If you’ve been on vacation, you may not have noticed the firestorm erupting over an incident on Reddit’s atheism subgroup. If you’re not the internet junkie type, Reddit is a social news site where members link to stories in particular subject groups. R/atheism is the site’s atheist subgroup, with over 350,000 members.
A few days ago, a fifteen year old girl posted a picture of herself with a book by Carl Sagan. It was titled “What my super religious mother got me for Christmas.” (LINK) If you’re like me, you look at the picture and think, “How awesome is that! A mom being openminded and loving towards her teenage daughter!” Until I read the comments, I would have thought that’s what most people’s reaction would be.
I’m sorry to say I placed far too much faith in humanity. I’m still having trouble coming to grips with some of the things redditors said to her, and still grasping at straws trying to come up with an explanation for it all.
- Brace yourself. The compliments are coming.
- Bracin’ mah anus
- She is fifteen years old. ABORT THE MISSION. ABORT THE MISSION.
- The jeans I’m wearing are older then her. But then again, they’re full of holes.
- Aaaaaaand so is she…
By the way, the picture at the upper left of this page? That’s the picture. If we were talking about a girl wearing a skimpy bikini, posing seductively, I could understand why men would think sexual responses were in order. But there’s nothing remotely sexual about the picture, except for the fact that it’s a girl. And that screams misogyny.
In fairness, I could probably leave this story at a few jerks being jerks if this had been the extent of the jerkiness. These comments are rude, misogynist, and unbecoming of people who like to claim that a godless moral system is better than a Christian one. But it’s not enough (in my humble opinion) to generate an outcry. Part of blogging and putting yourself out there is that there will be rude comments. I’ve gotten hundreds, maybe thousands of them in my years of atheist blogging. Some have reflected people’s perception of my sexual appeal or abilities. They were not kind. But I’ve gotten over it.
The thing is, that’s not where the comments stopped. Not even remotely.
- Well, 15 is legal many places, including my country, so I’ll only have to deal with abduction charges.
- You call it kidnapping. I call it surprise adoption.
Ok. We just crossed the line from wildly inappropriate and misogynist to criminal. Even in anonymous forums, the FBI takes threats of rape and kidnapping seriously. And even in anonymous forums, normal adults know better than to say such awful things to a child. At this point in the thread, I was struggling for a reason — ANY reason — why someone would do this and think it would be a good thing. After all, I pride myself on trying to understand every side of a story before I make my judgment. But I’m stumped on this one. The best I can come up with is that these are sociopaths with no concept of human empathy, and I’m ashamed to be associated with them, even if it’s only as a member of R/atheism.
I could stop the story at this point, and it would be enough to be outraged about. But that’s not the end of it by a long shot.
- “Relax your anus, it hurts less that way.”
- “Blood is mother nature’s lubricant.”
- “BITE THE PILLOW, IM GOIN’ IN DRY!”
- I’d put billions and billions in your pale blue dot.
- I’d occupy her habitable zone
- I’d go at that so hard, my entire body would appear blue on approach
- Upvote for creative use of Doppler effect in sexual allegory
- I’d read that book so f***ing hard to you.
And yes… each of these comments got plenty of upvotes. One got almost 2000. There have been hurtful parodies of her picture. There have been so many sexual innuendos, invitations, and threats, it’s sickening to look at. And just to add insult to injury, someone took the next obvious step and blamed the girl for… well… being born female:
- “Dat feel when you’ll never be taken seriously in the atheist/scientific/political/whatever community because you’re a girl. :c”
There is one good side to this story. In nearly a week since this whole thing started, there are some good changes on the page. The most recent comment at the time of this writing reads: “It is so awesome to know that your mom accepts you and will get you a present that reflects your interests!!! It’s just nice to be understood. Sorry about the cruddy comments from people on here. a fellow geek.” You have to scan down the page a bit to get to the rude content, some of which has been removed at the curiously sober discretion of the posters. But don’t you worry… there are thousands of screen-shots documenting the full scope of the atrocity.
