As I’ve predicted on this blog before, Christian terrorism has reared its ugly head again. I won’t regurgitate the news you’ve all probably heard, but a well-known abortionist was shot down in his church yesterday. 

When a “radical” Muslim kills in the name of their religion, there is usually a chorus of disapproval from the moderate Muslims.  Many experts have pointed out that these moderate Muslims create a context wherein the radicals may operate.  Those of us at a distance are able to rub our chins and wonder … “perhaps it is not just the radicals, but all of Muslims that are to blame.” 

As if on queue after this shooting, many Christian leaders have come out against this type of thing, and in so doing, offer us a profound comparison between Christianity and Islam. They really aren’t much different. Any time a person becomes disciplined in disengaging their rational mind in order to adhere to a principle, profoundly illogical leaps like this become more common. I believe that the cause of this type of violence is the outcome of years of cognitive dissonance. A person becomes practiced in switching between the logical world and illogical faith until their mind becomes almost totally bifurcated. Eventually, they can lose touch with reality altogether. When that happens, a person might kill a Doctor, or wage war on a country thinking they are the embodiment of Biblical prophecy.

The root of the problem is not insanity—it is irrational faith. The murderer  believed that what he was doing was justifiable homicide. I can speak from experience when I say that there are many Christians who will outwardly say this is a terrible way to deal with the situation—but inwardly they quietly approve. They do believe this is justifiable homicide. That tacit agreement from moderates allows the radical movements to thrive—and the terrorism will continue.

 I truly wish this weren’t true. George Bush betrayed his real motivation for invading Iraq to then Prime Minister Jacques Chirac in 2003 : he believed God had called him to defeat the Biblical (mythical) enemies of Gog and Magog.

Bush is believed to have told Chirac: “This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins”.

To my Christian readers: this is why it is unwise to believe that the Bible is a magic book. You will do crazy, incoherent things because you will compare reality to a book written by crazed prophets thousands of years ago. And I’m not just talking about the lunatic fringe of Christianity—this was the President of the United States! A man YOU prayed for on a regular basis. A man YOU voted for (probably). A man YOU believed was placed in authority over us BY GOD. YOU gave him his power. You should give account for 4,600 coalition deaths in Iraq. You should give account for over 36,000 coalition wounded. And worst of all, You should give account for the deaths of over 100,000 Iraqi civilians.

Do any of you really believe that Iraq is Magog? DO YOU?

Sometimes my avocation of promoting reason over superstition becomes a bleak exercise in futility. When I read news like this, I just shake my head and wonder how anyone could continue to voluntarily submit themselves to the Catholic church. Or any church for that matter. The Catholics’ wickedness was only able to become this systematic because they had such license over such huge segments of society for so long. And it’s no wonder … the atrocities detailed in this report pale in comparison to how they terrorized Europe for almost 1000 years.

The argument of “People aren’t perfect, just forgiven” just doesn’t work. We’re talking about a religion that has systematically tortured people for a millennium. In related news, it turns out that religious people are more likely to be in favor of torture. I wonder why? Perhaps it is because they view God’s love as perfect love. If God is even there, he is silent, detatched, and utterly uncaring about our pain and woes. This “example” of love seems to trickle down to his followers, for whom torture is a natural expression of compassion.

Not all Christians are idiots (I mean it!) but the people who see Jesus in a Cheeto are.

(In other news, my class final is Thursday so I will be badgering you all with greater regularity after that.)

An Orange County teacher, right here in my neighborhood, was just found guilty of violating the First Amendment by calling creationism “Superstitious nonsense.”

My reaction may surprise you, and I’m even disagreeing with the venerable PZ Myers, who I quoted below. But I think there are some important reasons why this decision was the right one. Before I get into that, however, let me say that I respect Dr. Corbett for his stance, and completely agree with him in content. There is nothing he’s said that I would blink twice about saying here on my blog. But it’s the context of his statements that make me feel as if the law has done its job by setting fairly reasonable boundaries.

