God and Son

Poking the bloated corpse of religion with a pointy stick to hear it fart.

Grow a pair, humanity.

on December 15, 2012

Over 20 children dead in a Connecticut shooting.

Dead because THEY DIDN’T BELIEVE… I shit you not.


Bryan Fischer spent the first hour of his radio program today discussing this morning’s truly horrific shooting at an elementary school in Connecticut, which he, of course, blamed on the fact that prayer, the Bible, and the Ten Commandments are not taught in public schools.

Fischer said that God could have protected the victims of this massacre, but didn’t because “God is not going to go where he is not wanted” and so if school administrators really want to protect students, they will start every school day with prayer:

And this link, from a guy who would be President… Yeah… Another asshole:

Never one to let a chance to politicize a tragedy pass him by, Huckabee doesn’t want to talk about guns or male violence or the culture of violence he participates in on Fox News. No, he wants to blame the victims of the crime by suggesting that if they had let his God in His Way, this wouldn’t have happened. If we had God in our schools, they would not be a place of “carnage”.

Prayer circles, better places, God’s actions… all things to hide behind. This is a terrible tragedy and one I cannot start to comprehend (as a father myself). It must be horrific for those involved… But WE need to take ownership of OUR problems, and stop candy coating these things, stop making it into some religious crusade or action of God.

This is a human thing, and it’s time to drop the safety blanket, the blame protection, of religion.

My thoughts are with all those affected.


I tried not to go over my APRIL JONES rant again, but to recap… The ‘social media’, your Facebook, Twitter, Reddit etc, will now be full of attention seeking whores asking you to LIKE or SHARE pictures and posts regarding the shootings. This is nothing to do with those poor kids, but it is everything to do with people using the killings as a way to gain popularity.

Fuck them.

Same to the religious groups who are praying for the children and families. A waste of time, ineffectual at best, an WHO ARE YOU PRAYING TO?

Yeah, your fucking god who let this happen.

There is no God. Just grow up and take responsibility and stop using religion as a security blankie.


57 responses to “Grow a pair, humanity.

  1. Becca says:

    To say there is no God is just as ignorant as saying there is. We don’t know, so no one should pretend to. But I agree with what you’re saying.

    • Scrib says:

      You also don’t have any proof that a puppy made of chocolate pretzels created the universe. You weren’t there. You don’t know. (Really hoping you see how stupid you sound, now.)

      • LB says:

        On the contrary.

      • Becca says:

        I was merely saying that I disagreed with the sentiment of, “there is no god.” I get what the writer is trying to say that we can’t hide behind something like religion to explain everything when man is definitely the culprit. I do not see how I sounded stupid. What gets to me a lot of the time is when certain atheist claim that people who believe in god are stupid and that, “DUH, there is no god!” I’m saying that it’s the same as a religious person saying, “DUH, there is a god!” I’m not stupid, but I believe people who say things with such arrogant black and white words ARE.

    • LB says:


      Not so arrogant. It has its basis.

      Arrogance would suggest no thought into the matter, and, well… a blind faith in there being no god.

      To quote the late Christopher Hitchens:

      ““I have been called arrogant myself in my time, and hope to earn the title again, but to claim that I am privy to the secrets of the universe and its creator — that’s beyond my conceit.”

      • Becca says:

        There is basis in both beliefs. There I said it, beliefs. You can believe whatever you want; there is no god. But I choose to believe the opposite. And I also don’t impose my beliefs on other people.

  2. Sam says:

    *affected, not effected.

    But other than that, good post. Blaming this on the victims is beyond sick; it’s delusional.

  3. Q says:

    To blame the secular school system as the cause for this tragedy is yet another excuse for The US to stick it’s head in the sand about gun violence. The rest of the world looks on in disbelief that again this has happened again! From the rest of the world: For the love of your kids put your: gods, your constitution, your fear and your moral superiority to one side and talk about this like adults that want to stop kids being shot.