In over a decade of atheist writing, I have never found myself in this awful position. I suddenly feel ashamed to be associated with one of the largest internet atheist communities. I find myself loathing large groups of men who call themselves atheists. I am appalled that I have spent so much time over the years fighting a battle against the blatant misogyny in Christianity, only to be slapped in the face by my own philosophical brothers.
Well… here’s what I have to say to you, any of you who might have taken part in this. SHAME! How dare you waggle your anonymous internet genitals in front of a child while invoking the label atheist! How dare you spit on what so many of us have worked so hard to accomplish! HOW DARE YOU, when you know as well as anyone that we are still the only minority that it’s OK to hate!? How dare you indulge in your sick, infantile displays of repressed mommy issues, and your latent hatred of women, even though it’s your own fault for not putting the Cheetos down and leaving 4chan for twenty minutes to try to get a date with an age appropriate woman!? How dare you try to associate yourself with me, or any of the thousands of bloggers who fight for women’s rights — those of us who oppose hate and misogyny!?
There is simply no excuse for this. Internet anonymity does not excuse it. The girl being a girl doesn’t excuse it. The fact that it’s only a couple thousand out of three hundred thousand doesn’t excuse it. It is inexcusable.
As a final note, many — including myself — have pointed out that as the atheist movement grows, there will be inevitable instances of people doing bad things while wearing scarlet As. This is undoubtably true, and this incident surely reflects the phenomenon. I have no doubt that most of these posters are fringe dwellers, angry malcontents, under-socialized. I’m sure porn is the only sexual outlet for some of them. I take comfort in the fact that even in r/atheism, sanity seems to have won the day. But let me make this abundantly clear: This is not your mommy’s basement. This is not your daddy’s church. This kind of behavior will not fly in this community, and you will find no sanctuary should you continue to indulge your sick fantasies while invoking our name.
Life Without a Net 
I finallly got failbook and commented on the examiner piece, but unless I’m logged on to facebook, the comment doesn’t show for some reason so I’ll repost here just in case
And this is why I don’t post pictures of myself on the internet.
As for people doing bad things while wearing the scarlet A? I’m not surprised and it doesn’t bother me or take away from my atheism. I never felt ashamed to be an atheist, regardless of what other atheists are doing because I know that of course atheists will do terrible and stupid things. They are human after all. What does surprise me is when others are surprised.
None the less, it is good to see you try to improve the atheist movement.
Posted by Alison | December 31, 2011, 4:40 pmI agree with you, Alison. Frankly, my “atheism” doesn’t do much at all, and I couldn’t care less about the “atheist” angle if this was just about disbelief. But atheism in America has grown into something more than a metaphysical claim about the universe. It’s a movement, similar in many ways to the Occupy Movement. While it may not be structured in a traditional sense, it is still an organized mass movement of people who call themselves atheists — and the goals are real: political, social goals.
We also have as our goal the “taking back” of the term atheist. We’re very concerned that non-atheists view us as immoral evildoers by virtue of our disbelief. When someone does something abhorrent in an atheist forum, we have PR work to do, whether we like it or not. No one is going to claim that atheists are morally perfect, and I would certainly not expect it. But.. one measure of our morality as a group is how we respond to evildoers in our midst. In this case, the response needs to be clear: This is intolerable.
Posted by Living Life Without a Net | December 31, 2011, 7:37 pmPathetic! Do these retards realize they are never gonna score with a girl by talking like that?
I hope this little sister of ours realize that there is a bad apple in every tree. And i have seen plenty of theist pedophiles in life too. I am an atheist too but i will never behave the way they did.
Reddit is not the only atheist playground online. Richard Dawkins’s website is awesome too. she should check it out
Posted by Armand787 | January 1, 2012, 2:50 amOn a FB group I’m on I posted a video of a very crass and angry guy ranting against feminists who are obviously hypocrites and double-standards making sexist remarks and even cutting down one of their own who said what I just said. His argument is correct, but the way he presented it was off-putting for many, especially women. I posted it to see how people would react.
