Skip to main content

 The foundation of morality should not be made dependent on myth nor tied to any authority lest doubt about the myth or about the legitimacy of the authority imperil the foundation of sound judgment and action." [Albert Einstein]

On the one hand, the lack of evidence to support the myth of Christianity requires an inordinate amount of energy and time constructing elaborate arguments, most or all of which are built on one fallacy of argument or another.  That time and energy would be better served in finding solutions to all of life's problems - especially the problem of a religion that claims we are designed to be dependent upon a church - rather than arguing about an infinite abstraction. Arguing about an infinite immaterial God is like arguing who has counted nearest to infinity. 

On the other hand, those who claim they truly know more about what the word "God" means than you do, and use this claim to support why they and their ideas must be accepted as the basis of morality, never accepted the arguments made by others who make the same claims, even as they demand that their own arguments are enough to prove they are right. 

In truth, their arguments only prove to themselves they are right, even if they do not do so to anyone else. And as they see it, if they are convinced by such arguments, then that is all you should require to accept their claims. And anyone who fails to see the logic of their arguments as superior to everyone else making the same arguments, so the Christian will assure you, deserves to be tortured forever for failing to "believe" the Christian claims, regardless of how immoral Christians often behave and how chalked full of logical fallacies the Christian arguments are.

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...