  4. Leo Roberts says:

    Ermmm …. Whilst I wholeheartedly deplore anyone who suggests that the lack of Biblical teaching in school is a factor, let alone the primary factor, for this unspeakable event you can’t have it both ways: you can’t say that a God you don’t believe in ‘allowed’ this to happen. You may as well blame Santa Claus or the tooth fairy…

    By the way, I call it an ‘event’ rather than a tragedy because, for me, a tragedy is something which is not preventable. This event eminently was – sensible gun control allied to proper investment in mental health could, and only could, have prevented this. However, it seems that Americans are way too interested in defending their ‘constitutional rights’ (a constitution that was written in a different age with different issues. In much the same way as right wing conservative Christians continue to bleat on quoting passages from a book which was written even longer ago!

    It matters not to me that you don’t believe in God. I do; and will continue to pray for the kids, their parents and all those affected. Whilst I’m doing that, I’ll also pray for America to, as you suggest, grow a pair and introduce effective gun control that might just stop idiots, or people with mental health issues, getting hold of deadly weapons….

    • LB says:

      I’m with you on the event/tragedy.

      I don’t believe in accidents, because when you burn through the cause analysis, you eventually find a preventable ignition point.

      These ignition points might not be dealt with for all manner of reasons (no available technology/insufficient funding/very low probability of occurrence), and as such ‘educated risks’ are taken. You never hear of an event occurring due to educated risks though.

      • leoroberts says:

        But when the ‘very low probability of occurrence’ is due to people who like to play with guns and have money using that money to make sure legislation isn’t passed that would stop them, and others, having access to guns…..

        • LB says:

          Very true.

          The low probability is based on ‘everything has been done that could financially or physically be done’ – the rest is the risk acceptance.

          Not everything was done in this case – and seldom is.

  5. trent says:

    Amen. 😉 Brilliant post.

  6. Steve says:

    Most of us who accept that we don’t know whether there is or isn’t a “God”, but had a more reasonable education were taught that “He” gave us free will. This despicable act is not “His” fault, if “He” does exist. It is humanities fault. It is the shooters fault. It is societies fault for not recognising that he had some, clearly, deep seated issues that should have been dealt with. We have the free will to regulate firearms. Free will to provide better help for mental illness. Free will to teach children better ways of dealing with their feelings and their feelings towards others. Free will to teach them love and respect. It doesn’t matter whether we know about God or not. It matters that we care about each other.

  7. Adam says:

    I find it hard to believe that in this day and age people are still having a fight about god and religion – who knows who is right just let people believe in what they do or do not believe in. But to go around stating that some deity has control over what we choose to do is just stupid – One of the main causes of this is how readily available firearms are – So let me ask you this is your constitutional right to bear arms really worth the lives of so many. Your right to bear arms may have meant if you wake up in time and manage to get everything sorted in time you could potentially defend your home and family but it has also given rise to numerous gang shootings with innocent by standers getting shot. For crap sake one of your presidents was killed due to that stupid constitutional right. Stand up for yourselves have a look at how much harm it is doing to your families especially the innocent children.

    I am not saying all crime will stop if there are no guns, but more families would have a younger generation more friendship circles would be complete and more children would have parents.

    Think about it please.

  8. gislebertus says:

    Wow…I really wish this guy was kidding…

  9. greyhound1405 says:

    God is too busy watching priests molest children in churches!

    • LB says:

      How could you say that?!?

      Are you saying the almighty isn’t able to do some godly video recording/watch later thing on the molesting, which would allow him to have saved those kids?

  10. AM says:

    Full disclosure up front, I don’t believe in any deity. What stuns me is that some people are happy to believe in a God so petty that “He” would allow innocent children to be killed because “He’s not wanted”. Truly shows the infantile nature of these people, and that what they believe in is merely a projection of their own stunted morality.