Not that you have done this, but you come close. I don’t think there’s many people who would agree with what happened, and many of the guys, if put in a third party position, might laugh but disagree and think it was horrible. I also think you skim over how online talking is so distanced from the persons involved that we will always be saying things on here that we would not say in person, even if drunk. Then to be ashamed of an entire ”community” for the actions of, like you mention, maybe a hundredth of said ”community” seems a little extreme. I don’t think atheists can all be put in one basket, as to why I don’t like the word ”community” being used for atheists by people in general. I think you are holding them to standards a little higher than what anyone needs to be held at. Atheistic moral or ethical standards are more intelligent, but are more difficult to construct and live by.
I agree with you. I think this is ridiculous, and I’m happy to see the girl call it a ‘shit-storm’ but still is on reddit and having fun. I do think you’re holding teens and under-age boys to too high a standard (cause let’s face it, a lot of the people on reddit are high school and college age even if they make remarks of her being ‘under-age’ I did that at 16 to appear older than I was). So, in effect, I am saying I agree with your post, I do not always agree with your quick ranting and vast generalizations, and I think you are being too critical in this case. Regardless, some proper PR work definitely is in order.
Posted by j-dog | January 7, 2012, 1:40 pmBut what is worse? A Christian guy who really thinks this way but totally represses his sexuality out of fear of not being perceived as being ‘holy’ or these guys that say what they think?
I think the sexual repression of society plays a big role in creating this. Men are continually force to repress their sexuality, then when there is the anonymity of the Internet, the freedom of not having a god or church watching you, all this pent up sexual frustration lets loose.
Posted by BOH | January 15, 2012, 2:54 am“But what is worse? A Christian guy who really thinks this way but totally represses his sexuality out of fear of not being perceived as being ‘holy’ or these guys that say what they think?” – BOH
@BOH,
Based on your 2 choices, What is worse is an Atheist who cant clearly decide what is worse!
A group of adult atheists who “say what they think” by hurling unsolicited crude sexual harrasment at an underage girl,
or,
A Christian guy who “represses his sexuality” and refrains himself from engaging in that display of immature behavior!
Posted by PG | January 15, 2012, 1:24 pmIf you need a benign celestial dictator to exist to coerce you into not being a sexist jerk, then please do go on believing in one.
Posted by Ian | January 16, 2012, 5:37 pmSince BOH only offered 2 choices of what is worse, should we therefore safely conclude that you chose the other given option of a group of adult atheists who “say what they think” by hurling unsolicited crude sexual harrasment at an underage girl”
Thank you for playing…
Posted by PG | January 16, 2012, 6:03 pmLet’s face it, your average American male has the mental age of a 12 year old so, no, it’s not surprising at all. You still this filth all over the internet, where people think nobody can find out who posted it. Guess they didn’t know the FBI can track you to your computer if needs be.
My questions too is, if men like this are leaving these disgusting comments about a 15 year old girl, what other children’s pictures are they looking at all over the net??
Posted by Reeves | January 17, 2012, 4:04 amIn case you didnt know, r/atheism is a default subreddit and makes the front page frequently. It is often commented on by many reddit users, not just frequenters of r/atheism. It is an unmoderated place where people can pretty much say whatever they want. If you want to hold anyone accountable, hold those accountable who typed the comments. It is ignorant of you to say it’s r/atheism’s problem.
Posted by sick_duck | January 18, 2012, 11:22 amAlso, some of your comments were said by the girl herself, such as “bracin mah anus”. Get your facts straight.
Posted by sick_duck | January 18, 2012, 11:24 am@PG
So I guess for you ignorance is bliss. It’s better for the girl to go through life thinking there aren’t sexually repressed men both Christian and atheist that think this way. Maybe you’re right.
