FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from

Amused Muse

Inspiring dissent and debate and the love of dissonance

My Photo
Location: Surreality, Have Fun Will Travel, Past Midnight before a Workday

Master's Degree holder, telecommuting from the hot tub, proud Darwinian Dawkobot, and pirate librarian belly-dancer bohemian secret agent scribe on a mission to rescue bloggers from the wholesome clutches of the pious backstabbing girl fridays of the world.

Saturday, February 09, 2008

"You'll Be Sorry!"

I can't imagine a mentality more degraded than someone marching up to us in a coffee shop and saying, essentially, "You'll be sorry that you're atheists!" and asking a person why they exist.

What this person actually said was, after a long harangue about how "everyone in the world needs an answer to life" and "has to have somebody to talk to" (and that's not true - not if you've studied eastern philosophy and religion. The Asian conception of religion, God (if any), and reality is very different from those of the Abrahamic religions), was "you'll see!"

"When you're on your deathbed, you'll see! What would you say to a child who's dying? You have nothing to say! Everybody needs an answer, and you do, too! You'll see!"

My answer that, 1) this person who’s assuming that I’ve never had trouble in life obviously didn't know anything about me, and 2) in my experience, children are quite irreverent about death and have less fear of it than adults, and 3) each person's death belongs to that person alone and I would be more inclined to listen than to preach, was drowned out by this person then telling me not to speak for everyone, which I wasn't trying to do, since he wouldn’t even let me speak for myself.)

"Why are you alive?" this person blared at us, and kept on his harangue while I asked if he knew about the sperm and the egg. Why am I alive? Is he joking? If he's so offended that I'm alive, holy shit, just wait a while and that will take care of itself. If that's not fast enough for him, because he's a mean old coot, then kill me and STFU.

I didn't initiate this discussion but I left it in tears. Man, I didn't see that coming at all. This from who looks like a kindly old man. (Was that a threat BTW?)

That has got to be the lowest blow ever by someone who is obviously never satisfied with anyone. This person has bitched and bitched about religion. This person asked for a copy of the Minnesota Atheist newsletter. Well, he was obviously looking for a fight, or else he's crazy.

What is this "answer" of which people speak? I don’t get it. Life is almost completely nonverbal. The earth orbiting the sun, the waves crashing on the shore, the wind in the trees, birth, death, eating, sleeping, making love, dance, art, music - all nonverbal. Where is there an "answer" in all this? Where is there meaning in life, except in the living of it? Do people actually want to reduce physical phenomena to a trite fortune cookie blurb? Is that what the word "spiritual," tossed around so much that it now has no meaning, mean to them?

Life is doing. When you do something instead of sitting on your ass watching life pass you by, and when you avoid making mistakes instead of hurling yourself into making bad decisions, or no decisions at all (which is a decision), you're much less inclined to ask "What's it all about?"

"What's is all about?" In my opinion, that has to be the stupidest question the human race ever came up with. We learn by doing, and we find purpose by doing. But that kind of purpose cannot be explicitly verbalized to someone who is so profoundly unhappy as to ask someone why he or she exists. Life is what happens to you while you're asking other people what it's all "about." As the Chinese say - "Westerners are always getting ready to live."

Personally, I think our ability to speak and engage in abstract thought is overrated if it culminates in this inexplicable sense of despair, which gives rise to this perverse desire to hurt someone else's feelings to the point of slamming into a coffee shop and informing someone that "you'll see in the future, when you're under stress and cry out to God," just so they can proclaim, “I told you so!” Yeah, and if I were waterboarded for a sufficient amount of time I'd probably betray my family, my friends, and everything that I hold dear, too. Should that define who I am? If I were starving and the only alternative was to rob someone, I suppose under certain circumstances I'd do it. Should that define who I am?

The behavior or a person reduced to an extreme state of misery should not be the basis of human morality, unless you think the rich and the middle class should be regularly stealing bread to feed their families, or driving away from gas pumps without paying, or holding someone's Jesus statue hostage even if the neighbor doesn’t have a dog pooping all over one’s yard.

As I said before, I think the problem is that too many people are cut off from nature. There’s no “meaning” or “meaninglessness” in nature, nor does there have to be. Nature is necessity and necessity is relentless, but never deliberately cruel. I realized this in the Galapagos.