  11. Beth Mitchell says:

    On October, 2, 2006, a gunman walked into an Amish school in Pennsylvania and killed 5 school girls, wounding 6 more. So either the Amish are praying to the wrong God ( the Christian one) or these people are spreading absolute bullshit. Because if God wasn’t in that school, then were was he that day?

  12. Ron Tennant says:

    Too paraphrase “Shit happens when good people do nothing”. America needs to look to the civilized world and admit they have got it wrong. It will take generations of education to remove guns from general circulation in the USA. When politicians start to serve the people and not their own need for power, ( never going to happen ) only then will the need for change be realised.
    In a country where a single shooting doesn’t make the front page there’s little hope. Collective memory is short. We have a saying here ” Your a long time dead and in a hundred years know one remember you.

  13. Roger says:

    I come from Sweden which is pretty much the most secular country in the world(thank god!) but so far we have had no school shootings. God must really be on our side, uh?

    • Scrib says:

      I’d say a bigger factor is your health care. When citizens who are ill, psychologically or physically, aren’t left to rot on the vine, they and their loved ones don’t seek revenge or act out.

      Just an idea. 😉

  14. While i agree that we cannot go around and making up excuses for terrible acts of violence. I reject the arguement that as God is used as a comfort blanket does not itself prove his non-existence. It shocks me to think that so many people reject the existence of God on the basis of a lack of religious upbringing. I may not agree with someone who does not believe in God however if their basis for rejecting God is through a logical and rational arguement then i can at lest regard their arguement as a challenge to my logical belief in favour of God’s existence.

    These people who blame a lack of religious teaching for this horrific attack seem to ignore the fact that the religious concept of God includes that he gave mankind free will meaning he does not interfere with it.

    In response to those saying that A God could not be good as he failed to intervene. Many of you see that shooting dead the person responsible for this attack would have been good in order to protect a larger quantity of people within the school. If God is almighty as most religions suggest then he has just as much power to choose not to act as he has to choose to act. But you would then argue that by failing to intervene he did not make a good choice. Let’s suppose God had shot the gunman. would this have been good? surely it cannot be good to shoot a man. This could be God’s attempt to reject the greatest happiness of the greatest number approach to right and wrong and lead towards a notion that things that are wrong are always wrong

    There an answer which does not depend on the words of an ancient book which is more a reflection of the culture when it was written than the word of God

    • LB says:

      For any of that to be plausible, there has to be a god.

      I have explored this, in depth. I once was religious. no great horror occurred, no significant event, to turn me back to the right godless path. I didn’t have something make me suddenly hate god, because hatred of the non-existent is irrational.

      Anyway, I studied. Probably… most likely… to a depth greater than most who say they believe.

      The results that keep coming back point to a bell curve that pushes god further to the lower percentile of any probability. Enough to satisfy me that the minuscule area that is still in doubt, is purely down to a logical reason not being found yet.

      Note I say not being found yet, and NOT due to a logical reason not existing.

      Just because we don’t understand certain things DOES NOT mean that a god exists, filling that void.

      • I agree that for this argument to make sense there does have to be a God. But so far your only stated reason to not believe in God is that his non-existence is self evident. I will concede I too am guilty of neglecting to prove God’s existence in my earlier comment.

        In response to your point that believers worship a ‘God of gaps.’ The fact that as we continue to fill gaps in our understanding eventually we will reach a point where we cannot understand the world any further. There is still an ultimate beginning. Take the theory of evolution for example. Notice how perfectly it is geared towards maintaining a good quality gene pool. Also why does a stone fall when i drop it and why can it not rise when i let go of it. The universe is governed by these laws of nature which as far as we can tell are absolute. I find it extraordinary that these all just exist by chance.

        Also as far as we know every physical movement has a cause therefore the first cause could not be physical or it to would require a cause. the only logical alternative would be that something metaphysical must have started the chain of causation.

        • LB says:

          The only logical explanation is your limited knowledge of everything.