But if we didn’t have such a sexually repressed society, men wouldn’t be this way. To expect many men in our society to not be this way is like expecting starving Somolians not drool and fight over a bag of rice. If they’re ‘well fed’ they won’t behave this way.
My point is just that the problem is not just these men, it’s society at large.
Posted by BOH | January 22, 2012, 2:58 amBOH,
You left out the option of the parent educating the girl to the facts of life so that she isnt ignorant, unless you are implying that you would prefer delegating that responsibility to perverted sexually repressed men.
BTW, the fact that you are attempting to justify the actions of these perverts is bizarre.
You seem to overlook the fact that these perverted men on R/Atheists who are of age of consent and free to engage in any sexual activity (With another consenting adult) , are trying to become “well fed” on an underage girl.
Posted by PG | January 22, 2012, 12:22 pmOh, of course — a person’s degenerate behavior is never their fault, it’s “society’s” fault. Typical liberalism. Marx forbid that we hold people accountable for their actions.
Posted by CB | January 22, 2012, 11:05 pmHow do you know? What is your evidence? And what do you even mean by “sexually repressed society”? Describe a society that is not “sexually repressed”, and explain how that would guarantee that men “woudn’t be this way” in such a society.
Posted by CB | January 22, 2012, 11:11 pm@PG
When there is a drive by shooting in the hood, the politcal right tells it’s because we’ve turned from God, drugs and welfare. The political left tells us it’s lack of social services and living wage jobs. So it’s societies fault but not much on the shooters.
But in this case, the bad behavior is 100% the perpetrators. So tell us what criteria I should use then to decide if bad behavior is the fault of society or not? Because we live in a society where sex is dirty and violence is glorified, I think we know the answer.
I not “justifing” the actions of these men. This is total strawman.
The fact that sex crimes and sexual offenses are treated differently than others is an example of us being in a sexually repressed society. I think a non-sexually repressed society would be one where you don’t get attacked just for suggesting a sexually repression creates these kind of men.
@CB
I would say in a non-sexually repressed society, people would use science and reason instead of superstition and prejudice to decide the when, where, how and with whom of sex. Where children are taught the facts and not religion and urban myths about sex.
Posted by BOH | January 23, 2012, 2:07 amA fantasy, in other words. Whether you care to admit it to yourself or not, the non-religious are just as prone to superstition, prejudice and urban myth as you would accuse the religious of being, and your false-dichotomy assertions serve as an example of such. Futhermore, I note that you fail to provide even one shred of evidence to support your pie-in-the-sky claims.
Posted by CB | January 29, 2012, 1:59 pm@CB
But, of course you can’t explain what is false dichomy. So we’ll just take it on faith that you’re right.
I never said the religious were alone in using superstition, predudice and myth, especially when it comes to sex. You’re making up a strawman.
Posted by BOH | February 1, 2012, 12:04 am“I would say in a non-sexually repressed society, people would use science and reason instead of superstition and prejudice to decide the when, where, how and with whom of sex.
Posted by BOH | January 23, 2012, 2:07 am
PG says:
Just out of curiosity, since you are relying on science to determine what is best for us regarding sexual freedom, what conclusions do you think science would evidence regarding the opportune age for a girl to begin to engage in sexual activity?
Posted by PG | February 1, 2012, 9:24 pmand the opportune age for a boy to begin to engage in sexual activity? Lets say for both, with adults over the age of 18…
Posted by PG | February 1, 2012, 9:29 pmSexuality is a very complex thing. There are a lot of factors that can go into whether a sexual experience is hightly positive, tramatic or something in between. Biological age is just one factor. The first time is often traumatic whether it’s 15 or 30. Society kind of arbitrarily picks 18 as some magic number where it’s taboo and criminal before and then legal afterwards.
