News-Record.com

Wow, another post by an atheist that's
arrogant (and hypocritical in this case), poorly written, and bigoted. What a shock!

I don't think it's arrogant, hypocritical or even particularly atheist to discuss the very strange history of brilliant people deciding they are Gods or vessels for Gods.

Now if you accused me of being an anti-television bigot I'd have to cop to it.

I have good friends of many religions and I don't hold their faith against them. But most of them are capable of laughing at the strange historical quirks of madmen (and the ridiculousness of modern televangelists) without getting huffy.

"Theorizing that the Earth is round more than a thousand years before it's proven, contributing essential building blocks to physics and democracy -- those are impressive feats for which we'll have to excuse your crazy."

"excuse your crazy." What?!**%#
One of J. Murray's poorly written phrases, I suppose. Did you mean to say: “to excuse the fact they were crazy.” Just a thought.

I have said many times on this blog that there are MANY orthodox Christians, me included, who grimace at some of the things the big televangelist stars say and do. Some of it may be the Peter Principle, or perhaps Charismatic egotism amplified by a huge audience. But I guess those of us who are “family” are a bit more understanding than those who are already anti-Christian or atheistic. They do say some good things, and some biblical things, ( I’ve watched thme at times) along with the questionable comments. And there are SOME solid and balanced examples as well. It’s just the nature of the TV beast. But from your commentary there is hardly anything else to judge Christianity by but the media megareps. How unstudied and facile – AND prejudicial.

You seem to have it in, not only for the religious media moguls, but for Christians in general, judging from the tawdry and calculated things you post, riddled with innuendo and vitriol. Again, I say, if these were anti-Semitic comments you would be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail by your liberal editors. But since Christianity is the THE enemy of humanists and atheists, owing to their diametrically opposed belief systems, it is open season on any and all Christians – especially the eccentric fringe types. This seems to be your axe to grind, Joe: your intellectual fetish. Your blog subjects are PREDICTABLY anti-Christian in one way or another. Perhaps you might consider picking on some other cult or religion – there are plenty around you know. You are so obvious, my friend. If you have to vent; perhaps you could do it in a more balanced and civil manner. But that wouldn’t be sensational enough, would it?

This particular post doesn't pick on Christians.

One sentence of it picks on Pat Robertson.

He's got it coming.

But if you'll look back through my posts on the blog you'll see that the thread running through them all isn't anti-Christianity (I was raised by Christians, I went to Catholic school, I have many Christian friends) -- it's general irreverance toward religion. That irreverance has touched on all sorts of Christians (more of them in America, so they're getting more positive and negative play everywhere in the Western world), Messianic Jews and Muslims -- not to mention marginal or long-dead religions where beans are evil and smoking is sacred.

Nancy's a committed Christian -- and although she doesn't use this blog to preach you'll generally find in her posts a seriousness of purpose that proceeds from the assumption that religion (particularly Christianity) is a good thing.

I'm not religious. You'll therefore find that my posts generally proceed from the assumption that religion is more strange and amusing than anything else. No sacred cows with me -- though that very phrase gets us dangerously close to mocking Hinduism...

My editors (every last one of which is a practicing Christian by-the-by, with nary a Jew, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist or even Catholic among them) read my posts here and elsewhere. Sometimes they're amused. Sometimes they're a little uncomfortable. But they -- and I -- are all Americans. We like discussion. We like varying viewpoints, even when we don't agree with them.

But if you're going to be offended by every post on any blog that doesn't take your belief system as seriously as you do (and come to the same conclusions), you might want to just start skipping mine.

Yeah, Joe- I reread all of your posts ridiculing Muslims and Islamists.

It's safe ridiculing Christians- we don't torture and kill you if we catch you or burn your town down.

Sad- very little in this blog has to do with any religion. Most of the time it is simply a vessel to deride Christians because a few definitely un-Christlike mask their ulterior motives in Christian clothing.

The Christians I know are far from the odd lot you keep parading as examples of what we are.

Well, let's not kid ourselves JW.

There are plenty of Christians who will torture and kill you for ridiculing, criticizing or questioning their religion - or even living your life in a way that's not consistent with their religion. That's not the majority of them, of course -- and none of the Muslims I've met are homicidal, either. There's a psychotic minority of people of many of the major religions who can't see past themselves and want to do physical harm to people who openly disagree with them.

But I'm not suggesting that all Christians (or all people of any other religion) are psychopaths. A few of my posts have asked philosophical questions about various religions, I've poked fun at the extremes of faith -- but the idea that that's so offensive to you is really puzzling. You're a citizen of a nation built on the idea of pluralism -- that people can and should have wildly different ideas and question, doubt and even mock accepted wisdom.

When Mark Twain wrote "The Innocents Abroad" there were Christians who were so offended by his gentle mockery that they wrote and said hateful things to him, even threatened violence. But more stable Christians, secure in their faith and welcoming of different viewpoints, laughed with him. Some of his closest friends and family were prominent, historically important Christians.

I'm no Mark Twain -- but I like to think I'm on the side of those who would have laughed with him, even when he mocked things I held dear. I like to think I would have thought long and had actual discussions when he questioned something I took on faith.

A lot of people were offended by the episode of South Park that mocked both Christians and Atheists. I'm a fan of Richard Dawkins' work, but when he was depicted as having started a world war by passionately pushing atheism to the exclusion of all other thinking (and naively having graphic sex with a poorly-disguised transsexual he thought was a woman) I laughed hard, talked with friends about the points and would never have argued the they shouldn't have been made. Was something I cared about mocked by a show that didn't show the side of the argument I agree with? Sure. But I know my worldview. I'm interested in seeing other peoples' -- particularly when it's something with which I disagree.

JK, I like the perspective from which thee writes. To examine thee's posts will help any person truly seeking to learn things!

Shalom

darryl you are hilarious !! :-)

meeth thinkest thateth thouiest isest theist funniesteth..............

"Theorizing that the Earth is round more than a thousand years before it's proven..."
Depends on what you mean by "proving" this fact. The Greeks proved it by checking out shadows in wells a few hundred miles apart. You don't need to sail around the world to prove it's round, you know.

As to your other issues, regarding genius and mental instability, there's obviously NOT a connection. For every anecdote you can put together, I can list some very stable, sane geniuses... such as Einstein, Asimov, Sagan and Galileo. Now if you can provide some statistical support for your notion, that might be a different matter. I'll look forward to it.

Regarding your "link" between insanity and religion... as natural for human beings as religion is, the instances of unstable people with religious manias is rather unremarkable... wouldn't you agree?