          I’m not saying you’re stupid, because I too have the same limited knowledge.

          In fairness, the whole human race is still pretty dumb.

          There are things we don’t know, and there are things we don’t know that we don’t know.

          In 1805 no one would have imagined a mobile phone, let alone be able to argue about which one is best, to a point where certain makes have cult followings.

          You speak about knowing about the beginnings of time. Well, there is so much between then and now that we don’t even know we don’t know about, that we can’t possibly begin to say it must be a god or whatever.

          I know that there are things I do not understand. I also know there must be countless things yet to be discovered. Things we can’t even begin to imagine.

          For me though, via the way science is progressing, I am more certain each waking moment that none of this is down to some ethereal being.

  15. Xyalon says:

    Let me get this straight… people who believe in god, the same people who preach that we are gods children and he loves us and want us to believe in him too, also want us to believe that he is the sort of omnipotent being that is perfectly happy to let young children die out of spite? On top of that, there are people who actively purport to know the inner workings of a mind that is, so they claim, omniscient and omnipotent?

    I’ve said it before: if there is a deity and the bible is actually factual (rather than some convenient mythology which happened to be written down and no-one got around to updating it) then we are lumbered with an omnipiotent deity which is riddled with hypocrisy and quite possibly verging on the sociopathic.

    So, we were made in his image, and we are all his beloved children and he gave us the greatest gift of all, free will. So far so good. Then we find out that, whilst we have the right to execute this free will, we must do it in a way that he sees fit or else we’ll be punished for eternity; we must believe in him or else we run the risk of damnation. Added to this, we now have the concept that if we don’t believe in him then he won’t do a thing to prevent something such as this.

    The resulting image gleaned from the above is that God is an omnipotent being which, for some reason, is so damned needy that he requires the adoration of his creations, and throws a tantrum if he doesn’t get it. I’m sorry, but if a being is truly omnipotent then preventing something like this from happening would be simple, but he just couldn’t be bothered because he’s sulking that he’s not the number one pin up in every school. Of course, if you want to throw in the “free will” card, that he cannot make people do something or stop them from doing something, then it means that you can’t blame the victims or the institution for being godless, because he wouldn’t have prevented it anyway.

    I don’t believe in any sort of deity, I realised this when I was very young. However, I know that if I did believe then I would loathe that deity with a passion and definitely try to organise some sort of rebellion.

    • Nicole says:

      I came here to say that were I indoctrinated into such a religion as this that I would resent worshiping a deity who is apparently so petty as to allow this to happen for such a reason. However everything you just said covered everything I wanted to convey much more eloquently than I ever could. Kudos.

      • LB says:

        Thank you.

        I am a bit of a blunt object when it comes to this cartoon, but with one cartoon box, a direct approach is often the slap some people need.

      • Xyalon says:

        Thank you. I just think that if someone truly believes the world as under the rule of god, then they should ask themselves what sort of ruler uses the threat and implementation of torture to ensure that their laws and authority are unquestioned.

        If I believed, I’d look to rebel. In terms of belief, Atheism is that rebellion.

        • leoroberts says:

          Really not trying to be theological here: but assuming that mainstream Christianity means believing in a God who ‘plays with humanity’ is a basic misunderstanding of Christian belief and is more akin to the ancient Greek/Roman belief systems.

          Christians do nit believe that the world is ‘under the rule of God’ but that we should try and live our lives by God’s Rules. A Gid, I accept, whom many do not believe in… But to belittle and mock those who do believe because they are different to you seems a little self-serving, don’t you think?

          Sadly, some Atheists jump on the mad ramblings of the more radical (and delusional) Christians such as those from Westboro Baptist Church and Bryan Fischer and assume that all Christians think that way – which does a disservice to both sides.

          Ultimately this issue isn’t about whether God exists, or what sort of Gid S/He is if exist S/He does…. It’s about how a society is going to address the issue of firearm availability to people with mental health issues.