As an analogy take driving a car. Being a good driver is based on understanding of a lot of things, understanding that other drivers are often jerks and idiots. Most of all practise and good teaching. So if a 30yo drives a car for the first time, they are going to be about as bad as a 16 y.o. There are some people that can be good drivers at 12, some are never good. But again because we are too lazy to evaluate each person we just pick 16 as the magic number.
If this was a 15y.o. boy getting sexual remarks from older women, he’d get positive comments. But a young girl is taught to be highly offended. Why? Because people want to control her sexuality, it’s power. So a lot of these popular myths like that it is bad for the girl and society for teenage girls to date and have sex with older men. It’s driven by jealous older women, cause it’s bad for them.
I would say for teenagers between puberty and 18, they should be required to pass courses on sexuality,Permission of parents, and psychological evaluation. But I’m dreaming because we’re a society driven by popular myths rather than science and reason.
Posted by BOH | February 3, 2012, 11:18 amBTW, In case you think people of a certain age are mature about sex decisions:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/02/03/older-people-getting-busy-and-getting-stds/
Maybe we just need to raise the age of concent to 80.
Posted by BOH | February 3, 2012, 11:32 am“I would say for teenagers between puberty and 18, they should be required to pass courses on sexuality,Permission of parents, and psychological evaluation. But I’m dreaming because we’re a society driven by popular myths rather than science and reason.” -BOH
Now BOH,
Apparently in your Atheist indoctrination, you were told myths and were withheld important scientific facts that the age for consent for sex in most Bible Belt states is 16 years old with only 10 states in the U.S.A enforcing a 18 year old consent of age!
This means that your science and reasoning of inceasing the consent age to 18, requiring passing courses of sexuality, obtaining parents permission, and psychological evaluations would actually invoke social guidelines that are far more repressive and draconian than what is currently on the books!
I would want Atheists to be more educated before lashing out at the rest of society, but I would only be dreaming, because as you so eloquently evidenced, they are a society driven by popular atheist myths…
Posted by PG | February 3, 2012, 9:53 pmI am only advocating repression when there is evidence of harm to individuals or society. If you want to believe something else so be it. That is the theist way, believe what you want to believe rather than the facts.
Posted by BOH | February 3, 2012, 11:39 pmLets review your statements:
“But if we didn’t have such a sexually repressed society, men wouldn’t be this way. To expect many men in our society to not be this way is like expecting starving Somolians not drool and fight over a bag of rice. If they’re ‘well fed’ they won’t behave this way” _BOH
And
“I would say for teenagers between puberty and 18, they should be required to pass courses on sexuality,Permission of parents, and psychological evaluation. But I’m dreaming because we’re a society driven by popular myths rather than science and reason.” -BOH
And
“I am only advocating repression when there is evidence of harm to individuals or society.” -BOH
BOH,
So basically, you are advocating that grown men over the age of 18 looking to become “WELL FED!” can begin dating and romancing boys and girls who are still in puberty and if it gets to the point that they want to have sex, the youth simply needs to pass courses on sexuality, get permission from parents, and have a psychological evaluation?
Do I have it right so far?
Posted by PG | February 5, 2012, 3:28 pmIt has been the cultural norm in many societies for older men with the means to support a family to have arranged marriages with teenage girls. Joseph and Mary in the New Testament are an example. But ironically, most Christians today would find an arranged marriage of barely past puberty girl to and older man disgusting.
American cultural values at this point in time are that this is taboo. Apparently society would rather see a 16y.o boy knock up a girl and then have the mom go on welfare rather than let a ‘dirty old man’ with the financial means to raise children. There is no proof that these girls are traumatized by this. If they are traumatized, it is because they are expected to be traumatized by people like you. People behave how the culture expects them to behave.
If we’re going to use the police state to control people’s sexuality, I’d like to see them prevent people that would be lousy parents from becoming one and then putting the burden on the rest of society and having their children suffer. Seems like if you we’re really concerned with child welfare you’d feel this way too.
Apparently you’d rather not use science and reason to decide what is best for everyone, but rather popular and religious myth.
Posted by BOH | February 6, 2012, 2:35 pm“It has been the cultural norm in many societies for older men with the means to support a family to have arranged marriages with teenage girls. Joseph and Mary in the New Testament are an example. But ironically, most Christians today would find an arranged marriage of barely past puberty girl to and older man disgusting….There is no proof that these girls are traumatized by this”
Signed -BOH
Wow, just wow!
Let me get this straight. So Atheists believe that an ideal non-sexually repressed society would advocate arranged marrages between older men and a child and that it does not constitute repression because in other societies its the cultural norm (Atheist reasoning), and that science today does not evidence any proof that these girls are tramatized or repressed by the marriage.(Atheist science)
Wow, just wow! SPEACHLESS!
Posted by PG | February 6, 2012, 4:11 pmYou are just making stuff up because you got it out for atheists. I did not use the word ‘child’, you are making shit up.
I am not for any kind of arranged marriage. I’m just pointing out that many societies had no problem with older men in a relationship with teenage women. In fact I think the idea of marriage and monogamy is outdated. This is MY opinion. All ‘atheist’ means is that one does not believe in any kind of god. Period you got that? Every atheist is different and has a different opinion of things. But in general, they only believe things with evidence not because of popular myth.
I am only saying there is no evidence that post-pubesent women are necessarily traumatized by sex with men of any age. So laws about what should be legal and illegal should be based on scientific study and not myths and predudice.
I think in non-sexually repressed society, people would not be hung up on age differences as long as both parties are physically and mentally mature.
Now go ahead and make shit up…
Posted by BOH | February 7, 2012, 1:05 amBelieve what you want to believe or what your told to believe, that’s the theist way to go through life.
Posted by BOH | February 7, 2012, 1:06 amActually BOH,
I learned something! After researching other societies age of consent laws I have learned and understand your justification for lowering the age of consent. And you are correct that the Bible does infact support your position. If the scientific evidence is that it has had no adverse affects on these other societies for all these years, then I would conditionally agree with you. The condition then would come down to the physical, Maturity and emotional levels of the teen just as you stated. The difficulty for “American acceptance” is that our society is not currently on that quick of a “Timetable” to the education process of our children into that higher level of expectant maturity because it would raise fears and doubts, create radical change, and threatens the whole American ideal of Childhood, abstenence, etc, Its also bad enough that parents have to worry about teen sex, now they would also have to worry about adults trying to become well-fed too. thats creates a a big uphill battle for you….
BTW, Were not too far off ideology regarding marriage and monogamy either….
Posted by PG | February 7, 2012, 4:30 pmSorry the sacrcasm doesn’t work with me. I’m not a ‘person of faith.’
I don’t think the bible supports my position. It was just a normal thing in Middle eastern cultures at the time to put young women into arranged marriages about the time they went through puberty.
The difficulty of American society accptance of less sexual repression is all the people hung up on the sin aspect of sex rather than scientific reasoning.
Posted by BOH | February 8, 2012, 9:47 amGotta love how you guys have this apparently irresistible urge for jumping to erroneous conclusions, all the while making such great pretenses toward being “evidence” driven. Such flagrant cognitive dissonance is what I have come to expect from your camp, however.
The implication of your statements is clear, whether you care to admit it or not. You have set up a dichotomy with “science”, “reason” and “facts” on one side, and “superstition”, “prejudice”, “religion” and “urban myths” on the other, but, as you yourself have tacitly admitted, the dichotomy is indeed false, as atheists are just as prone to urban myths and prejudice as you would accuse the religious of being. Furthermore, the dichotomy is false as it presumes “facts” to be the exclusive domain of “science” and “reason”, and that the “religious” are excluded from the factual, but you yourself have made claims that are not factual, and you have yet to evidentially support the preposterous idea that religious is devoid of facts, which further shatters the false dichotomy (assuming you place yourself in the former of the two falsely dichotomous groups).