Here’s the thing … even the most correct world view can be guilty of harassment and tyranny. The French Revolution is a great example. They were extremely well-meaning people with extremely forthright principles who ran roughshod over an entire culture. Dr. Corbett, while he is correct in his philosophy, should not have promoted hostility toward any other group—no matter how wrong or silly that group may be. Because—unlike my blog—his classroom represents our government. When looking at cases like this, we shouldn’t weigh the merits of the decision on the basis of how it complements or contradicts our own beliefs. What we should do is weigh the precedent against what would happen if the tables were reversed.

This is Orange County, after all. What would happen if a Creationist teacher said in a classroom that atheists were morons who were just trying to justify their sinful desires? That statement would be the hostile equivalent of what Corbett said, and it should not be tolerated. On the other hand, since this was a classroom, a teacher should never be required to teach creation. It does not hold up under scientific scrutiny, and therefore has no place in secular education. But a teacher should be able to teach evolution without showing hostility to specific cultural or religious groups who do not agree with it. If it were a college classroom, it might be different, but a High School student ostensibly has no choice but to sit in a certain public school and listen to a teacher. Hostility should not be tolerated.

As many have said on this blog, atheists are capable of atrocities. Hopefully that will never happen in our country, due to a set of laws that are pretty good about protecting minorities.

PZ Myers … whose blog “Pharyngula” I’ve come to read on a daily basis, gave the commencement speech at USC this week. It’s very short, and encapsulates exactly how I feel.

While I don’t consider myself a “public intellectual,” I still abide by much of PZ’s advice. Here are two paragraphs that I found most inspiring:

- Here’s another one you may take for granted, but I assure you, much of the world outside your circle of nerds does not: Criticize. It’s one of the most powerful tools in the scientific toolbox, and self-criticism and constant testing and evaluation of our ideas is how we make our understanding greater. If you haven’t gotten out of the lab much in the last few years, you may be surprised at how much shock and dismay you can generate with the simple words, “I think you’re wrong, and here’s why.” Don’t be shy about using them!

- Go ahead, be offensive. I’m offensive all the time, and I’ve got reams of hate mail to prove it. I say that women should have the right to decide what to do with their own bodies, and are just as good at science as men, and the angry mail streams in. I say that gay people should have the same rights as straight people, and I have offended a vocal horde right there. I say that all religion is foolish tosh and an affront to reason and the dignity of humankind, and boy, do I get outraged letters. And it’s all good. You don’t have to agree with everything I say, because the role of the public intellectual is to spark the argument and provoke change, not to dictate it. Do it.

Sam Harris’s web page is finally live.

Its goal is to promote secularism. It’s got some outstanding efforts, including an annotated version of the Bible that shows its myriad of contradictions, brutalities, and even the good stuff.

About 10 years ago, I was having a conversation with one of my co-workers about some of the crazy thing you read about people on the internet. He seemed particularly prone to believe anything he found there. I admonished him to be more skeptical, and suggested that just because something had been found in print does not make it true.

Soon I excused myself to get back to my desk to ostensibly work. In about five minutes, I pounded out an “urban legend” and inserted a few items into my story that would: 

1)       Make it believable and

2)       Make people want to tell the story

Simple.

I printed it out, and walked it back to my friend, tossed it on his desk and said “wow, look at THIS one I just found.” He read it, laughed, and said, “I believe it!”

“Of course you do,” I said. “But I just wrote it.” 

He believed it because he wanted to believe it. He believed it because it had some really believable elements in it. He could identify in some small way with the protagonist’s illness, but it made him feel superior to the poor bloke because he was able to control himself better. Plus, the story indicated that there is some grand retribution against someone who allows their predilections to go too far, which makes him  feel better about repressing his  predilections. It is so easy to prey on these simple human desires. 

As a goof, I submitted the story to the Darwin Awards and promptly forgot about it.