          • leoroberts says:

            And all those ‘Gids’ us what comes if typing on an iPhone whilst trying to watch the cricket… Sorry about that!

          • LB says:

            My personal view on religion:

            Studied, followed, researched… Made my mind up that it is not for me.

            People want religion, then fine. BUT the moment it impacts on anyone but themselves (or other willing and free minded person), then they can back off.

            If I hated all levels of religion, then I would delete all the pro-religion comments here, or start ridiculing the commenters.

            I appreciate well thought out feed back, and metered religion has provoked, and continues to provoke, good philosophical debate & mental development the world over.

          • Xyalon says:

            Yes, I will admit that I am jumping on the views of the more radical deists, but please understand that that is merely because it is their views that cause more harm and are the ones which are in need of reevaluation, such as the views of those in the above article.

            For those who use religion as naught but a fountain of strength and moral anchor, for those who have faith and that faith allows them to be better people and more tolerant of people who are different, for those people I have nothing but respect. I am not for one minute so close-minded to believe that everyone who is Christian is the same intolerant radical, just as I am sure that not all deists don’t believe that every atheist is a hate-filled, irreverent heretic. As far as I am concerned, everyone should be free to practice whatever faith they believe in as long as they neither use it as a right to proselytize or force it on others; when they do then I am happy to respond of a similar kind.

            In general, I am not trying to mock, merely put forward a counter argument to those who jump on the “If we were all Christian then this wouldn’t happen” bandwagon instead of addressing the real issue which, as you put very succinctly, is the availability of firearms to people with mental health issues. Although, generally, I’d go one step further and posit that the availability of firearms in general is more the issue here.

  16. Those children’s death has NOTHING to do with religion and/or personal beliefs. I DO believe in God, but I still see the point to your post.

    They didn’t die because God isn’t allowed in schools, and they didn’t die because we don’t have stricter gun control laws. They died because ONE person decided to take their lives.

  17. Jon-Paul says:

    I would like you to know that what I’ve read I have enjoyed. However, as writer’s I suffer the same way as you do regarding the acceptance of personal responsibility. Furthermore, I am a Christian man who also finds it offensive when people – for no other reason than they are talked-out – ostensibly go to religion to try to sort things out.

    In my experience it is the same old the three things you never discuss at a cocktail party…sex, religion, or politics. Notwithstanding there are reasons why these particular topics were chosen and there exists reasons for adhering to the advise. As we look around the world – or simply our own worlds – what is there that can be challenging, electrifying, or even exciting when one endeavors into the realm of politics? I haven’t tried religion lately insofar as the polarity has really gotten extreme. Now of course that leaves us with sex; personally, I don’t have a problem discussing sex in general. Now of course this is if what is being talked about is sex; however, all too many times the simple idea of sex turns into someone’s treatise on gender, equality, preference, and any other of the multitude of issues.

    Now then…towards the end of your writing you state, “The ‘social media’, your Facebook, Twitter, Reddit etc, will now be full of attention seeking whores asking you to LIKE or SHARE pictures and posts regarding the shootings. This is nothing to do with those poor kids, but it is everything to do with people using the killings as a way to gain popularity.” But all things being equal, isn’t that also what you are doing?

    Furthermore, your statement of “Same to the religious groups who are praying for the children and families. A waste of time, ineffectual at best, and WHO ARE YOU PRAYING TO?” carries the same connotation as your first quibble with the exception that now in that second statement you’ve gotten judgmental – which I’m sorry to say is just plain bad form. One last item here; you state, “There is no God.” Hey okay that’s your opinion and it is your blog, albeit, to others it may be offensive just like at the cocktail parties.

    • LB says:

      In answer to the social media part: I am not asking for this to be shared etc. if people want to, then good. It’s a good message to get out, but unlike the ‘social media’ whores, I am not asking people to do this ‘if they agree’ or to LIKE THIS if you don’t like child killings.

