Warren Hershel III, the Republican candidate for State Representative in the 2nd District in Alabama, stated to a crowd that atheists were worse than Satanists
At least you know where you stand with the Satanists,” yelled out Mathew King, long time resident. “Atheists? Don’t they worship Hitler?”
– someone from the crowd he spoke to
Our popular conservative media likes to portray the “believer” as the good and upright citizen, and the atheist as somehow evil and sometimes even immoral and depraved. The post below tells the story of a grieving atheist, and how her mother-in-law kept badgering her with relentless insensitivity and outright insults.
Originally posted on The Grieving Atheist:
Let me preface this by telling you that my mother was one of the kindest people out there. She’d been a teacher. She loved people of all ages. She was sweet to everyone with a modicum of decency. But she was also astute and didn’t suffer fools lightly. And she did not care for my mother in law. She thought she was ignorant, self-serving and tactless. And she was RIGHT.
My mother didn’t get to throw me a bridal shower. Why not? Because my MIL decided she was throwing one in Rochester, NY. “Oh no no no! All my friends have daughters and I don’t have one so I am THROWING this SHOWER!” she’d told my mom. Never mind that I was only back east for half a week, so there wasn’t time for my mom to do anything else. Never mind that my mother’s friends couldn’t easily attend because…
View original 554 more words
6 If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or y the wife you embrace or your friend who is as your own soul entices you secretly, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ which neither you nor your fathers have known,
7 some of the gods of the peoples who are around you, whether near you or far off from you, from the one end of the earth to the other,
8 you shall not yield to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him, nor shall you conceal him.
9 But you shall kill him. Your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people.
10 You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
One fact that concerns some Christians and elates some atheists is that 93 percent of the members of the National Academy of Sciences, one of the most elite scientific organizations in the United States, do not believe in God.
Trent Horn, the author of this blog post, then tells us that he is not concerned:
First, the National Academy of Sciences represents a small number of scientists. The Academy itself comprises only about 2,000 members, while there are more than 2 million scientists employed in the United States as a whole. This means that the NAS only represents about one-tenth of one percent of all scientists in the nation. Using this statistic alone to prove scientists are overwhelmingly atheists would be inaccurate.
I guess Horn does not believe in sampling, either. He should probably check with some of our political pollsters who will argue that if the sample is random, results can be projected to larger populations quite accurately, within some margin of error. Ok, it might not be 93 percent of scientists in general who are atheists. Maybe it’s 89 percent, but maybe 97 percent. I don’t think the exact number matters. What matters that the gap between the general population is huge, and therefore it should give one pause to think.
Horn then asks whether atheism creates scientists or science causes atheism.
I have a hard time buying into the concept that how I feel about religion or how I don’t feel about religion somehow affects my interest in science, my ability to grasp scientific concepts or my passion to spend years of hard work in college becoming a scientist.
To be clear, I am not a scientist. But I know that to be a good scientist you have to be intelligent. I have taken courses in calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, physics, and statistics, all just basic prerequisites to even be allowed to take real science courses. I have a sense for what it takes to become a scientist.
So the statement scientists are intelligent is probably true most of the time. The statement scientists are atheists also appears to be true some 90 percent of the time (to be argued). From those two statements one cannot conclude that atheists are intelligent, or inversely that intelligent people are atheists. It only makes a statement about scientists.
I know some very intelligent people with who hold Ph.D. and M.D degrees who are religious. But in general, one could argue that people who deal with factual analysis of the real world tend to reject religion.
You might want to browse Catholic Answers for some interesting articles and interpretations. It’s a well-organized blog with good writing.
When the original Islamic prophet Muhammad died in the year 632, there was a dispute over the succession.
The early leaders of the Muslim nation were called Khalifat Rasul Allah, the political successors to the messenger of God. Some academics transliterate the term as Khalīfah.
Sunnis believe that Abu Bakr, the father of Muhammad’s wife Aisha, was Muhammad’s rightful successor and that the method of choosing or electing leaders endorsed by the Quran is the consensus of the Muslim community.
Shias believe that Muhammad divinely ordained his cousin and son-in-law Ali (the father of his grandsons Hasan ibn Ali and Hussein ibn Ali) in accordance with the command of God to be the next caliph, making Ali and his direct descendants Muhammad’s successors. Ali was married to Fatimah, Muhammad’s daughter from his wife Khadijah bint Khuwaylid.
The dispute intensified greatly after the Battle of Karbala, in which Hussein ibn Ali and his household were killed by the ruling Umayyad Caliph Yazid I, and the outcry for his revenge divided the early Islamic community.
[I encapsulated these details from Wikipedia. Learn more details here.]
And thus the dispute started over 1300 years ago and continues to this day.
The two main sects still hate each other sufficiently, at least at the power and leadership level, that they are willing to kill each other and innocent bystanders for it.
Today 87–89% of the world’s Muslims are Sunni and 11-12% are Shia.
Did we really believe that by toppling Saddam Hussein, a Sunni, by the way, in Iraq, one of the countries where the Sunni were actually a minority, we would once and for good solve the ancient dispute between the two Muslim sects? Bush and Cheney, with presumably access to the advice of the best experts on Islam in the world, did apparently not consider this situation sufficiently before they dismantled the power structure in Iraq and the surrounding region. All they did was stir up the powder keg.
Cheney recently remarked that by 2007 or 2008, they had pretty much sewed up the situation in Iraq.
This is history we’re talking about. Things don’t happen in a matter of days, weeks or even months. History sometimes takes years or decades or more to “resolve” situations. The Shia – Sunni situation has taken more than a millennium now. Do we really think they’ll come together now just because the imperialist United States would like them to?
While many Americans now blast Obama for passivity, I applaud him. He actually seems to understand that further meddling with a situation that we don’t even properly comprehend can not result in any satisfactory outcome other than more innocent dead, more American soldiers dead, more billions of American money (that we don’t have) spent, and more anti-American sentiment around the world. Finally, there would be more terrorism directed against the United States as the great Satan, fomenting religious zealotry and escalating world-wide terrorism as a result.
If the Middle East were not rich in oil, none of us would care about it. We would not even be able to point to Iraq on a map. Do you need proof? Point to Liberia or Namibia on a map.
Now that oil as a valuable resource is in decline and the world is rapidly (on a historic timescale) converting to renewable energies, we will see the Middle Eastern countries revert to feudalism and religious irrelevance. I predict it will take no longer than a couple of hundred years and nobody in the industrialized world will give a hoot about the difference between Sunni and Shia – and they will still be killing each other.
Thus are the benefits of religion to mankind.