catholics apparently valuing your host over the lives of two people as very few catholics (three or four out of the myriads who have visited here at the last count) have actually condemned what happened to PZ and the student. Who are the hypocrites here, not us, for if your church official hadn’t reacted the opposite of xians this would have been a non event and you could have got on with your delusions. However, when the host is apparently more important than the lives of two people. expect those not beholden to your delusions to hold a bright shining light to the absurdity and the hypocrisy. I am getting real tired of having to explain this to each new catholic that comes in here crying persecution. I just wish all of read up on the whole story before you come here crying about persecution or bigotry as it is getting stake when you can’t be bothered to get the full story first and makes you look even worse each time.
“We’re environmentalists around here.”
Not what I meant. You’re focus is on an afterlife that doesn’t exist, a god that doesn’t exist, a promise that won’t be fulfilled. You, and the others here focusing only on the stupid wafer and not, conveniently, the homocidial tendancies of your fellow theists, are nurturing both the social climate that allows people worshipping bad snack food as holy AND the people who would murder those who aren’t so deluded.
You’re part of the problem. And no amount of your pretending to be beign is going to change that fact.
I’m getting tired of repeating myself: PZ does not go around screwing with the catholics for fun, there is a context and reason for what he proposed. See Overton’s Window. And by the way, criticizing the inane does not qualify as bigotry. It’s been addressed.
None as effective, no.
We are well-acquainted with your narcissistic christian sensibilities. And your anguish over a cracker is hurtful to me due to its infringement on my rationality.
Well, I would.
“Use reason to respect that which you find unreasonable […]” Are you trying to be ironic? Do you respect the beliefs of the scientologists? Of the mormons? Of the FSMist?
@ Pavel
Am I deluded or lying? Suppose I’m not?
*sigh*. I hate the “suppose I’m not” premise. You could make that argument for anything you want to invent, Pavel… don’t you see the failing logic in it?
I believe there’s a magic pink unicorn that will grant you three wishes if you just jump off this 150 ft. cliff.
Am I deluded or am I lying? Suppose I’m not?
Now, go ahead and insert any old made up supposition in there… what makes it any different than what you are saying?
Is someone doing really bad parody trolling?
“Am I deluded or lying? Suppose I’m not?”
I can fly.
Am I deluded or lying? Suppose I’m not?
Celtic asks: “So, sending death threats and calling for PZ’s job and the myriad of other “acts of christianity” are “sitting there peacefully”?
Are you suggesting that the “crackers” have been busy bothering PZ? Naughty “crackers”!
‘Cause that’s what I have been writing about…or are you having a tough time keeping your head from spinning long enough to read?
We shouldn’t have to goad PZ into following through with what he claims is a leisurely activity. He has flapped his jaws plenty, and now it’s time to do what he has said he’s going to do.
Unless, could it be, that it’s not just a “cracker”? !@@!
look, I’m going to take a Ritz out of the cupboard right now and feed it to my dog…that’s what you do with crackers.
So get with it.
“… please use reason to respect that which you find unreasonable and do not understand or appreciate.”
I understand the belief in sacred crackers perfectly. I understand that people who take their holy crackers seriously are incredibly stupid and batshit crazy. I understand these people are so completely out of their minds, they’re dangerous. They are also extremely immoral because they brainwash gullible little children to believe the same bullshit. I have nothing but contempt for you Catholic assholes.
Andrew asked:
I assume you mean: “but why can NOT this belief be respected?”
Because it is an inherently crazy thing to believe. It doesn’t take a lot of reasoning to see that it is irrational. How can you tell if a cracker is consecrated or not? When did anyone decide that saying mumbo jumbo over a cracker made it different than it was before? And even if it is transformed, couldn’t Jesus untransform it if he didn’t like where it was? Even in the Christian world-view it’s nuts to think the cracker is vulnerable.
kmerian mistakes:
Wrong, you have to be in a state of grace to accept the communion. The unbeliever doesn’t get (again, per the Vatican, & major hint, read 292):
Summarizing, kmerian, the elements of this sacrament that are related to grace is you have to already be there to take it, and it preserves and renews that grace.
please use reason to respect that which you find unreasonable and do not understand or appreciate.
You go right on ahead and dole out respect for Fred Phelps and the Timecube guy. I’m going to go on calling out idiocy.
First of all, a consecrated Host is not ‘ a piece of bread.’ Aside from that, I would say that desecrating a consecrated Host is one of the saddest things a human being can do. But no, I wouldn’t harm anyone who did it. They would have done enough harm to themselves, and who am I to punish or mock anyone?
In fact it is a piece of bread. What you imagine happens to it is your opinion, an opinion not shared by most of the population of the world and not even most Christians. But if it really is more vile than rape or murder then how could you let it happen without stopping it?
I think Christ would feel sorry for you. He did so enough to die for you.
So sorry that he sends billions of human beings into unending torture because they didn’t believe the exact way that some despot in Rome told them they had to? At least that is what your church teaches. And as far as his suffering on the cross, your church did far worse than that to plenty of people who didn’t accept their beliefs.
To be honest, I think PZ’s threat to desecrate a host (meant seriously or not) was a bit juvenile (even taken as satire, it’s hardly in the league of Swift’s A Modest Proposal). But…a rational person’s response to that would be to say, “Oh, that guy could grow up a little and perhaps try to be a little more sensitive to other people’s beliefs and feelings,” then forget about it and go on about his/her business. A rational person does not bloviate about descrating a host constituting a “hate crime” or make comparisons to actual crimes and atrocities. A reasonable person does not contact PZ’s boss and try to get him in trouble, even fired, or threaten him with violence and death. The hysterical overreaction to both the original incident and PZ’s response is very disheartening.
Andrew,
Well, are they not left alone ? Are there hords of pharyngulites disturbing their sacred rituals in their multitudes of churches ? Anyway, they don’t even run that risk, they have the law to protect them, it is against the law in most states to wilfully disturb a religious service.
No, the only problem that they have is that they really cannot stand the idea that a humble biologist expresses his opinion on his blog whereby he declares that it means nothing to him, that it’s just a frackin cracker, and that he threatens to desecrate one, that they have absolutely not the vaguest idea how to react to his threat, that they demand that he should offer respect to a symbol which means nothing to him, when they cannot even respect the fact that it means nothing to him.
True Bob, you are correct, however, I was dealing with the receipt of communion by a non-believer. What you quoted deals with a Catholic who receives it unworthily.
“Unless, could it be, that it’s not just a “cracker”? !@@!”
Unless, could it be, that it’s not JUST a death threat? Perhaps theres a couple millennia of homicidal violence from Catholics that leds others to think they’re not just threats?
(not trying to speak for Prof. Myers.)
@laughin_guy
There is a distinct lack of creativity in that. We atheists frown upon that. PZ is just trying to maintain his image.
@ Laughin_guy
Are you suggesting that the “crackers” have been busy bothering PZ? Naughty “crackers”!
Are YOU too dizzy to be able to even remember, let alone read, what it is you wrote??? YOU are the one that said that CATHOLICS, not CRACKERS, are sitting there peacefully… so don’t blame ME for your choice of words, you mental giant. I responded to your claim about the peaceful catholics. You responded by claiming you were talking about crackers. Ergo, you are a twit.
And why is it time to do what he said he’s going to do? because some anonymous troll said so? Again… please get over yourself.
And if you’re insinuating in any way that he’s afraid to do it because of fear of god’s retribution, you must be new here.
We have violent atheist terrorists?
Atheists may flap their jaws and blow their gaskets every once in a while, but I’ve never heard, read, or seen an atheist kill someone in the name of atheism.
Not yet anyway :P
Also, IMMA CHARGING MAH LASER
“They would have done enough harm to themselves, and who am I to punish or mock anyone?”
This is why I laugh at Catholics and other religious assholes. Their belief in hell is disgusting. I notice they like to use code words for hell, like “They would have done enough harm to themselves”. It requires a very sick and evil mind to believe in hell. Also required is stupidity and insanity.
@ Andrew
“John — I cheerfully agree that the Florida student should not have been attacked (so long as, as it seems, he was merely acting out of confusion rather than malice).”
See, you do value the cracker over people. It would have been fine by you to attack him if he did what he did out of malice?
“But I am not on the blog of those who attacked him.”
Why not? Clean your own house.
DON”T POST USING MY NAME MORON!
I think PZ’s threat to desecrate a host … was a bit juvenile
That’s true, it was, but the context is important. In this case, he was reacting to people making death threats over another alleged act of desecration. It’s hard not to be outraged after reading the original story, and easy to start taunting the freaks in it.
@DrmChsro #1120
What is the power output on that thing? I bet mine is bigger than yours.
Christian charity: burn the heretics at the stake before they compound their damnation.
“I notice they like to use code words for hell, like “They would have done enough harm to themselves” It requires a very sick and evil mind to believe in hell. Also required is stupidity and insanity.”
Which is why I like to point out to the ones that pretend to be peaceful, but who say things like “They would have done enough harm to themselves” that what they’re really saying is the same thing that the more honest ones say – you’re going to be tortured in hell forever because god loves you so much.
Fools.
I’m wondering if all christians are so full of themselves as these catholics are. I’ve never met an actual practicing and devout catholic (I think), and the ones invading the threads here have pretty much convinced me that even catholics have insane fundies running around whereas I had a much more nuanced opinion of them before.
Here they are, pretending PZ is just making a dash for attention even though it’s catholic nutjobs who are the ones providing it to him. It’s not as if PZ wasn’t famous all over the world already, but I guess being ignorant gives you an excuse for not knowing that.
“I cheerfully agree that the Florida student should not have been attacked (so long as, as it seems, he was merely acting out of confusion rather than malice).”
I’m not sure who said this, but apparently this person wants to justify violence if a cracker was not eaten because of malice. Typical Catholic asshole.
“There is a distinct lack of creativity in that. We atheists frown upon that. PZ is just trying to maintain his image.”
Good, great! Let’s see some really creative atheism. Something, anything other than a continuation of the inane blather being bandied about by the PZ flying monkey corps.
If PZ had the balls to be true to his own convictions, I could at least give him that. But as it stands, it appears that the guy is nothing more than a certifiable lunatic with a big mouth that has managed to attract a fair number of people that share his mental defects on the intertubes.
The point (other than the one on the tops of your heads) is this: Until PZ proves otherwise by treating them as such, the wafers he says he has in his possession are not “just crackers”.
He’s either going to “eat the crackers”, or he’s going to eat his own idiotic words, and no amount of goofball rhetoric that can be spewed here will make it otherwise.
What is truly obscene is 1000+ posts on a single page.
“Reading this post by the bigot Myers and the ensuing responses goes a long way in exposing the outright hatred and distain toward anything Christian. I challenge any of you to be as hateful toward anything muslim. No? I thought not.”