      Also, I am not using photos etc of the shootings, or stealing others work, to then put in my tweet feed, Facebook wall etc, just to build my numbers up.

      I am not guilting people into sharing, but it is a double edged sword & a fine line at that. I had a statement that I wrote, that I wanted to make. People can share as they like.

      As for offensive with ‘there is no God’… Tell me what isn’t?

      I don’t go out of my way to offend, although in a short cartoon I have little room to be my usual empathic & calmer self.

      I’m not about to pussy foot around trying to make sure everyone is pleased. Even a mundane subject like ‘who was the best Bond?’ can annoy and offend, just because an opinion is bound to have a contrary opinion. When it comes to religion or politics even starting the conversation is going to offend certain people… and that’s before they’ve even heard what has been said.

      What I try to do is let people have their say.

      You might have offended me suggesting there is a god! Really sir! How can you say that?! – but I jest… People having a religion does not offend me, it’s what is carried out under religion that offends, angers, me.

      Opinions based on thought out & researched reasoning may offend, but I will give you your right to air those opinions, as it is the only way we can learn.

      In fact I appreciate contrary opinion backed up with a well phrased argument and discussion, after all, that is philosophy in action… science in action. If my opinion cannot stand being tested by a contrary opinion, then I would recognise that my view might have errors, and as such I will adjust accordingly.

      This is why I get annoyed when certain web sites do not post comments (or vet/block comments) that the site owners disagree with. How can anyone learn from that, be they the writer or the commenter?

      I have, on several occasions on various blogs, re-written a piece, or added a section, based on sent in information backed opinions that I thought were well put. I might not agree, but I recognise that ideas need sharing.

      I have even posted cartoons that I wouldn’t even talk about normally, purely because the message needed to get out. Some of the research I do for this site makes me sick, as I read so much bad being done in the name of religion.

      I have a responsibility as the cartoonist I guess. Okay, I don’t… It’s not written anywhere that I should, but I feel that I do.

      Some of the cartoons are wincingly blunt too – but that’s because in some cases the subject does need to slap people into thinking.

      As it has been said: “You can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot please all of the people all of the time”

      Offence is opinion v opinion at the end of the day.

      “It’s now very common to hear people say, ‘I’m rather offended by that.’ As if that gives them certain rights; it’s actually nothing more….. It’s simply a whine. It’s no more than a whine. ‘I find that offensive,’ it has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. ‘I am offended by that.’ Well so (*)(*)(*)(*)ing what?”

      – Stephen Fry

      I go one further: Unbacked statements of ‘I’m offended by that’ are lacking purpose and are just a whine.

      So… I won’t apologise if I offended you (it is not intentional, just unavoidable), as that would be me going contrary to my educated opinions, much like if you comment contrary to me.

      We are all different. The thing is to find the middle ground of respect.

      • Jon-Paul says:


        This response from you doesn’t really warrant a reply or any effectual comment. I start with I’ve enjoyed everything I’ve read thus far. Then in an attempt to enhance your calmer, empathetic, and (hopefully) comprehending self, I furthermore within the first paragraph mention “personal responsibility” inasmuch as most people who go to religion or God or what have you, realize nothing of personal responsibility.

        Now this next part is important– so take a breath and relax. What precisely did I say about being offended? Critical reading. “I am a Christian man who also finds it offensive when people – for no other reason than they are talked-out – ostensibly go to religion to try to sort things out.”

        Did I say that something you said, or alluded to, was offensive to me? Hell no! Quite openly I avoided using that kind of language understanding how or certainly cautious of some of the ways my audience thinks. Capisce?

        The social media is the social media and use it as you please. Furthermore, with your reference to “There is no God…” I’m sure if you reread my post you will see that I wasn’t at all referring to myself; I merely stated, “It is your opinion, your blog, albeit to others it may be offensive.” Now, I don’t see a reference to me, or anything regarding me. Please in the future, please read what it is that I have written, try and remember that it is content (substance) that counts and please read with more care because you quite frankly, are all over the place with your response vis-a-vie opinions, debates, common ground, offensive, offended, whining, web sites that screen their incoming emails, social media, and no apology. Whew!!

