Skip to main content

The Immorality of God's Design

"Not long ago I was sleeping in a cabin in the woods and was awoken in the middle of the night by the sounds of a struggle between two animals. Cries of terror and extreme agony rent the night, intermingled with the sounds of jaws snapping bones and fle sh being torn from limbs. One animal was being savagely attacked, killed and then devoured by another. "A clearer case of a horrible event in nature, a natural evil, has never been presented to me. It seemed to me self-evident that the natural law that animals must savagely kill and devour each other in order to survive was an evil natural law and that the obtaining of this law was sufficient evidence that God did not exist. If I held a certain epistemological theory about "basic beliefs", I might conclude from this experience that my intuition that there is no God co-existing with this horror was a "basic belief" and thus that I am epistemically entitled to be an atheist without needing to justify this intuition." 

Quentin Smith, "An Atheological Argument from Evil Natural Laws"

That the most natural of all laws of nature is that immeasurable suffering is inseparable from a law of survival that requires one species of animals to prey upon and devour another, with man being, as Franz de Waal pointing out, the Nazis to every other species of life on the planet, may not in fact be proof that a "God" does not exist. 

It does, however, prove that the kind of God being sold by Christians as a "loving God" is irreconcilable to such laws, for such a "God," one said to be endowed with infinite power and ability and wisdom, could surely have created a planet in which all forms of life were vegetarians, or merely survived off of water and photosynthesis. On such a planet, the suffering that comes from not only animals eating other animals, but even the mass storage and slaughter houses needed to feed humanity their full of cows, chickens, pigs and other animals, would be easily avoided. 

How much easier would it be to avoid committing murder if no such murder was designed to be the necessary means by which we survive in the first place? That we can murder other species but not our own is easy to say, but when Jews are compared to cockroaches or rats or swine, as Nazis would do, such dehumanization makes it all the more easier to commit genocide, since that is what is needed for civilization to thrive. Is it any wonder that such dehumanization was coupled with describing Jews as enemies of the German state? 












Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Christianity is More Unnatural Than Homosexuality

I grew up in a family that is about as homophobic as Phil Robertson and the Westboro Baptists, only they're not quite as boisterous about it; at least not in public anyway. They have also conveniently convinced themselves  that their homophobia is really just their unique Christian ability to "hate the sin, but love the sinner" (even though these very same Christians adamantly refuse to accept that people can "hate Christianity, but love the Christian").  The sexual superiority complex necessarily relied on by such Christians is, of course, blanketed beneath the lambs wool of the Christian humility of serving "God." They interpret their fear of those who are different, in other words, as simply proof of their intimate knowledge and love of God. And the only thing such Christians are more sure about than that their own personal version of "God" exists, is that such a "God" would never want people to be homosexual - no matter how ma...
  The world changes according to the way people see it, and if you alter even by a millimeter the way people look at reality, then you can change it.” James Baldwin   

Why Are Republicans Pro Life?

Most people don't realize that the Supreme Court has been in the hands of the Republican party since at least 1970! In fact, even in the landmark case of Roe v Wade that legalized abortion, SCOTUS was inhabited by 6 Republicans and 3 Democrats, and the vote was 7 to 2. One of the reasons is that the Republican Party has absolutely ZERO desire to win on the abortion issue. And that's because abortion gives the GOP a clear focal point with potentially unlimited organizing power. And it's an even simpler message to sell than religion, since we are "pro-life." (if that was true, however, they wouldn't be actively trying to repeal healthcare for up to 30 million Americans, nor would they be so pro-gun, pro-war, pro-death penalty, pro welfare cuts, pro- social security cuts, pro- drone strikes, etc). The Republican party officially became "pro-life" in 1976, thanks to Jesse Helms (R-NC). The only reason no serious challenge was brought within the pa...