Wow, thanks for the window of opportunity to answer your question. You must be displaying that all-powerful, great and wonderful thinking we keep hearing about from religious circles. Read this blog more often and you’ll get your wish, althought you will have to endure the disdain for your IDEAS, not people.
There isn’t a lot of respect for those that espouse and support the unsupportable around here so you’re going to have to do some thinking. Hopefully you’ll afford yourself that much, but your post doesn’t seem to indicate you will.
(1) Have you ever heard of paragraphs?
(2) Have you actually considered that it’s all made up and many of us can, if you could actually hold your mind open to the reams of data and analysis across many domains of research show you that your religion is made up?
(3) Who was Asheroth and how this name relevant to these biblical passages?:
Then God said, “Let us make humans in our image, in our likeness. Let them rule the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the domestic animals all over the earth, and all the animals that crawl on the earth.
God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”
And what changes to this Genesis story did the Priests under the rule of King Josiah in the 7th Century BC make?
(4) Who were the Hyksos and how does that tie into the Jews and the claims of captivity in Egypt?
(5) From which religion did the Jews steal Noah’s Flood?
(6) In what Century were the first copies of the Gospel of Luke penned? As a follow up, in what century was the STORY of the LAST SUPPER ADDED to the Gospel of Luke?
(7) In what century was the story of the Adulteress (John 7: 53 – 8: 11) added to the Gospel of John? In what Gospel did the story originally appear (hint, it wasn’t John!!!!)?
(8) In what century did the Jews start giving up human sacrifice?
(9) What was the price for not sacrificing your first-born son to God? The blood price as set forth in the Bible.
That should keep you busy, if you put in the effort to fully understand and answer the questions.
kmerian, there is NO communion occuring if you are not in a state of grace, believer or not.
Further, the unbeliever cannot receive the fruits of any sacrament, the fruits of the eucharist being as described. Since they quit doing undulgences, you cannot take a sacrament and thus alter your condition into one of grace.
I think he knows what he’s talking about.
There are any number of us who would disagree with that monstrous old bigot.
Concerning why we can be so abrasive toward religion, the answer is simple: there are fewer of us, so we have to fight harder.
We are being assaulted on all sides by superstitious nonsense: it invades our schools, influences public policy, and virtually defines the culture. Politicians must genuflect to religious zealots by getting cozy with modern-day shamans, school science curricula are being injected with superstition, federal funding for science gets blocked because of fairy tales about human development.
As atheists, we also have a long history of being marginalized and silenced. That era is ending, folks. Get used to it.
OMFGWTFBBQ!!! You’re a hippy! I thought you guys went extinct under Reagan…
Wow, it’s so nice to see one alive.
He did so enough to die for you.
I’ve done nothing so evil it requires the murder of another human being.
That you think this says something positive about your deity is rather twisted. Then again, you worship a blood-thirsty monster.
Moses: on the thread http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/07/stop_it_now_please.php
I was asking a few questions about the eucharist, since it seems singularly unjewish in comparison with the rest of early Christian symbology. I ‘figer you might shed some light on the question.
@laughin_guy #1129
Are you tired of repeating yourself yet? See Celtic_Evolution’s post #1119.
By the way, if you actually think something will happen to those that do desecrate your little cracker, then you are truly more insane than I gave you credit for.
OMFGWTFBBQ!!! You’re a hippy!
Nah, freak, if the difference means anything to you. My computer animation students would call me Gandalf at first, then later, Saruman. I was too young to be a hippy when Zappa’s Freak Out was hot wax, so I never made it into the Peace Corps nor slept on Owsley’s floor. While it’s all still growing out of the top of my head, nobody will permit me to cut it.
To all who responded to my post with a goal toward dialog and not hate, vitriol, disrespect or intolerance for those who have different ideas and beliefs from your own:
What happened to the student is well known, I did not start at the beginning of the situation as most here know the facts, my aim was to seek to prevent a hateful act from occurring in response to the original unwarranted act of aggression that precipitated the current situation.
I understand and don’t condone the actions that occurred to precipitate this. Is the answer to fight injustice with another injustice? I should hope not. I also did not send any “death threats” nor do I condone or accept those who do so in the name of Christ as acting Christian. Not all Catholics and Christians want to impose our beliefs on others in the same way we don’t want the beliefs of others imposed on us. The US Constitution provides us all with the right to religious freedom, which includes the right to not have one, i.e., atheists. To each their own.
And we all have the right to freedom of speech, but does the exercise of that freedom mean we must resort to personal attacks and hatred? Is that what freedom of speech means today? But if I disagree with someone’s actions, I would not resort to words or actions that are hateful, hurtful or disrespectful in return. Exchanging hate for hate is not a dialog, and neither side is actually hearing the other side. When this happens no one, least of all our democratic, pluralistic society “wins”.
My point was simply “two wrongs don’t make a right”, yes actions were perpetrated against the student that were not warranted. However, that wrong is not well answered through an attack (another wrong). The result is no one is listening or cares about the other side’ viewpoint, so it leaves the realm of civil discourse and becomes a hateful, mudslinging contest. And the result? Neither side sees the wrongs they themselves have done nor do they understand the injustice from the other’s perspective.
The level of hate vitriol here against other people who have different ideas and beliefs is a sad commentary on our “society”. I recall when people protested war in the 1960’s, they put flowers in the barrels of the National Guard soldiers, now it seems they would get their own guns and start a war to end a war?!
…and to those of you who responded to my post with hate, vitriol, disrespect or intolerance for those who have different ideas and beliefs from your own: is it only possible in your world view to believe only as you do, with no dissent, disagreement or personal ideas, thoughts and beliefs allowed? Is that your idea of democracy, think and believe as you do or what?
Peace,
Richard
@gdlchmst
It’s not my “little cracker”, and I don’t know what would happen if PZ desecrated it. Evidently, no one ever will because “the man” has lost his nerve.
So those wafers will sit where ever PZ has stashed them, or he’ll (very) quietly dispose of them; the Catholic church will continue to teach it’s dogma, PZ will become the poster boy of athiest fringe lunacy and I’ll have a good laugh!
Did you know that you’re suppoed to kneel and take it on the tongue when the Pope gives Jesus? I wonder how he takes it?
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=13051
“You don’t have to be Fellini to figure that one out.” – G.Carlin
Richard, I would ignore the stupidity of Catholic assholes if they kept to themselves. Instead they went nuts for no good reason, showing off their insanity to everyone. When a disease is out of control, and yes your religion is a disease, it should not be ignored.
Another reason Catholic assholes deserve ridicule is their brainwashing of little children. I was a victim of this child abuse. It’s disgusting. The people who do it, all Catholics and all other religious idiots, deserve to be treated with contempt.
Richard, I think you are mistaken about the hate. I think you are correct about the disrespect. I would even say contempt. There really isn’t hate or hurt (beyond hurt feelings, but nobody has a right to mollycoddling).
As has been posted numerous times, we respect your right to believe whatever you want to. We do NOT have to respect those beliefs. See the difference? Would you respect my right to smear banana cream pies all over myself? Do you think it would be silly? We are in that kind of perspective.
Of course, I do not speak for all atheist folk, we are notoriously not a group.
(addendum to #1140)
Diamond Dave, of Digger fame, is still very active–he’s in student government and all around cultural ambassador at City College of San Francisco. My first encounter with him was hearing him shout out in the arts bldg., “Let your freak flag fly, brother!”
Perhaps, regarding the True and Correct Rules of Capitalization, we should consult Her Majesty the Queen, since it is The Queen’s English, after all; moreover, She is Head of the Church of England and All That. Tut Tut.
Richard,
The attacks are not personal.
For the hundredth time, see Overton’s Window.
You missed the point. It never was “revenge” to start with.
And you speak for everyone that is religious?
I don’t think quotation marks mean what you think they mean. And, once again, are you trying to be ironic?
You clearly don’t even comprehend our worldview. Small wonder that you accusations carry so little substance. Now, before you accuse us of not understanding your position, know that many of us had been religious at one point, and the rest of us are usually very well-versed in religious history and philosophy.
I’m going the stop feeding the childish troll known as Laughin_Guy. But just know this:
We are not laughing with you, but at you.
negentopyeater #1021: I’ll stop here because I think I could spend my whole day writing about so called “moral benefits the church has provided civilization in periods of crisis.”
No, please continue. Dig up the dirt.
I agree with your premise that it is bad to cause others to suffer. However you have blurred a very distinct line between suffering and being offended.
When Muslims choose to be grievously offended by documentaries about them or cartoons, we cannot just surrender and give up our freedom of speech. They have to become more thick skinned and not be offended. Similarly fundamentalist Christians don’t like the teaching of evolution. Should we allow them to teach wrong information in schools simply because they are offended by the idea that their creation myth is not literally true?
The problem is people being offended, and an argument can be made that the solution is to offend people until they get over it. Eventually Catholics will realize that they are not being hurt, and can go on with their lives without retaliating. You are “pained and hurt” because you choose to be. When those who believe in God can accept that he can take care of himself, and doesn’t need people to fight or be offended on his behalf, then atheists will have nothing more to do.
Pavel Chichikov (Comment #1072)
In the same manner as all other human beings – being an intelligent social animal with social instincts and a sense of empathy, refined through cultural upbringing, experience, reason and personal reflection. No gods required.
Actually, the point I was implying was that the moral character of God as portrayed by Christianity leaves something to be desired. That’s not the same thing as wondering how a perfectly good deity allows evil. If anything, it provides a solution to the problem (i.e., that the deity in question is rather less than perfectly good).
If the experiences are impossible to describe, then what possible public criteria can there be for inferring any reliable conclusions from them? How could you ever tell if the experience has been interpreted correctly? How would you tell a valid experience from an invalid one? It’s not that I doubt that certain people have experiences of a certain kind (even if they seem to have difficulty in giving an intelligible account of them) – my skepticism arises from the lack of any basis for placing a religious interpretation on them.
Incidentally, the blindness analogy is a rather poor one. It’s possible (to an extent, anyway) to describe visual experiences to blind people by analogy with other senses (e.g., different colours as being akin to different textures as felt by touch). More importantly, it is possible to demonstrate to a blind person that you are able to sense things in a way that they can’t – because the very same things are detectable by other senses. That’s not the case in religious experiences.
“Embraced by totality” is a phrase that inevitably evokes for me the image of Nuremburg rallies, but I don’t want to Godwin the conversation so let’s set that aside.
More to the point, “being embraced by totality” sounds like a metaphorical description of an emotional/aesthetic state. Indeed,
when believers do talk about religious experiences, it seems to me that what they’re talking about most of the time is an state of heightened emotion (commonly awe, wonder, fear etc), rather than experiences in any cognitive sense. And the point is, you don’t need anything supernatural to induce such states.
I’m more interested in getting out and exploring the house. But if, during my explorations, I keep encountering people who insist (a) on regaling me with elaborate tales about the Thing That Lives in the Attic and (b) that I have to accept their claims on faith because they are incapable of demonstrating that the house even has an attic, let alone that anything else they say is true, then I’m going to conclude that they have nothing useful or interesting to tell me.
Then I hope to God (rhetorical) that I never see it. I can imagine few things worse than such an abject surrender of a person’s moral and intellectual integrity. Well, maybe for a few hours, if the show was particularly good, as long as I retained the ability to switch my brain back on later. But forever? What a completely appalling prospect. Sorry, but your idea of heaven sounds very like my idea of hell. I have no wish to spend eternity effectively lobotomised and hooked up to a morphine drip.
But thanks for taking the time to respond, despite creeping me out with that last bit.
Just to be clear, no one has the right to not be offended.
Unitarian Christians or Unitarian-Universalists? Because not all Unitarian Churches merged with the Universalists.
If they were UUs, which is perfectly possible, then, well, that’s the problem when you, by your nature, don’t manage from the ‘top-down’ in matters of doctrine. Every now and then enough hide-bound reactionaries or zealots will take over the governing body of a congregation and go regressive instead of progressive.
Case in point, when our congregation decided to be a “welcoming” congregation for the LGBT community, a number of members walked. I found it ironic that they could handle the atheists, but not the gays whose beliefs were closer to theirs than mine.
Their loss. As it is to the one-third of congregations who still refuse to take that path.
Still though, the rock-solid majority of UUS are like our congregation. And if we sport a few regressive elements stuck in their dark-ages (1950’s) religious viewpoints, well, in time, I suspect they’ll end up with the rest of us as the Overton Window in our church moves, by fits and starts, further left with each generation.
And when you look at the composition of our beliefs, you can see why:
In a survey, Unitarian Universalists in the United States were asked which provided term or set of terms best describe their belief. Many respondents chose more than one term to describe their beliefs. The top choices were:
Humanist – 54%
Agnostic – 33%
Earth-centered – 31%
Atheist – 18%
Buddhist – 16.5%
Christian – 13.1%
Pagan – 13.1%
Mine were Atheist and Earth-Centered. My wife was Agnostic and Earth-Centered. I have friends who are Atheist-Jew-Earth-Centered UUs. I have friends who are Christian-UUs.
Anyway, they are free to be closed-minded and throw-backs. And we continue to push the agenda to acceptance and social justice. Eventually, like the nearby UU church in Murfreesboro, they’ll come around (it was the LGBT issue, they were already “atheist friendly” (or whatever you want to call it)) and it’ll all go down the memory hole.
Richard, what vitriol you may find here is not for catholics but for catholicism, i.e. to paraphrase one of your xian phrases, hate the belief not the believer. Especially when we see it make people ready to assault and send death threats over what is, whatever it may mean to catholics, still only a cracker. Any belief system that allows its adherents to consider an inanimate object as of more value than a human being is seriously screwed up. That is our problem with religion in general. And please, no arguments about no true Scotsmen, we have heard it before and those you wield it against often reply in kind about you.
Spoof Alert!!!
Professor Myers should break into the RNC, dressed in a shepherd’s smock, preferably when Mr. Foley is speaking (sermonizing), force Foley to drop trou, and proceed to f___ the s___ out of him.
Now, that would be desecrating a frackin’ cracker.
Richard #1141
What injustice is there in the desecration of the Host? Truth is not a matter of opinion. The communion wafer is not and never will be the body of a dude who died 2000 years ago. That’s the whole point of the exercise: to demonstrate the stupidity of the belief.
Not all beliefs must be respected equally. If you believe the Jews should be exterminated, I have no reason to respect that belief, and, in fact, I can treat it with utmost derision.
That’s how we view superstitions. If you weren’t already acculturated and desensitized to the idea that a processed wheat product takes on magic properties, you would realize just how insane that idea is.
We should challenge insane thinking.
Comment to post #1145
What is hateful is when someone tells you that your words, actions and threats cause is hateful towards them and you do not acknowledge that point or care about that point. Yes, its true you don’t have to respect another’s beliefs, but what is gained by disrespecting their beliefs? Certainly not a dialogue or a reasonable coexistence? Perhaps if all sides had more respect for the rights of others with whom they disagree there would be fewer incidents like this?
To threaten desecration or to desecrate that which is sacred to Catholics is hateful toward Catholics. As a Catholic, that is how and I and many others I know view it. I’m not saying you or anyone else has to respect our beliefs but as long as no one respect’s the beliefs of another we will only see similar situations increase in number, and perhaps worse.
To #1148,
I did not claim to speak for others. I wasn’t making accusations, and no I don’t claim to understand your world view. If you look at some of the responses to my post, you will see few attempts to explain your world view or create a dialog. I did not accuse “you” of not understanding my position, but rather understanding how your actions and threats are received by Catholics. If revenge was not the motive, “to hold the Eucharist hostage” then what is is the motive? As you state, many of those here who are not religious have been so in the past, and are well-versed in philosophy then from that perspective, isn’t it obvious what the impact of “holding the Eucharist hostage” and threatening desecration would be on those who are religious? Knowing this makes the actions all the more vitriolic, hateful as you do know what you do?
And no, I was not being ironic: mutual respect has to start somewhere, it seems as if many people here simply ridicule, belittle and attack those who are religious or don’t agree with their positions and then often wonder why they aren’t respected, taken seriously or feel as if they are a minority view under attack.
Peace,
Richard
How is it that theists continually ask the same silly questions? I wouldn’t go there if I was a believer, afterall, I’d have to say goddidit in some convoluted way and have no evidence for that at all. While the atheist will bury me with natural explanations that work fine.
Of course, you could go the ID route. Just decree that some process is to complicated for nature (even though it isn’t) and give credit to whatever god you prefer. Then walk away and pretend you don’t have to give any evidence for your assertions.
There’s a simple but important distinction that people fail to grasp when they call us “bigots.” It’s wrong, and it’s bigotry, when you judge someone based on characteristics that are out of their control, such as race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation. It’s perfectly acceptable to judge people based on things that they can control — actions and beliefs — and we do it all the time.
We judge people when they murder, rape, or steal. We throw them in jail. We publicize sexual offenders. Some cities even publicize the names of men who solicit prostitutes. Society provides legal, social, and financial disincentives for dangerous behavior. Unfortunately, we don’t provide enough disincentives against stupid and dangerous ideas. Now, I wouldn’t want to create a thought police scenario by creating legal disincentives for beliefs, but we can and should create social disincentives for stupid and dangerous beliefs.
People who entertain absurd beliefs should be challenged in the public sphere. If the beliefs are insane or dangerous enough, they should be openly ridiculed.
To rationalists, truth is a moral value. We don’t respect absurd claims, and the transubstantiation of the communion wafer is an absurd claim.
@ E.V. post #1071
:Thank you for your comment.
You’re welcome E.V.
:Since you only added your own irrelevant cluelessness, don’t feel slighted when we consider you to be sub-troll and unworthy of further attention.
Actually what I posted was neither irrelevant nor clueless. If anything it exposed some rather inept cluelessness on the part of P. Z. Myers when it comes to public relations aka PR. When a professed “unbeliever” aka atheist describes Professor Myers as a “fundamentalist atheist” in expressing his disapproval of P.Z. Myers anti-religious antics you can be sure that a good number of moderate atheists are not very happy with P.Z. Myers’ PR for the atheist community.
:Oh, and your website is pure shite.
Which one? Presumably you mean my StumbleUpon blog which is the URL that I provided for all of my posts here so far. You are entitled to your opinion but it is outweighed by over 800 people from around the world and all walks of life, including a good number of atheists I might add. . . who have clearly indicated that they like it with a thumb’s up SU “review”.
That gives me an idea: imagine if this site had FAQ pages, and whenever someone tried to post certain keywords (morals, Stalin, Koran, etc.) they would be sent to the appropriate page and then briefly quizzed about it before being allowed to post.
I wonder if that would work under Scienceblogs. It doesn’t seem like it should be too difficult.
I have Goth acquaintances. I’m guessing you’re talking about the whole unconventional-thinking, frequently sardonic, generally creative, my-own-kind-dude/look thing that is part of, but not actually owned by, the Goth movement.
As for cutting the hair, that’s what daughter says. Which is why it’s nearly 3′ long and she’s 11.
to #1157.
And who appointed you the ultimate arbiter of the what is and is not stupidity for the rest of us?
This goes to my basic point: live and let live; and allowing others to have their beliefs.
Since you have decided unilaterally or within a small minority that something is stupid, you will resort to hateful actions against those who see value, and see sacred in what you see as stupidity? Do you think this hate will change the minds of those who believe, or is it to impress others who believe as you do with who can make Catholics more upset or suffer more?
And how are the beliefs of Catholics impacting you to the point where you are motivated to actions of hate, vitriol and derision? How do our beliefs hurt you? Why do your beliefs demand you must hurt us? (to my earlier point about a worldview that only accepts approved perspectives, ideas, thoughts and beliefs.)
Peace,
Richard
I think PZ’s threat to desecrate a host … was a bit juvenile
Perhaps it was not juvenile at all.
Perhaps
he is
The MYER!!
The Myer saw the suffering of his fellow man.
Then PZ spaketh: ‘Cast not stones upon the children, cast them upon me,’ and he saideth unto them: ‘It’s just a frackin’ cracker’
And the youth was saved and the mob turned and casteth stones upon the Myer. And through this selfless act of sacrifice was born the Church of The Myer, and it shall be written for it is true.
And that, children, is why crackers are forbidden in the Church of Myer, to this day, for The Myer proclaimed, Spilleth not your grain to build graven images, Idols, nor crackers, but ferment the sacred wheat into holy beer and drinketh on the house.”
Wow that made me thirsty.
———–
You Tube Eucharist Challenge
There needs to be a Wiki of common theist / Christian claims and our answers, much like the codex of creationist claims. It would save millions of hours in time wasted on the Internet.
And who appointed you the ultimate arbiter of the what is and is not stupidity for the rest of us?
The ultimate arbiter of truth is reality, which can be consulted through observation and experiment.
A claim about the “substance” of a wafer can never be verified, and the information seems to come from the divine revelation of another being that can’t verified.
Ultimately, the utter wastefulness of the time, resources, and rituals spent on this delusion is what makes it stupid.
How do our beliefs hurt you?
You vote, and you pump money into the political system, affecting public policy. And you send death threats when someone challenges your delusion, and a few Catholics have carried those threats to their conclusion.
Someone posted this link from Pete Rooke which may have been overlooked by many of you, what with over a 1,000 comments here.
[url]http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/stchadsomegachurch/[/url]
Hopefully Pete Rooke is done with this topic and us. He is an idiot by the way. Just check out his website. He has maybe a 6th grade education. Just an idiot. And a con-artist. A “moocher” as Ayn Rand would say. Snake oil sold by a charlatan.
I agree with many of you who said they were pleased we got trolled by Pete Rooke. It reminds me (and apparently some of the rest of you) how sick these people are and how much they are influencing our world and our lives. Negatively.
Richard,
The motive is to show that it is superstitious and inane to believe that a cracker is the body of god. This is, in turn, one act in a bigger movement to secularize the society by exposing the ridiculousness of religious beliefs. Again, see Overton’s Window.
Like I previously stated: knowing this, I find your christian sensibilities narcissistic. You are offended to be sure, and that is the point. But your thinking that this rather mild act is somehow hateful or bigoted is due to a cultural brainwashing that allows you to think that religion is above criticism.
It’s no secret that we don’t respect your beliefs and you don’t respect our beliefs. We do, however, respect each other’s *right* to hold such beliefs. There is no mutual respect, and none is needed. That is the nature of the relationship between any two groups with drastically different worldviews.
Posted this on July 12, 2008 as #266 in the FYI thread, time for a repeat for the new people, especially those asking for an apology.
“OK, I am now convinced that the catholics are due an apology so here goes, and speaking only for myself:
I am sorry that your vision of a god is so weak that he cannot protect his cracker form.
I am sorry that you engage in idolatry in regards to said cracker.
I am sorry that you are offended by people pointing out that religious people often believe things that many of us find silly at best and dangerous at worst.
I am sorry that you have continued to hide evidence of crimes within your church, thus giving people easy targets during verbal and/or blog battles.
I am sorry that you allow Bill Donahue to speak for many of you.
I am sorry you do not have the courage to speak out against those who make you look bad, such as Donahue.
I am sorry you hate gay and lesbian people – yes, YOU DO, you church requires you to hate them, or at least their “sin”.
I am sorry your church continues to block AIDS awareness programs in places like Africa.
I am sorry your church compels you to hate Africans by requiring you to believe that them not having condoms is somehow good for them.
I am sorry you do not know what your own prophet and bible say.
I am sorry you do not practice what Rabbi Ben Jesu asked you to practice – you do not love your neighbor as yourself, you will not eat with publicans and prostitutes – you condemn them. (No, there is no need to comment on the name folks, I do not really care, call him what you like.)
I am sorry you are offended when someone tells you to fuck off after you offer to pray for our souls. As many have noted on here, “pray for you” often effectively equates to fuck you. On, to get ahead of the curve a bit, fuck you if you offer to pray for me.
I am sure there are catholics that do not believe in the oppression of gays and lesbians or allowing Africans to die of AIDS. I am sure there are catholics who do not believe the cracker and wine are more than a symbol. I am sure there are catholics that are outraged by the protection of pedophile priests. I am sorry you do not have the courage to slip off your chains and take responsibility for your own life, your own morals, your own dealings with the world. This one makes me especially sad.
Pax Nabisco”
Richard
No matter how many times you pretend to be persecuted… no matter how many times you incorrectly assign all “this” to us “atheists” going out of our way to pick on you poor catholics, you should not, will not, can not actually shift the focus away from what started this nonsense in the first place: namely the completely insane over-reaction of catholics threatening a young man with bodily harm and even death over the eucharist.
So please, stop acting so predictable. Stop pretending like you and other catholics are being persecuted here, remember who’s actually been persecuted unnecessarily and take it to the Catholic league message board, and as has already been stated here, clean up your own house. I’m frankly sick of your whining.
At 1113 Tom P. said:
And as far as his suffering on the cross, your church did far worse than that to plenty of people who didn’t accept their beliefs.
And, we shouldn’t neglect to point out that god’s son chose to suffer on the cross.
OTOH, the folks the church killed and tortured over the years usually didn’t get much choice in the matter. Unless the choice was “choose to believe as we catholics do or choose to die.”
“desecrating a consecrated Host is one of the saddest things a human being can do.”
Really? What about:
Murder
Rape
Assault
Theft
Damaging another’s property
Dishonesty
Hypocrisy
Neglecting those in need (children, elderly, sick, etc.)
Mistreating someone who does not deserve to be mistreated
Willful ignorance
Being complicit in any of the above
Witnessing any of the above without attempting to intervene
I just pulled that moral code out of my ass and it’s better than yours.
You can start here: http://richarddawkins.net/cat1_Reason,cat2_Debate-Points
I think the key is in making people read it before they can post the same old crap.
Richard,
The rationale behind the whole “cracker desecration” scheme has been explained numerous times in this thread. Have you understood any of the posted explanations as to why someone would bother to do this? If not, it would be helpful for you to ask specific questions or quote what you don’t understand and ask for clarification. As it is, it just looks like you’re not bothering to read or think about what has been written. Believe me, it has nothing to do with “I hate you so I’m going to do something to this cracker.”
Statements like this “This goes to my basic point: live and let live; and allowing others to have their beliefs,” are particularly ridiculous considering the context in which the cracker desecration post arose.
Richard asked:
I have some ideas on that here:
http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/07/pzs-crackergate-scandal.html
The first 3 youTube videos explore some of the craziness in the belief that you can bless a cracker and it will become Jesus’ body.
“And only where God is seen does life truly begin. Only when we meet the living God in Christ do we know what life is. We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary. There is nothing more beautiful than to be surprised by the Gospel, by the encounter with Christ. There is nothing more beautiful than to know Him and to speak to others of our friendship with him.”-BXVI
Ken Cope – Nice picture. At first I thought you were druid Kirk. *grin*
Moses – I’m with your daughter, no hair cuts. My hair is long enough to hang below my back jeans pockets.
#861 Truth Machine – That was too frelling funny!
Richard,
The problem you have is that as a Catholic you are in a very poor position to be lecturing others about hatred.
Your religion kill people. Granted it may not actually intend to do so, but it knows it kills people and it does nothing about it.
It kills people by opposing condom use in preventing the spread of HIV.
It kills people by opposing the legalisation of abortions so that desperate woman are forced to go to backstreet abortionists.
It kills people who take their own life because of the conflict between their sexuality and their faith.
It kills people through the opposition to stem cell research.
As a Catholic you are guilty of these things. Not only you, but if you choose to belong to a Church that does these things, you share the guilt. The only reason the Catholic Church has any power to do these things is because of the millions it claims as members.
Richard (1141)
Once again, putting a wafer in a pocket is not injustice, ridiculing fantastical ideas is not hadred and initiating civil discourse with Catholics is not the main purpose behind PZ’s comments.
Again, we cherish difference of opinion, free speech and freedom of or from religion. At least some of the ones who use what you call vitriol are doing so out of hope to cut through the sky fairy blather. In a no nonsense way it’s meant to help. For others the vitriol is as it appears on the surface — an expression of anger. It might do you well to think freshly about why the anger exists.
End the end tho, wafergate is a diorama made for the vast numbers of people who have no personal stake in the outcome. All successful social movements have had to speak the truth and follow it up with consistent action when it was dangerous or unpopular to do so. Sitting down in a soda shop won’t be remembered because it was illegal, nor the underground railway because it was literally stealing, nor Stonewall because it was a riot, etc., etc., a thousand times, etc.
Mike post 1178 nice way to say fuck off to atheists you sanctimonious prick. You believers complain about us having no respect for you and what do you do, you come in and shit in our living room, so to speak. So to return the compliment, and unlike you kot no death threats but, fuck off you deluded moron.
kot=lot doh!
Kevin Cope #1140
Haha, I got the same reaction when I saw the picture, total Gandalf. Anyway it looks good, if ya got it , grow it.
Actually I was old enough to be a very young hippy when Freak-Out hit the record stores, but I didn’t go out and buy a tamborine and find a rock band and become their ROAD manager.
I did get the shit kicked out of me on the streets by the cops but I didn’t Love them.
I was never really accepted into hippydom because I was always a biker, with the black clothes and boots (not a fashion statement, those old bikes leak oil all over you), but I had a blast anyway with all the acid and grateful dead shows, and got along marvelously with the hippy girls.
You know what happens when an atheist takes alot of acid for a long time?
He doesn’t see god.
Saw plenty of other weird shit though
-ciao
oh BTW, you wouldn’t want to sleep on Owsley’s floor, he’s kind of abrasive to put it mildly.
——————
You Tube Eucharist Challenge
And we shouldn’t neglect to point out that (according to Christians), god’s son is frackin’ immortal and thus one bad weekend over the stretch of all eternity is hardly that significant.
Stop your mealy inferences that the jeezits have any influence upon our Mighty (and now, Cyberpistolly ENHANCED!)Overlord. His Squidliness will act when and how He sees fit.
Now, move along. BTW, Jesus spill in the wine section; what’s the protocol? Do we have to call some priests to suck him up off the floor?
I believe that the Eucharist is, by it’s nature and practice, pagan idolatry and baseless touting of a bronze-age, anti-materialist worldview which is entirely opposite to my own beliefs in the rational and knowable universe.
Why do you hatefully, with malice and forethought, continue to engage in, and defend, this anti-rational practice? It is HATEFUL to me that you practice bronze-age mummery and voodoo magic of a plagiarized and cobbled together religion. Your Catholic Faith, is, simply put, one of the most vile practices known to mankind.
Why won’t you respect my legitimate beliefs and STOP THIS BARBARIC, BRONZE-AGE ritual that was co-opted from other ‘mystery cult’ and ‘dieing god’ religions?
Whether you recognize it or not, the vestiges of pagan religion in Christian symbology are undeniable. Egyptian sun disks became the halos of Catholic saints. Pictograms of Isis nursing her miraculously conceived son Horus became the blueprint for our modern images of the Virgin Mary nursing Baby Jesus.
Virtually all the elements of the Catholic ritual – the miter, the altar, the doxology, and communion, the act of “God-eating” – were taken directly from earlier pagan ‘mystery’ and ‘dieing God’ religions.
Sadly, nothing in Christianity is truly original. The pre-Christian God Mithras – called the Son of God and the Light of the World – was born on December 25, died was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected in three days. His story, also borrowing from the martyrdom of Krishna, becomes your Jesus with a few inept changes.
December 25 is also the birthday or Osiris, Adonis, and Dionysus. All part of local legends from which Christianity has borrowed liberally (Dionysus was the the origins of “water into wine” story).
The phony birth-story of Jesus, which couldn’t have happened because too many of the events and locations mentioned were not existent, but occurred well prior or much, much later than at that time was taken directly from a different myth – Hinduism. Yes, that’s right, the newborn Krishna was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Even Christianity’s weekly holy day was stolen from the pagans.
And don’t even get me started on the Old Testament!!!
So, when will you change your entire life-style, and all of your belief systems, to stop offending me by with your presumption that your religion is ‘true’ and its rituals meaningful?
You won’t?
No shit. I don’t expect you to. In fact, it’s not my right to try and force you to respect the religious beliefs I fail hold.
And that’s because I have no religion. Because the facts and data tell me the likeliest conclusion – you’re running with a kludged religion that invented itself as it went along by stealing from other local religions – is the most believable.
But don’t ask for one iota of respect for your beliefs unless you can demonstrate, through DATA AND ARGUMENT that they’re meaningful beyond your superstitious adherence to them. From my perspective, your beliefs aren’t what you think they are and are as meaningless as the non-existent virtue of virginity which is an easily remedied condition for most people as they reach sexual maturity.
“And only where FSM is seen does life truly begin. Only when we meet the living FSM in Sauce do we know what life is. We are not some casual and meaningless product of religion. Each of us is the result of a thought of FSM. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary. There is nothing more beautiful than to be surprised by the Sauce, by the encounter with FSM. There is nothing more beautiful than to Her.”
Endor LOL, got to love the noodly one.
Respect? “I do not think it means what you think it means.” Just about every time someone is asking people to respect catholic beliefs, it seems like privilege would be a more accurate word than respect. If respecting the belief that a “cracker” is a bit of a deity means I have to pretend to not disagree with said belief, it seems rather one sided. Why can’t we try it the other way for a change? Can’t you apologists respect PZ’s view and not challenge him for doing what he wants with a bit of bread in his own time and space?
“Until PZ proves otherwise by treating them as such, the wafers he says he has in his possession are not ‘just crackers'”.
That’s right, they are unjust crackers.
Finally we agree on something.
MS: To be honest, I think PZ’s threat to desecrate a host (meant seriously or not) was a bit juvenile (even taken as satire, it’s hardly in the league of Swift’s A Modest Proposal). But…a rational person’s response to that would be to say, “Oh, that guy could grow up a little and perhaps try to be a little more sensitive to other people’s beliefs and feelings,” then forget about it and go on about his/her business.
And that’s exactly why it’s not juvenile. If folks had reacted as you describe, then it would have been a juvenile stunt. But since folks, folks with influence, have not responded as you describe, it’s actually an important window into how our co-citizens think.
If you tell someone at a conference “Your fly’s open”, they look down, and you laugh “Made ya look”, that’s juvenile. If you do it at a parole hearing, and they try to tear your head off before being dragged back to their cells, not juvenile!
I guess I was under the mistaken belief that liberals were to be the party of peace and love. My mistake. But as I reflect on the whole situation, I wonder why faith is hard to believe in. Call me crazy, but it takes a whole lot of faith to believe in the “big bang theory.” I am supposed to believe that out of absolute nothingness there just happened to be an explosion that created life? Really? But why the desecration? If you are truly intellectual, try to prove your point intellectually.
#1178 I’ll fix that for you.
“And only where captain Kirk is seen does life truly begin. Only when we meet the living captain Kirk do we know what life is. We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of captain Kirk . Each of us is willed, each of us is loved by captain Kirk (esp green women), each of us is necessary. There is nothing more beautiful than to be surprised by horny captain Kirk , by the encounter with a naked captain Kirk . There is nothing more beautiful than to know captain Kirk and to speak to others of our friendship with him.”-BXVI
Asshate get it right next time.
Matt Penfold: You listed the least of the Catholic Churches sins. Don’t forget that encouraging high birth rates and opposing family planning and birth control. This has resulted in a population out of control. Soon, there is likely to be famine and pandemics. To take the heat off the leadership of various countries like Pakistan and India, there will be war. Likely with nuclear weapons. Death by back street abortion will be an insignificant footnote by comparison. The Catholic church and all of these “personhood begins at conception” cults will be largely responsible.
Andrew wrote: The point is that for Catholics, the Host is sacred — a divine gift. It would be gravely wrong to ignore that fact simply because the host is not one I am consuming. Again, you may not agree — you may find it foolish — but why can this belief [not] be respected?
Easy to miss the jiu-jitsu moment here, whereby Andrew’s personal beliefs are converted into something we all must respect, and implicitly, into conduct we all should follow.
Andrew, you’re quite free to have your beliefs, and I can certainly respect you as an apparently polite and aware interlocutor, but you are not entitled, using the leverage of that respect, to convert your personal beliefs into speech or conduct norms for others. As you wrote in #1089: Step outside of yourself and realize that others have beliefs that are different than yours. Indeed.
Though you might dearly wish PZ hadn’t written with such verve of his personal disdain for the concept of the consecrated Host, or threatened to pulverize a bunch of them on video, it’s no infringement on any personal right you might have. Those are PZ’s beliefs, and if you step outside yourself far enough, you might get to a place where you respect his right to express those beliefs in ways that seem to you to be rampantly vile taste.
“got to love the noodly one.”
Definitely. And, in no small part because theists, ime, tend to get very incredulous at the thought of FSM. Mmmm, taste that irony!
———————
“I guess I was under the mistaken belief that liberals were to be the party of peace and love”
Atheists =/= liberals.
“Call me crazy, but it takes a whole lot of faith to believe in the “big bang theory.”
you’re not crazy, necessarily, just dumb.
“But why the desecration”
You’d have to ask your theistic buddies why a living, breathing human being is less important that a wafer. That’s the true “descration”.
Endor, got to agree with every point and as for J if it is the usual one, well he is always looking for a way to be the concern troll. As for the big bang, I don’t have faith in it, like most who have any understanding of physics, we accept it as the best explanation on the existing evidence. When more evidence comes along we will adjust our understanding accordingly, no faith necessary.
“Matt Penfold: You listed the least of the Catholic Churches sins. Don’t forget that encouraging high birth rates and opposing family planning and birth control. This has resulted in a population out of control. Soon, there is likely to be famine and pandemics. To take the heat off the leadership of various countries like Pakistan and India, there will be war. Likely with nuclear weapons. Death by back street abortion will be an insignificant footnote by comparison. The Catholic church and all of these “personhood begins at conception” cults will be largely responsible.”
I did think of adding that one as well. I decided I needed to restrict the number otherwise I would still be typing the list of sins of the Catholic Church.
“Endor LOL, got to love the noodly one.”
Yes. Now see, this would be an entirely different issue if we were talking about garlic bread.
Kryth @1194
Thanks for fixing that.
I so wanted to be a green woman in my teens.
J wrote:
What an incredible abuse of the English language. I actually do believe in faith, I have faith that when I put the key into the ignition of my car and turn it — it will start up and I can drive it where I need to go. My car earned that faith.
Maybe if you’re an uneducated twit who can’t comprehend the evidence for the “big bang.” Theories like that aren’t something you actually “believe in” or have “faith in” until you have to bet on them. If that theory were overturned tomorrow only the cosmologists invested in them would have their lives significantly altered.
There is no such thing as nothingness. It’s an artifact of the human imagination.
No, not really. It’s a bit more complicated than that. What you take to be a scientific theory is nothing more than the straw man version your priests use to lie to you with.
See the videos on my blog post here:
http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/07/pzs-crackergate-scandal.html
For years I’ve imagined getting a group of people to hang out around some big, politically-charged event and carry signs saying, “This Is A Peaceful Demonstration”. Not for or against anything particularly. Just…peaceful.
Maybe I’m too easily amused. :D
For those interested but too lazy to google, the Racial Slur Database is located at:
http://www.rsdb.org/
It’s hardly a complete listing. Focused only on ethnicity/race (despite the vast repertoire of slurs available based on age, sexuality, gender, class, appearance, etc.), and nearly all are contemporary slurs.
But still worthy of my Reference Bookmarks folder.
“But as I reflect on the whole situation, I wonder why faith is hard to believe in.”
It’s in the very definition of “faith”, that is, believing something without evidence. We don’t do that.
“Call me crazy, but it takes a whole lot of faith to believe in the “big bang theory.””
I thought faith was a virtue with you. Why do you mock our “faith”, you big poopy-head?
“I am supposed to believe that out of absolute nothingness there just happened to be an explosion that created life? Really?”
No. The origin of the universe and the origin of life on Earth are two entirely separate things. You’d be well advised to read up on both of them.
“If you are truly intellectual, try to prove your point intellectually.”
Our point is that a cracker is a cracker. Any unbiased observer would have to conclude that by default. The burden is on you to prove that it’s anything other than a cracker.
cicely: Some guy picketed Scientology by himself with a blank sign. He said the wrath was worse by far than any other picket signs such as “Scientology Kills”.
J: #1193
I guess I was under the mistaken belief that liberals were to be the party of peace and love. My mistake. But as I reflect on the whole situation, I wonder why faith is hard to believe in. Call me crazy, but it takes a whole lot of faith to believe in the “big bang theory.” I am supposed to believe that out of absolute nothingness there just happened to be an explosion that created life? Really? But why the desecration? If you are truly intellectual, try to prove your point intellectually.
Is this a new concern troll J, or the same old one? Or did ya forget which sockpuppet you were using?
A) Big Bang did not begin life. Completely different scales, times, etc. Neither depends on the other theoretically.
B) No one is asking you to take it “on faith”. Go learn the physics — get yourself a Ph.D., look at all the data, design new experiments. If you find out that the Physics community is wrong, they’ll give you a lot of money and a shiny metal, even a free trip to Scandinavia.
C) Big Bang does not imply that the universe came out of nothingness. It is just one location on the universal manifold. You can’t have a “before time began”!
D) How can you prove a point intellectually to those who appear to lack any respect for intellect?
E) Peace and love is reciprocal. No one claimed that “liberals” were all Gandhi-ists (who himself was not a fan of Christianity, and insulted the entire panoply of Christian faith at least once). I’ll respect you if and only if you return the favor; with the history of the monotheist religions, you have quite a bit to prove before I’m going to start “believing” that you’re willing to play fair.
“If you are truly intellectual, try to prove your point intellectually.”
Tried to. The fanatics ignored that.
Sigh. The Washington Post providing a soapbox for more, “Oh woe is I, I are a victim!” bloviating.
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2008/07/the_duty_to_defend_the_nearly.html#comments
I should add to my earlier comments that by-and-large I do not think that PZ Myers necessarily deserves to be prosecuted for any hate crimes.
However, as Santi Tafarella pointed out:
What I think Myers is not yet acknowledging is that the destruction of cultural symbols typically forebodes the marginalizing and destruction of people, and that a civil dialogue between people is rarely possible in an atmosphere of iconoclasm.
Iconoclasm, in other words, is an ancient form of prejudicial expression that ought to draw as much horror from contemporary people as racism and sexism.
Catholicism is particularly vulnerable to these types of attacks. As as mentioned previously: would PZ have called for the desecration of the Koran? No, of course not.