        • LB says:

          I humbly apologise. I did indeed misread your comment, and as my mind had been dealing with other topics ‘less educated in response’ than yours, I fell for the trap of reading your response whilst still in the other mindset.

          • Jon-Paul says:


            We all understand that communication is difficult enough, even when people are face to face or one-on-one. Yet when it comes to communicating within the written form there are so many barriers.

            I believe it takes a hellava person to apologize; and I do humbly accept. It seemed to me that with the amount of comments (kudos, btw) and a typically difficult topic to address being a bit tired or weary is all it takes. No grudges, no b/s, hopefully just common ground. Again thank you!

  18. jadedlilwriter says:

    I agree with your post 😀 I wish others would stop using outside forces to blame.

  19. Maddy says:

    I totally agree with your outrage at the comments you quoted but although not religious myself, there are people out there who manage to be religious without being so literal simplistic and offensive to the majority.

  20. Where is his supposed Christian compassion? And then you have the gun lobby arguing that it happened because the teachers weren’t allowed to carry guns, which if they were allowed, may I suggest this stupid God botherer would make a suitable target.

  21. Ian says:

    Zealots are bores whether they are religious or atheist. Like people who always have to have the last word in an argument, they are haunted by the thought that not everybody takes their word as the only possible interpretation that is beyond further questioning. Of course it is alright for *them* to adopt this attitude because they just know that right is on their side, but if the opposition adopts the same technique, then it is further proof of their obstinacy. Mr Pot, meet Mr Kettle. The sad fact is that Mr Pot and Mr Kettle need each other, because nobody else is listening. Anyone with common sense avoids fundamentalists of any persuasion. Neither side is *ever* going to budge, and so the argument quickly descends from logical reasoning into trading insults.

    In the present instance, we are faced with the wholesale slaughter of children. Does this arouse compassion? A debate about gun control and mental health? Well, it does in sensible people. But not the zealots, oh no – they just know what the real story here is. Thus, they start mouthing off that God is punishing American policy on religion in schools or some other such foolishness. This would be a great opportunity for the atheist zealots to score a few points by showing sensitivity and respect for the bereaved families. But no, not a bit of it – out come the cliches about how seeking comfort in prayer is useless, It doesn’t matter what the situation is, neither side can resist producing their habitual arguments and then calling anyone who doesn’t agree a traitor to the cause.

    Face facts – all these arguments do is reinforce the dogma of believers and deter everyone else. Nobody wins, nobody’s mind is changed. So why bother in the first place?

    • LB says:

      But without them, who would the middle grounders have to complain about?

      As for why bother?… Well, women have the vote, slavery was abolished, equal rights has come of age, gays can marry in more places than before, and through this ‘useless’ bickering, the Scout movement is going to let atheists into the group.

      Yes, there’s a lot of pomp and theatrics, but underneath that are the mechanisms of change. Sometimes you need the show to get the idea moving.

      • Ian says:

        But therein lies the problem – they don’t. Fundamentalists have been circling the same roundabout for a hundred years or more. And what’s more, it suits them to do so.

        Take evolution versus providential design, for example. If fundamentalist Christians had to give up going on and on about Creationism being given equal prominence, people might wake up to how intellectually limited the charismatic church really is. But doing battle with the evil atheists doing the devil’s work in our schools stops the flock thinking ‘okay, we’ve won that battle – now what?’ Similarly, if finding another fossil that by the miracle of teleological reasoning ‘proves’ evolution really happened, then a frankly peripheral branch of the biological sciences can carry on presenting itself as being at the vanguard of the battle against the wilful ignorance of Christianity (or at least Dawkins et al’s straw man version of Christianity).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: