You may recall that a Christian group in Bath called “Healing on the Streets” was going about claiming that faith could heal all sorts of ailments: “Ulcers, Depression, Allergies, Fibromyalgia, Asthma, Paralysis, Crippling Disease, Phobias, Sleeping disorders or any other sickness”. They got slapped down for making false claims, as they should have been.

Brendan O’Neill is outraged — this is a violation of freedom of religion! And then he goes on to make a really good analogy.

This is an outrageous attack on freedom of religion, on the basic right of people to express central tenets of their faith. Of course, the authorities have a role to play in keeping a check on the scientific claims made by businesses in their ads. If, for example, Pepsi suddenly announced that a can of its pop can cure backache, that should be challenged; likewise, companies that spout homeopathic claptrap can reasonably be asked to provide evidence for their claims. But the state and its offshoots have no business whatsoever sticking their snouts into the expression of a religious conviction, into the public articulation of faith, which is precisely what the HOTS leaflet was. Monitoring claims that are made in an explicitly scientific fashion is fine, but policing the expression of an inner conviction, of a profound belief in the healing qualities of God, is ludicrous and authoritarian. Not content with policing the public square, the ASA, it seems, now wants to monitor men’s souls too.

Well, yes, that’s a really good example. If Pepsi profited by selling more cans of pop by plastering them with misleading medical claims, that would be wrong, and it would be society’s responsibility to act to protect its more gullible members from predatory lies. But when HOTS tries to profit in its evangelical efforts by lying about their medical benefits, that isn’t offensive behavior because…? “Inner convictions” doesn’t cut it. There are plenty of scams going around with devout proponents — homeopathy, balance bracelets, libertarianism, crystal healing — but we don’t exempt them from laws against fraudulent advertising because their middle management is willing step up and say “I really, really believe”. Why does religion get this free pass?

Here’s another thought experiment. What if the CEO of Pepsi has a conversion experience, sees a vision of Jesus, and Jesus says unto him, “Lo, high fructose corn syrup is the true nectar of the gods, it’s all we drink up here in heaven. It’s what makes us immortal!” Could Pepsi now slap a new label on their cans that says “Now with eternal life!”?

What if all of their ads featured a charismatic preacher with big teeth and big hair and tap-dancing angels all singing about how Pepsi was Jesus’ favorite drink? Would that be sufficient evidence of “inner conviction” and justify any medical claims Pepsi might want to make?

I had no idea that the one true reason women get abortions is to avoid stretch marks. At least that’s how little Scotty on facebook explains the problem.

That’s an interesting exchange, too: so both sexes have to make sacrifices, with us men giving up porn, and women giving up 9 months of their life and the pristine smoothness of their abdominal connective tissue. Oh, and he probably expects the women to give up their careers and stay at home tending to the babies afterwards, as well. Those are perfectly comparable compromises.

I also really like the tortured reasoning in there to excuse his god from the crime of murder. He never murdered anyone, he only ordered “some slaying” (like, all but 8 people on the planet), and those were like totally justified because they were wicked.

Sometimes people accuse atheists of wanting to convert people. I have a deal: we won’t try to convert people like Scotty ever, not that rational arguments would matter to him. Nasty little maggots like that, we’d rather not have in the atheist camp, and they can all stay Christian.

I don’t know about you, but I find these data and stated intentions disturbing:

Ages at which Americans say they accepted Christ and became a Christian

Another survey — by the International Bible Society — indicated that 83% of all Christians make their commitment to Jesus between the ages of 4 and 14, that is, when they are children or early youth. The Barna Research Group surveys demonstrate that American children ages 5 to 13 have a 32% probability of accepting Christ, but youth or teens aged 14 to 18 have only a 4% probability of doing so. Adults age 19 and over have just a 6% probability of becoming Christians.
This data illustrates the importance of influencing children to consider making a decision to follow Christ.
Because the 4-14 period slice of the pie is so large, many have started referring to the “4-14 Window.” Many people serving as career cross-cultural missionaries have testified that they first felt God calling them to missionary service during that 4-14 age period.

Yeah, I know! What kind of godsawful hack makes 3-D pie charts?

Oh, and then there’s the substance of the message. It’s not surprising: pack the kids’ heads full of garbage when they’re gullible and pliant, and they’re poisoned for life.

I wonder what similar data would look like for adoption of atheism? I suspect it’ll largely be shifted to older ages, when minds are a little more mature and capable of rational thought.