If the crackers are magical, then the magical priests who create the magical crackers with their magical rituals should be able to tell which crackers are magical and which are mundane.
This would be a trivial matter to test scientifically. In fact, I would go so far as to say that such a test could provide powerful evidence FOR the existence of god.
And not just any god, but their specific model of god.
IF THE PRIESTS COULD TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MAGICAL CRACKERS & THE MUNDANE CRACKERS!
An easy test that any true Priest should be able to pass infallibly, if the crackers truly are magical and made so by the ritual performance of the Priests.
I hope that PZ goes through with the cracker stunt-I don’t think that atheists should even consider the use of the religious term “desecrate,” which conveys that the user is in agreement with Catholic ideology. No harm can be done to communion wafer-“It’s just a frackin’ cracker.”
Does anyone know if Mr. Kroll sent the apology that he said that he would (if, indeed, that was really him apologizing on Greg Laden’s blog)?
would PZ have called for the desecration of the Koran? No, of course not.
LIAR!
Karen, you splitter you, it appears we will have to fire up the inquisition once again :)
“What I think Myers is not yet acknowledging is that the destruction of cultural symbols typically forebodes the marginalizing and destruction of people”
Well, you guys are certainly the experts in that.
@Rey Fox
Good thing I double checked the thread before pressed post or people would think we were sockpuppets.
As as mentioned previously: would PZ have called for the desecration of the Koran? No, of course not.
Don’t you bother reading anything else except what you write? He has done it.
Santi Tafarella + Pete Rooke expressed this:
So far the only people who have threatened that are on your side of the argument. If they continue to behave that way, then yes, your fears are justified in some long term and abstract way.
I would suggest it is only possible in an atmosphere of iconoclasm. Great changes necessarily demand iconoclasm.
Good, glad to hear it. Those bastards used to crown the kings of Europe who ruled by divine right. They set up the Spanish Inquisition. And they still need to be taken down a few more notches.
We don’t live in a majority Muslim country. And those bastards really will kill you, not just send email death threats. No doubt when religious change comes to Arabia it will be bloody as hell.
“Argument from linguistics”? Let me try:
The Finnish word for the Host is öylätti, and that sounds pretty silly.
inkadu @ 562 wrote:
Robert Thille is cribbing off Orson Scott Card. Which is fine. That one was a good story.
Maybe, but it’s been a long time since I read any Orson Scott Card (since before I found out he was a Mormon wack-job), and I don’t remember any story like what I postulated.
I was just trying to come up with something of equal insanity to the cracker saga. Maybe I should have used fingernail clippings instead of poop, since that’s something easier to store and less offensive to the non-believers, so there’s more likelihood that a non-believer would steal and desecrate them…
In response to ‘why do you hate catholics’, I don’t. I have some friends who are catholics. I find them to be mostly reasonable people, though their statement that they’d rather have their daughter in a abusive hetero relationship than a loving homosexual one really put me off.
The idea that if I take a consecrated cracker, which you have no idea how I obtained, and crap on it or feed it to my dog or whatever harms you in any real way is something I reject. You are free to believe that it harms you and take offense, but don’t assume I’ll care. And if you threaten me with death because of your perceived offense, then expect me to be offended (at the minimum).
Time to class up this thread with the Word of God.
John Chapter 6
1* After this Jesus went to the other side of the Sea of Galilee, which is the Sea of Tiberi-as. 2 And a multitude followed him, because they saw the signs which he did on those who were diseased. 3 Jesus went up on the mountain, and there sat down with his disciples. 4 Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was at hand. 5* Lifting up his eyes, then, and seeing that a multitude was coming to him, Jesus said to Philip, “How are we to buy bread, so that these people may eat?” 6 This he said to test him, for he himself knew what he would do. 7 Philip answered him, “Two hundred denarii * would not buy enough bread for each of them to get a little.” 8* One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, said to him, 9* “There is a lad here who has five barley loaves and two fish; but what are they among so many?” 10 Jesus said, “Make the people sit down.” Now there was much grass in the place; so the men sat down, in number about five thousand. 11 Jesus then took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed them to those who were seated; so also the fish, as much as they wanted. 12 And when they had eaten their fill, he told his disciples, “Gather up the fragments left over, that nothing may be lost.” 13 So they gathered them up and filled twelve baskets with fragments from the five barley loaves, left by those who had eaten. 14* When the people saw the sign which he had done, they said, “This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world!” 15* Perceiving then that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, Jesus withdrew again to the mountain by himself. 16* When evening came, his disciples went down to the sea, 17 got into a boat, and started across the sea to Caperna-um. It was now dark, and Jesus had not yet come to them. 18 The sea rose because a strong wind was blowing. 19 When they had rowed about three or four miles, * they saw Jesus walking on the sea and drawing near to the boat. They were frightened, 20 but he said to them, “It is I; do not be afraid.” 21 Then they were glad to take him into the boat, and immediately the boat was at the land to which they were going. 22 On the next day the people who remained on the other side of the sea saw that there had been only one boat there, and that Jesus had not entered the boat with his disciples, but that his disciples had gone away alone. 23 However, boats from Tiberi-as came near the place where they ate the bread after the Lord had given thanks. 24 So when the people saw that Jesus was not there, nor his disciples, they themselves got into the boats and went to Caperna-um, seeking Jesus. 25 When they found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him, “Rabbi, when did you come here?” 26 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. 27* Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you; for on him has God the Father set his seal.” 28 Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” 29* Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” 30* So they said to him, “Then what sign do you do, that we may see, and believe you? What work do you perform? 31* Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.'” 32 Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven; my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world.” 34* They said to him, “Lord, give us this bread always.” 35* Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. 37* All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out. 38* For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me; 39* and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day. 40* For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.” 41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, “I am the bread which came down from heaven.” 42 They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” 43 Jesus answered them, “Do not murmur among yourselves. 44* No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. 45* It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Every one who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me. 46* Not that any one has seen the Father except him who is from God; he has seen the Father. 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.” 52* The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; 54 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56* He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. 58* This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.” 59* This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Caperna-um. 60 Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” 61* But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62* Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before? 63* It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64* But there are some of you that do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray him. 65* And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” 66 After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him. 67 Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you also wish to go away?” 68* Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life; 69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” 70* Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” 71* He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was to betray him.
Richard (#1158): “Yes, its true you don’t have to respect another’s beliefs, but what is gained by disrespecting their beliefs? Certainly not a dialogue or a reasonable coexistence?”
I don’t want to coexist with religious assholes. I want them off my planet. I’m willing to wait until they drop dead, but the brainwashing of young children has to stop. Now.
Bradley.
You suck.
The Word of The Lord. Thanks Be To God. Here’s another to class up the joint.
Trash me all you want. Praise God for it. I’ve got work to do and won’t be coming back to see your trash talk, so save your time. May Almighty God Bless you, in the name of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit, Amen.
1 Corinthians, Chapter 23* * For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for * you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25* In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26* For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. 27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
Oh and you’re an asshole.
Bradley, eat shit and die slow.
#1187 – Moses – Excellent post! Notice how carefully all the godists are ignoring it. If memory serves Gilgamesh was about 1182 BC, but they don’t want to hear that either.
A tip of my Canada Dry to you! :)
Bradley, go pollute somewhere else you insufferable little death cultist prick and take your garbage with you.
Why don’t you just go out and send some more death threats Bradley?
Time to class up this thread with the Word of God.
“here comes that Bible Duuuudeee!”
Bradley, I think we all have a copy of the book (right next copy of the Koran in my case)
If we want to read ne of them, we can any time we want to. But not in this thread?
But we dont see the sense in either of them.
So please stop spaming?
Or is that what the bible is for you? Material to use in spam??
I’m shure your “God” will love that concept…..
Bradley, did you type that out by hand? It must have taken you ages. What devotion.
… or just cut & paste it from some xian site? Religion – no brains required.
There’s little violence that you can do to Christ’s body in the Eucharist that mankind hasn’t already done to Him in His Passion and Crucifixion.
And there’s nothing you can do to the Eucharist that will shake my faith that Christ is truly present, body, blood, soul, and divinity. I’m angry and you make many people very sad, but your plan is going to backfire.
You’re expecting that lightning won’t strike you down, and that if nothing extraordinary happens to evidence God’s existence, that it will “prove” something. It just really shows your pride and misanthropy, your bigotry toward people of faith.
We don’t pray for you out of spite. We pray that your heart of stone will become a heart of flesh and that your outrageous cry for attention will ultimate lead to your humbling.
John Phillips, FCD wrote:
I don’t think Bradley has any idea how pathetic what he is doing is. However, I appreciate his reminder of just how loony tunes the Bible actually comes off as… Believe me or else said Jesus.
Somebody mail me this plan pls.
Norman Doering, yes, sadly I have to agree with you, on both points. And oh look, it must be letting out time somewhere as all the religiotards are oozing out of the intertoobz.
@ Bradley.
Hah! That was perfect, buddy!
Imagine the hilarity that would ensue if you were able to sprinkle “virtual holy water” on this crew. We’d be treated to several minutes of watching PZ’s flying monkeys “run around” clawing at their pointed little heads screaming “gaah, it buuuurns!”
Good on ya.
Keep prayin Geoff.
Bigotry again???? It’s not our fault you believe in magic and imaginary ghosts, demons and angels. I mean, its understandable in the dark ages and earlier, but really? Still?
We don’t hate religious people. I just think they’re wasting their time, and perhaps a little unthinking.
Laughin_Gay: It wouldn’t be the virtual holy water that would burn but the real stoopid being displayed by you and yours. But I don’t expect a simpleton such as yourself to understand such a difficult concept without pretty pictures, if then.
#1221 the brainwashing of young children has to stop. Now.
THAT’s the plan. Tackle the problem at the root. The rest will follow.
“real stoopid”
Gee, I didn’t know PZ taught spelling *and* biology!
Geoff Tipley wrote:
Really? How about a couple of questions?
When exactly does an ordinary cracker become the truly present, body, blood, soul, and divinity? When a priest says some specific bit of mumbo jumbo over it? What if the priest who was saying the mumbo jumbo over your cracker was a pedophile who cheated and lied his way through seminary, can he still consecrate your toast?
Could you tell if a cracker was consecrated or not?
Yes.
No. You’ll prove it for us by doing what you’re doing now.
Explain how that works, please.
I would pray too if I thought it would do any good, but it never has.