Nature will eventually kill you, but it will never mock you, call you fat, make you feel ugly, call you stupid, humiliate you in front of others, scare you with hell-talk, engage in emotional blackmail, or make you feel like you can never be perfect enough. Nature just is, as I just am, in all our glorious imperfections. Screw the people who are always looking for perfection, an answer, or "meaning." They are more hurtful and incomprehensible than the so-called "meaninglessness" of life could ever be.

UPDATED: Scott to the rescue!

Labels: ,


Blogger cathauto said...

I'm sad that you were made to cry... It is hard to wear your life story on your sleeve for all the assholes who would otherwise be humbled by it. As a woman who lives life with reality on my side, I feel proud. Reading your post tonight (which I read regularly but have never commented) makes me feel like I am not alone. And neither are you. Keep doin' it.

February 09, 2008 6:52 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

Thanks, dear.

February 09, 2008 7:20 PM  
Blogger Joshua said...

<3 Kristine.

It's clear from this person's anger that he's living every day the life of suffering and stress that he says would force you to turn to God. Why else would he work so hard to upset you, if not that he wants company in the pit of despair where he lives every moment of his life?

February 09, 2008 7:28 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

Right. WTF did he want me to do, pretend?

I suppose someone could get at me through fear like that, but all religion ever made me feel was fear, and that's all it would do "in the future." What good is that?

February 09, 2008 7:37 PM  
Blogger Scott Hatfield . . . . said...


I don't know what to say. I feel anger that you were blindsided by a hateful bully, and a sick feeling, since I know that so many of my fellow believers would probably try to make excuses for the guy's bullshit. I have to wonder in the back of my mind if the jerk would've done the same thing if you were a man, and as I think about it, I doubt it. I'm sorry that happened to you and I'm going to link to your post.

February 09, 2008 8:34 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

Well, Rev. Barky was there, and this guy was arguing with him, too. Barky held up better than I did.

He's just some bitter old man. Maybe he's actually senile. I've certainly been insulted before but I don't how anybody gets off asking a younger person why she's alive, in effect, asking why she doesn't kill herself. I was really shocked.

February 09, 2008 8:43 PM  
Anonymous slut said...

Kristine, to me it sounds like the guy lives in terrible fear, deep down inside. He's afraid atheists are right and he can't bear the thought.

That's why he hates us. It wasn't personal. Atheists are beginning to come out in the open. We're beginning to point out how stupid religious beliefs are. Theists don't want to have their fantasy shaken.

Sorry for your bad experience. It sounds frightening, as well as maddening.

February 09, 2008 10:52 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

Some things have come together for me when I slept on this. This is happened to me several times, and it's been the "sing-of-yourself, spread-your-wings, mommy-never-let-me-do-what-I-want" people who've turned around and attacked me like this.

I now realize that there's a difference between bitching about your past, which sounds independent, and actually getting over it, living your life, and being independent. This person is not independent. I was taken in by his bitching, but he just doesn't like anybody - believers, atheists, etc.

Now that I think about it, everything that he says is negative. It's never his fault. Other people have done terrible things to him, and blah, blah, blah. Well, we all have shit in our past, but some of us try to get over it (and I'm trying to).

I have things to escape into - dance, writing, science, music, literature, etc, and I try to remember that. Does he? I wonder.

I personally think that when people fight about "religion," they're really fighting about worldly things, and in this case, his problem is he never truly rebelled. I'm not even talking about rebelling against religion - he never rebelled, period. I did. Boy, did I rebel! But he never let go of those apron strings, because he's waiting for permission to rebel, or something like that. Well, that doesn't work. You have to grow up all by yourself.

February 10, 2008 11:41 AM  
Blogger Forthekids said...

I agree the guy shouldn‘t have said what he did. What I can't figure out though is how his statement was any different than say, this one:

"We're beginning to point out how stupid religious beliefs are. Theists don't want to have their fantasy shaken."

Or, for other examples of bullying, look no further than across the pond at your favorite MN Professor or the AtBC characters.

It's much easier to spot a bully when you're the one being attacked, no?