But the story doesn’t end there. About five years later I got a chain e-mail from a friend that showed “This year’s Darwin Award winners.” I could not help but look and sure enough—there it was! I have never been more amused about something I wrote. I then forgot all about it again, and today I decided to Google it.

My story has published 255 times on the internet. Each publication presents it as true. 

If you want to see it, follow this link. http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=%22Officer+Hradj%22&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=

Google wanted to correct my search, so ignore the first few “Officer Hardy” references. Follow any link that quotes “Officer Hradj.”

It pays not to believe everything you read. Sometimes people do purposefully try to pull one over on you.

I could not come up with more bizarre stories than what today’s news provides. A video was shot about a year ago as part of a documentary, and apparently leaked to Al Jazeera. The video feed is slow, but what it shows is astounding.  The video shows a group of American GIs stationed in Afghanistan, who have obtained copies of the New Testament written up in local languages, and intended to distribute them.

At the time the article was written (Monday), there had been no response from the Pentagon. However, yesterday the Pentagon did reply.

They destroyed the Bibles and are apparently distancing themselves from the entire affair. That is probably the best reaction I could hope for. Here is another link from a Christian news bureau. Comments after this article are as frightening as they are inane.  Some see this as a freedom of speech issue.

But really, if purveyors of the gospel are carrying both a Bible and a Gun, doesn’t this show their tremendous lack of persuasiveness?

I’d like to recount a very personal story.  This is probably one of the most intimate details about my life that I could share, but I think it is germane to the goal of this blog.

About six years ago I had a best friend who was deeply troubled with addictions and health issues. His life was a mess. He was miserable, losing his mental faculties, and was watching everything he had worked for in his life slowly slip away. One night I got a call from him and I could tell he was very, very low. The conversation went something like this:

Him: Hey Jim, I need to tell you something but I want you to promise me something. Me: What?
Him: Promise me that after I tell you what I’m going to tell you that you won’t call the police.
(Now, at this point I thought my friend had broken the law, or was intending to break some law. Whatever it was, he was like a brother to me and I didn’t care.)
Me: OK, I promise. Now what’s going on?
Him: I want to kill myself tonight. I don’t want to die alone though, so I want you to come be with me while I die.
(Long Pause.)
Me: Are you kidding me?
Him: I’m very serious.
Me: I need to think about this.
Him: You don’t have time. It’s already started. I just took something, and I should be gone in a few hours.
Me: I’m on my way.

I got into my car in a state of shock. I’d grown up with this guy, and I couldn’t believe what was happening. I thought about for awhile and was in a deep conundrum. I had made a promise to my best friend during the most desperate time of his life! How could I break that promise? I’m embarrassed to say that I was in such a cloud that I lacked the clarity to know what to do. So from the car I called a friend, and she asked one question:

“What is more important: you keeping your promise, or you saving his life?”

Clarity achieved. I hung up with her, and called the police. They arrived at my friend before I did. I didn’t even get to speak to him, but only saw him scowling at me while they put him in the ambulance. He died on the operating table 7 times that night, but they revived him each time. Later, he thanked me for going against his will and breaking my promise.

But this brings up a very serious question for Christians, because what my friend was going through is parallel to my current state according to Christians. I am apparently choosing to suffer eternal death, so why isn’t God calling the police? Christians say that God loves me—even more than I loved my friend. And his love is so great that he allegedly allowed his son to die for me. So why won’t he usurp my own will to save my eternal soul from damnation? Why won’t he intervene? Is he so weak that he cannot intervene? Why is he silent? Is he pouting? Why does he provide me no plausible evidence whatsoever?

Christians will say that he has given me evidence, but the evidence for Christ is equal to the evidence for Zoroaster, Allah, and Krishna. It is all laughable and clearly man made.

If God really loved me, and my soul was really valuable to him, and he were really all-powerful, he would do whatever it took to save me. He would set his “higher ways” aside and simply reach down and show me.

“What is more important? Saving my eternal life or sticking to some obtuse Godly method?”

God doesn’t want to save me from hell because he isn’t there, and neither is hell.