So you don’t believe in the consecrated host. Fine, but why offend so many people? Cook should know that by being Catholic he was supposed to eat it right there and then because of people like you and others (satanic rituals)who want to defame it. What do you have to gain from such an abuse of other people’s beliefs? It just seems like such a childish way to get attention. You know for sure that there is not a God? You better sure hope not or else you will have eternity to contemplate it. Christ said- “take this and eat it, this is my body” he did not say this is a symbol of my body. You have no idea what you are about to do. If you don’t believe in Catholic doctrine then don’t, but to promote such offensive acts is just childish. All this coming from a grown man. Pathetic-
Laughin_Gay: See, I told you that you would need a few pictures to help, especially for one who doesn’t even understand intertoobz terminology. I would be Crying_Gay if I was a fraction as stoopid as you appear.
Just to add a data point here, I don’t hate people by the group, I hate them individually. Hate takes effort, and I wouldn’t want to waste that on someone I merely disdain. My hate must be earned.
As far as catholics go, I hate them so much I married one. Of course, she’s a heretic. She doesn’t believe in hell, nor anything but symbolism in the eucharist. She also doesn’t think priestboy needs to know every dirty little thought she had. She’s more catholic by upbringing and tradition than by dogma.
I just wanted folks to know that there are sane folks who call themselves catholics.
And Bradley and Laughing_pinhead, go pray yourselves. Awesome christian charity you express L_p – you imagine “hilarity” of people in pain. You better keep that god of yours, I think your too much the sociopath for society to tolerate you without it. You are one sick, twisted, sad little bastard.
Geoff: You’re expecting that lightning won’t strike you down, and that if nothing extraordinary happens to evidence God’s existence, that it will “prove” something. It just really shows your pride and misanthropy, your bigotry toward people of faith.
Has someone been threatening to lynch “people of faith”? Are people being denied promotions because they are “people of faith”? Has it been two hundred years since a “people of faith” has been elected to the presidency? Are “people of faith” being kept out of college? Are “people of faith” being isolated as children because the won’t pledge “One Nation under No-God”?
Or are you one of those whiny Christian white guys who has never seen the slightest bit of bigotry in your lazy, easy, setup life that you inherited, and now that someone has the temerity to question the dominance of your group, you cry like a little boy who has to share his lollipop?
“Bigotry! Bigotry!” Yeah, bigotry is when others treat you one tenth as badly as you’ve treated them.
(Email is required for authentication purposes only. Comments are moderated for spam, your comment may not appear immediately. Thanks for waiting.)
Does posting huge tracts of bibble bile count as spam? I think it should.
All Brad has proved is that he knows how to cut & paste. On this thread at least (I can’t be bothered trawling through PZ’s entire site) that’s all he has done. Wow, what an intellect.
In 1540 the Spanish Inquisition established a branch to investigate the Spanish navy including a group to check on the orthodoxy of the galley squadrons. Being a galley slave brought before the Inquisition has got to be close to the nadir of human existence.
Yeah, I know what you mean, John.
Sometimes my year old son looks at me like he’s thinking I’ll never understand 1 year old terminology.
Then he usually drools a little bit…you get that too out there in teh intertoobz 2?
*laughing*
why offend so many people?
better question:
why are so many people offended?
and no, you really don’t have a good answer for that, since by and large, there apparently are an awful lot of catholics who aren’t.
Jesus and Mo today is most excellent.
JoJo: well at least it was a day off for them, sorry, this amoral atheist couldn’t resist. By the way, what was their doctrinal stance on garlic bread.
Chicago Dave.
It’s a FRICKIN CRACKER!
Despite all the meaning you want to think is in that cracker…
or by miracle really the flesh of Jesus (that’s really messed up)… it is STILL JUST A CRACKER.
You superstitious jerk.
Crying_Gay, sounds as if your son has already overtaken you. Congratulate him from me as it sounds as if there may be some hope for him. Though I doubt if it was that hard a feat for him to achieve as you have set the bar spectacularly low for him.
Laughin_moron, the Holy Ghost sucks your penis and swallows your ejaculate. In your dreams.
Pray off
I’ve just spotted paradoctor’s post at #264. I have read most of this thread, but I keep getting called away and I’ve missed some chunks. But I think paradoctor’s idea is spot on. I think we should bring this to PZ’s attention.
OWOWOWOW, OHMYGOD, the Holy Spirit and God are taking retribution for my unholy blasphemy…oh wait, no, sorry, just a bit of gas.
… Of course that would also give us the opportunity to open the wafer’s coffin after three days and see if it’s empty or not…
Say, Steve_C?
Your screaming not withstanding, another day has passed and the score remains:
The “Cracker”: 9 (days)
PZ and his Flying Monkeys: 0; zip; zero; nada (unless you wish to claim 1200 comments of blah, blah, blah as a point, just for obsessive determination.)
It’s clear that PZ has come to realize that it’s not just a “cracker”, or he’d have posted some wonderfully clever atheist cracker tortures on Youtube already.
Did a lightning bolt strike him down? Nah. It appears that PZ suddenly must have just had an epiphany and realized what a stupendous ass he has made of himself.
Like they say, God works in mysterious ways…right?
Dave-Chicago: “You know for sure that there is not a God? You better sure hope not or else you will have eternity to contemplate it.”
Your threats don’t work here asshole.
We pray that your heart of stone will become a heart of flesh and that your outrageous cry for attention will ultimate lead to your humbling.
You can take your pleas to your imaginary friend and shove them, you condescending tool.
steve c- what’s really messed up is you- You’re the one who has a problem believing what we believe. I’m not asking you to believe it, but why do you have such a problem with what I believe? what harm does it do to you? The guy Cook who tried to take it back to show his friend should know what the rules are. If he doesn’t believe in Catholic doctrine don’t be a part of it. As I have read some of these post, it’s easy to see where the hate lies. It isn’t with me, yet you seem to have a big problem with my beliefs. I’m not asking you to join, so what’s you’re problem?
Laughin_loser
Your silence proves that you wish to have oral sex with the Holy Spirit. You know that makes you an unforgivable blasphemer. As with the crackers, the proof is that you didn’t respond within 5 posts. Seeya in hell.
Dave, if you are not asking us to join why are you spouting your gibberish here then. And as I said in another post, to paraphrase a good old xian saying, hate the belief not the believer.
I’m not threatening you. It’s a fact, if you don’t believe there is a God and you’re wrong You Will have eternity to contemplate it. Nice display of intellect though with the curse word.
Dave asked:
Think of it this way; we’re just asking ourselves if these religious types might be dangerously insane — and then you guys come here and basically answer: “yes, we’re even nuttier than you imagined.”
It’s a fact…
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
True.
And if you don’t believe in Allah and you’re wrong, you will have eternity to contemplate it.
And if you don’t believe in Zeus and you’re wrong, you will have eternity to contemplate it.
And if you don’t believe in Mithra and you’re wrong, you will have eternity to contemplate it.
And if you don’t believe in Thor and you’re wrong, you will have eternity to contemplate it.
And if you don’t believe in Isis and you’re wrong, you will have eternity to contemplate it.
And if you don’t believe in Shiva and you’re wrong, you will have eternity to contemplate it.
Dave, the problem started with a totally screwed up sense of proportionality (i.e. physical assault, death threats and career threats against Cook). When PZ ridiculed that, he was hit with (surprise!) a totally screwed up sense of proportionality. I would’ve thought anyone posting here would’ve paid that much attention.
Beyond that, your beliefs, which of course you are entitled to have and follow, are beyond preposterous. So we point and laugh, at your beliefs and the fact that anyone is daft enough to buy them hook, line, and sinker.
I’m sure you respect other religions so much that you abstain from pork, shellfish and beef, you do no activities on Saturday, yadda yadda yadda.
It’s our right to laugh at your rite. We find it funny, and the outrageous disproportionate response to be funny as well.
Don’t even start us on the harm caused by your amalgamated death cult.
“It’s a fact, if you don’t believe there is a God and you’re wrong You Will have eternity to contemplate it.”
It’s a fact, Dave, that you’re a deranged moron.
You got evidence for your eternity bullshit? I didn’t think so asshole.
Say, TrueBob?
Did PZ call a class holiday so all of his top students could spend the day filling his comments with razor sharp wit like Steve_C’s and yours?
I mean you guys are awsome intellects…no, really.
*laughing*
I gotta go for now, but I’d bet my next paycheck that tomorrow will come and go and PZ will still be just sitting there, staring at his “crackers” (but not too close), trying to figure a way out of the mess he’s dug himself into.
Here’s a tip my man, I hear the city of Morris is looking for a good gardener. 10 years or so and you’ll probably just be a humorous footnote on teh intertubes…right, John?
*laughing*
*Laughing*
I’m not asking you to join. Why am I spouting here? why are you? it’s my belief that is being desecrated, not yours. So why are you here? Just to make sure that my belief is desecrated? What’s so sick about you that this is your reason to write. What is it to you what I believe? I have more of a reason to post than you, when you think about it.
Life’s a piece of shit,
When you look at it.
Life’s a laugh and death’s a joke it’s true.
You’ll see it’s all a show.
Keep ’em laughing as you go.
Just remember that the last laugh is on you.
Believe what you want Dave. Nobody gives a shit about you morons. But if you come here telling people they’re going to hell because they’re not insane like you are, expect to be called an asshole.
Norman: I think all of this is bullshit but there is disagreement about exactly when the hocus pocus occurs. RCs believe it’s when the words “This is my body” and “This is my blood” are said by the priest. Eastern Orthodoxy believes it happens when the holy spirit is called down upon the cracker & wine, after the RC words. Some Anglicans believe that it’s the whole prayer said (the eucharistic prayer) including the congregation’s response that consecrates the stuff.
I wonder why RCs don’t get up in arms over the fact that other churches don’t believe in the great change and thus mock their rite?
Oh, and I just got my Vaso-Matic. I’m looking for volunteers to try it out.
L_G thinks he’s scary. Like Salt, another fundament.
Hey laugher, when is cheeses coming back? He’s way way overdue. He was supposed to get back before his contemporaries were all even dead.
You give that fictional slacker a pass on his centuries of tardiness with your retardiness, but insist on a firm schedule with a mere mortal? Have you read anything here? PZ wasn’t even home for most of that time. How do you know how many crackers his project needs? Maybe he’ll be making a statue of Mohammed out of cheeses crackers.
Now pray off.
Laughin_Guy reminds me of a hyena, with the intellect to boot.
I told the priest
don’t plan on any second coming
God got his ass kicked
The first time he came down here slumming
Andy Prieboy, “Tomorrow Wendy”
Dave wrote:
Beliefs that can be desecrated… Now there is an interesting concept. I know you can think people are wrong, foolish and have arguments… but desecrated?
Your belief itself is a sacred object?
Not that’s the way to maintain a delusion! Call it sacred.
Perhaps that was meant to refer to something else, but it reminds me of the sophisticated theologians’ criticisms of Dawkins et al..
Dave: I’m not threatening you. It’s a fact, if you don’t believe there is a God and you’re wrong You Will have eternity to contemplate it. Nice display of intellect though with the curse word.