No need, as I have provided the explanation that you erroneously claimed to be not forthcoming.
On the contrary, as I have explained, the implication of your statements is quite clear, even if you personally refuse to see or acknowledge them.
And you still have yet to produce any actual evidence to support your claims. Not that I actually expect any, of course…
Posted by CB | February 8, 2012, 2:36 pmApparently BOH, it seems you dont get very many people with initially opposing view points to actually come around in agreement to your position.
Does other societies with age of consent laws at less than 16 years of age evidence adverse affects? No!
Does the Bible evidence and support your position that girls at the age of puberty were sexually active? YES!
That presents a strong case to your position to lower the current age of consent laws with conditions as I stated above.
Posted by PG | February 8, 2012, 2:55 pm@CB
So according to reasoning then that “religion has facts”, then all myths and legends are true if any part of the story is factualy. So the legend of Paul Bunyon is true because there are indeed many lakes in Minnesota. Despite the fact that their is no evidence for 50 foot tall men. So we should just abondon science as an explaination of the lakes and just believe Paul and his Ox made all of them.
There is no false dichotomy because by your so called “facts” of religion, myth or superstition are not facts because they can not be proven. You can’t call something “a fact” that can not be proven to be true. You’re tring to redifine words of the languge.
@PG
I think it’s quite irrational to believe that evolution would have made people physically mature for sex at around a certain age, but then none would be mentally mature for sex until much later. Makes no sense. People like to control other people’s sexuality not to protect them or society, but for power.
Posted by BOH | February 8, 2012, 11:55 pm“People like to control other people’s sexuality not to protect them or society, but for power.”- Posted by BOH
Wait a minute BOH,
Your contradicting yourself. You stated that in your utopian non-sexually repressed society and I quote:
“I would say for teenagers between puberty and 18, they should be required to pass courses on sexuality,Permission of parents, and psychological evaluation. But I’m dreaming because we’re a society driven by popular myths rather than science and reason.” -BOH
.
It seems your utopian non-sexually repressed society actually raises the current age of consent in many states and countries, grants new “Powers” to the government agencies responsible for creating, and administering those courses and testing on sexuality, gives more control to parents of children up to the age of 18 versus the current age of 16 in many states, and grants new “Powers” to the psychologists creating and conducting the evaluations.
Your sex-utopia is actually far more repressive than what currently exists in many states and countries today!
Yeah, your dreaming alright…
Posted by PG | February 9, 2012, 2:36 amIt truly boggles the mind that you consider that to be an example of “reasoning”…
What is it with you and false dichotomies, anyway? If one myth happens to be true, that means all of them are? No, as any student of world religions can tell you, different religions carry opposing beliefs, so they cannot all be true. One obvious example is Jesus as the Messiah — Christianity accepts it and Judaism rejects as, as does Islam, so either Judaism and Islam are wrong or Christianity is wrong on that particular issue.
No, nobody is claiming that all religious myths are true — that is just your peculiar misrepresentation of what I did actually write. What I did say is that you have not substantiated the (implied) claim that no religious myth is true. I have also implied that there is at least one religious myth that is true, and I will expand on that here. Prior to Hubble’s discovery of the red shift, it was pretty much universally accepted that the universe was eternal and had no beginning. However, Hubble’s discovery rather shattered that belief (which itself was a myth, ironically enough). However, the very first words of the (King James) Bible are “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” In other words, the Judeo-Christian narrative taught that the universe did indeed have a beginning, long before Hubble. So that is one religious myth that has recently been verified by secular science.
I have just provided an example of a religious myth that has been recently verified by science, you your claim is simply incorrect, and the claim of false dichotomy therefore stands.
Posted by CB | February 14, 2012, 11:16 amThat’s really shameful act! I didn’t even notice that post. Thanks for pointing this out!
Posted by Chankey Pathak | February 19, 2012, 1:49 pm