It’s a fact. If you waste even a single second of your life in meaningless, empty ritual that depends on it being True, you’ve wasted an eternity. If you only get one pass at things, every second counts as much as eternity.
Yes Dave. Your belief that the cracker is important is stupid. I’m very comfortable mocking it and making fun of it. After all it is religion. It’s nonsense. All religion is essentially nonsense.
Dave; Actually we have more reason to post as it was one of ours who suffered death threats and a campaign to oust him from his job over the wild overreaction of some catholictards who do your faith no favours. Managing to show us in the process that many catholictards consider the desecration of a host as more important than two human lives. All we have seen since then have been wild rationalisations or threats such as yours that we are all going to roast in hell when your god shows his face. Bring him on sunshine, for if he does exist I have some rather pointed questions for the amoral doofus responsible for so much of the world’s misery and suffering, both directly if his holy babble is to be believed, and indirectly at the hands of his minions on earth. If that last sentence doesn’t give you a slight hint that we think you are full of it and that we really, really don’t give a shit about him, only the untold damage caused by the religiotards who believe in him, then I don’t know what will.
LawnBoy: And if you don’t believe in Shiva and you’re wrong, you will have eternity to contemplate it.
Nah, Shiva has compassion. You just keep on going round the wheel until you get it right. It might be billions of years, but eternal punishment is for monsters.
Your belief is idiotic and wrong. I’m not offending you. It’s a fact, if you don’t recognize that christianity is superstition you will have wasted your one and only lifetime on inanity.
At #1232 Geoff Tipley said:
You’re expecting that lightning won’t strike you down,
Since individuals who are Christians are struck by lightning on a regular basis, how will we know if god is zapping us because he’s angry with our posts on this thread, or because he’s angry with us for some other reason, or because he’s angry with other people, or because he loves us, or because it’s simply his will that we die by lightning at that particular moment?
Very obediant spirit, isn’t it? Comes when it’s called, every time without fail, in thousands of churches all over the world, sometimes simultaneously. Oh, of course it’s god so it can. But that doesn’t mean it always does.
Doesn’t it ever have an off day, and decides not to turn up? And if it didn’t show up, who would know? “Oh no, not the cracker thing again, do I have to? I’ve got more important things to do. I am god, you know! I’ve got earthquakes to arrange, football matches to fix, wars to start. It’s all go up here you know. And you want me to come every time you whistle, jut to sit inside your wafer? Eat me.”
Obedient, before the grammar nazis get at me (don’t you dare, thruth_machine!). It’s 1 AM here, I’m off to bed.
So why are you here?
Uh, the question is why are you here, you self-centered cretin troll.
It’s a fact
Only a moron would think so, and only an arrogant jackass would claim so.
if you don’t believe there is a God and you’re wrong You Will have eternity to contemplate it
People who aren’t cretins are familiar with the absurd fallacy of Pascal’s Wager. You can’t get more cowardly than to pander to a fictitious entity because it’s conceivable that it would harm you if you don’t. And you can’t get much more intellectually dishonest than to pick that one fictitious entity out of the infinity of possible fictitious entities to pander to.
Nice display of intellect though with the curse word.
What is with these stupid fucking shitheads, theistic or not, who think that there’s some incompatibility between intellect and cursing?
Thanks for bringing it back up to the top of the stack for me. I’m sad to have missed this one in such a rapidly growing thread, not just because it is sly and subversive, but because I have the highest regard for paradoctor, personally.
I think the only possible way to embellish paradoctor’s suggestion for a respectful funeral and burial (God is dead, after all) would be to follow up the services with a suitably Irish Wake, providing a glass of spirits, of course, for the delectation of the “transubstantiated gobbet of man-god flesh.”
don’t you dare, th ===> r >=== uth ===> _ <=== machine
Who, me?
Time to class up this thread with the Word of Ennis (21:11).
LAST SCION OF THE MESSIAH: Suffer the little children! Humperdumperdoo! Fishers of men! Humperdum!
MARSEILLE: I just can’t believe this!
STARR: Why not? After two thousand years of keeping them breeding inside the one bloodline, we’re lucky the bastard doesn’t have antennae.
MARSEILLE: But this is the blood of the Lamb we’re talking about! The most sacred lineage the world has ever known! I mean, what about the divine essence?
STARR: The what?
MARSEILLE: The essence of Heaven itself! Wouldn’t it keep the bloodline from becoming tainted?
STARR: Son of God or Son of Man, Marseille: You can’t fuck your sister and expect much good to come of it.
Oh noes, you said a swear word. My mama always told me that only dumb people curse.
Damn, what kind of pedant am I. screwing that up …
don’t you dare, t ===> h <=== ruth ===> _ <=== machine
“am I.” -> “am I,”
I guess 3 hours isn’t enough.
Truth Machine wrote:
It’s almost as annoying as saying one who swears lacks a suitable vocabulary. It shows how little the stupid and ignorant understand about effective communication.
Fucking morons.
It wasn’t that long ago that there would be a traffic barrier across the information highway and a “DETOUR” sign pointing to a new thread when comments approached 1K. The very fabric of scienceblogs.com spacetime warped critically at that threshold; fortunately, most of the passengers and crew made it to the lifeboats in the nick of time.
Now the comment mass approximates at 1.3K, but the first klaxon has yet to sound. Query the engine room: what are the readings on the dilithium crystals?
How long can this go on?
Holy crap Rey Fox.
I just read that last night.
I love The Preacher.
Query the engine room: what are the readings on the dilithium crystals?
What Scotty doesn’t know, is that we’ve replaced his dilithium crystals with Rich Folger’s Coffee Crystals!
I wrote:
Ack! That should be: “Now that’s the way to maintain a delusion! Call it sacred.”
There is apparently something wrong with my brain. I can’t type what I mean.
Considering the background, your “let them live as they see fit” translates to “give them total license to engage in any behavior they choose, no matter how vilely hateful, irrational, guanophrenic and violent it might be”.
No.
I will not condone the granting of such special privileges to any group, nor will I consent to their claims being granted “do not challenge” status. To do so would be to abandon the very concept of equality before the law as well as that of the use of reason. We have entirely too many examples in history of what happens when a society does what you’re whining for.
So, take your demands for special rights and stick them up your host-hole.
Ktesibios, but if we don’t let them have their own way, we are being bigots. They told us so and their xians. They wouldn’t lie, would they?
Pierce R. Butler wrote:
DETOUR
—->
http://normdoering.blogspot.com/2008/07/pzs-crackergate-scandal.html
There ya go, Pierce.
Seriously, these clueless new papist trolls make the old protestant/fundie ones seem like witty, perceptive poets in comparison. At least some of the time they’d try to read before posting.
I’m hoping there’s some new Ken Ham/Discovery Insitute fiasco that’s going to swing things back in that direction – and it shouldn’t be far off; I can’t imagine the dinosaur loving, evolution-denying cretins aren’t jealous of all the attention the cracker-worshipping, kid-fucking dress-wearers are getting.
It’s almost as annoying as saying one who swears lacks a suitable vocabulary.
It’s a fallacy of affirmation of the consequent:
People with small vocabularies curse.
You curse.
Therefore you have a small vocabulary.
Fucking morons.
Cerebrally challenged dung eating buttwipes!
THE CRACKER IS A LIE
THE CRACKER IS A LIE
THE CRACKER IS A LIE
THE CRACKER IS A LIE
More importantly…Will there be cake?
Night all – a little humour for those not humour impaired.
http://www.gahanwilson.com/pbc2nothing.htm
Pox Nabisco
…and one of his engineers with Madge, from Palmolive. Let’s watch:
“Mild? Oh, more than just mild. You’re soaking in it.”
Secudity! Get this “Madge” lass out of my engine room!
And get me a proper cuppa!! This piss tastes like dilithium!
There’s no way of knowing if this is true because Jesus might be “hardening their hearts”. When the Pharaoh had his heart hardened by Jesus, the Pharaoh didn’t know it was being hardened, otherwise he would have caught on to what was happening.
There’s just no way to take anybody’s word for anything, because Jesus can do whatever he wants, and so therefore nothing is impossible.
Anytime you guys speak in definitive terms about anything, that indicates that you don’t really believe your own beliefs. (Because Jesus can do whatever he wants and nothing is impossible -therefore there is nothing that is difinitively for sure for sure. (Except that Jesus can fly like a birdie, of coarse.))
@JeffreyD
Wilson’s comment on this one is revealing:
http://www.gahanwilson.com/pbc1santachim.htm
Aren’t the Catholics who assure us that they are indeed eating a dead body confessing to grave robbing (where’s Christ body if NOT in the crackers they say are him?) and cannibalism?
Who are the criminals now?
PZ only threatened crackers. Brian F and Donahue are either insane people who think they are cannibals, or are eating the dead through magic.
There’s really no way the non-metaphorical version of the Sacrament wins this dispute.
spurge: I think of the kid messiah (known as “Humperdido” to many Preacher fans) every time some godbot starts spamming with Bible quotes and/or assertions of God’s existence and/or biblical morals.
Gahan Wilson wrote:
It would appear that Gahan Wilson never thought to do a cartoon about consecrated crackers.
Rey, I can see why that might come to mind in such circumstances.
“I guess I was under the mistaken belief that liberals were to be the party of peace and love.”
Liberals aren’t a party in America. It’s a philosophical approach. You should read about it more, because you probably ascribe to it yourself without knowing it.
“But as I reflect on the whole situation, I wonder why faith is hard to believe in.”
Faith is hard to believe in? This sentence has no meaning.
“I am supposed to believe that out of absolute nothingness there just happened to be an explosion that created life?”
There is evidence for this. There is none for your god.
“If you are truly intellectual, try to prove your point intellectually.”
Drawing everyone’s attention to the fact that this cracker is inanimate and not worth more respect than a human life is intellectual. Being an intellectual doesn’t mean being passive. This desecration is a form of protest.
Catholicism is much like Scientology. You are brainwashed for years and drained of funds; when you are told about Xenu, you don’t bat an eye. Really, OT3s like Tom Cruse, believe in Xenu. Crackers is God! Catholics are crackers!
Why do you believe the actions of Bill Donahue concern you whether you agree with them or not? Your actions against him really don’t make any sense and are quite immature.
Trash me all you want. Praise God for it.
Martyr fetish
May Almighty God Bless you, in the name of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit, Amen.
And a hearty “fuck you” to you, too.
THE CRACKER IS A LIE
More importantly…Will there be cake?
There is no cracker.
You know for sure that there is not a God? You better sure hope not or else you will have eternity to contemplate it
blah blah blah
do you idiots do anything but parrot nonsense?
By no means! I hope it’s true. Why? This is why.
Good point — this one has gone on way too long. Consider it closed, and go here if you must.