February 10, 2008 5:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are those who believe in an eternal hell
With fire and brimstone and sulphurous smell.
Well, they can just go to their mythical perdition.
It's no skin off my nose; they have my permission.

February 10, 2008 8:49 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

I agree the guy shouldn‘t have said what he did.

Why not? As you said yourself, "I'm living by a moral standard, whereas the rest of you [atheists] aren't," and I think you called us "dead" to boot.

As for what Dawkins says, or PZ, did they march up to you and surprise you like that? Hurl it in your face? Have either of them commented on your blog? (Have I, lately?) Take it up with them yourself - you're a big girl. (But Dawkins especially didn't target you, because he doesn't know you exist, does he?)

Bye now.

February 10, 2008 9:22 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

At least I'm not "the most hateful, foul mouthed, frothing bitch in the biosphere." Right?

February 10, 2008 9:31 PM  
Blogger Forthekids said...

Kristine, I don't know what you're refering to with the "dead" quote. You obviously live by your own sense of morality...I'm thinking it's probably pretty similiar to the religious belief system you grew up with albeit a bit of tweaking to make it work for ya.

And, fyi, I've tried to "take it up with PZ". When I emailed him once, he told me to never email him again and if I did he wouldn't respond. I did absolutely nothing to deserve that, whatsoever. I honestly tried to talk to the man. That was early on when I first came across his blog and decided I'd try to talk to him privately. I wasn't yet aware of his deep seeded hatred for "creationists".

He is completely closed off to discussions with those he deems unworthy of his self perceived massive intellect. I'm just a "creationist" after all.

BTW, I apologized to Abbie for that statement...ask her if you don't believe me.

I've never seen PZ apologize for anything. He believes "creationists" to be scum of the earth, and they deserve whatever he dishes out.

How you can defend that man is beyond me.

February 10, 2008 10:51 PM  
Anonymous Janine said...

FtK said...

And, fyi, I've tried to "take it up with PZ". When I emailed him once, he told me to never email him again and if I did he wouldn't respond. I did absolutely nothing to deserve that, whatsoever. I honestly tried to talk to the man.

WOW! And I do mean WOW! FtK seems to expect everyone to be rather dumb and owning short memories. Please, FtK, give us a reason PZ would want to hear from you? Let us see, what did your good pal Sal call PZ: Paul Zoophile Myers. And you did your part in spreading that lie and defending the liar. Don't you dare play innocent. You sound like you are sniveling.

Also, quotes are not "dead". You cannot weasel out of what you have said. And it seems there are quite a few people around to make sure they stick. My advice to you is this, drop the topic. You are on the losing end.
Most people try to life to some kind of morality. But it seems that those of the Abrahamic faiths keep trying to claim it was their invention. And I will say this, it seems that Kristine has done more than "tweak" the ideas she was raised with. She outright rejects them.

And at the risk of being a PZ defender, what does he have to apologize for. It is shown over and over the creations either argue from ignorance or outright lie. And it would seem that "scum" is the right word for those who knowingly lie.

February 10, 2008 11:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This toad that made you cry: he's nothing but an ignorant old horse apple.

February 11, 2008 1:01 AM  
Anonymous JanieBelle said...


I'm sorry you were accosted by such a dirtbag.

I've been thinking lately that the reason the Abrahamic Fundy Asshats of the world feel the need to spread their bile is mainly fear. They're so afraid of dying that they have to force the world to accept their rectally inspired delusions in the hope that if everyone in the world knuckles under and agrees with them, perhaps their fantasies will come true. There's evidence close at hand that they don't really believe half the shit they vomit up.

It's pitiable to be that terrified and insecure. Deep down, I guess they all suspect that the nature of reality will not conform to their juvenile Santa-Claus fairy tales, and they just refuse to wrap their brains around that. It's probably also what drives their psychotic control issues, being part and parcel of the same insecurity-effect.

Nevertheless, we are all forced to deal with their fear as they fight to force it on the rest of us. It's hard, but I just try to pity their lamentable condition and help quarantine the infectious agent.

Fundy whack jobs are dangerous, but the underlying condition of overwhelming terror should probably be treated like a mental disorder. Treat and correct what you can, but prevent them from doing any more harm to themselves or others wherever possible.

The ones that are just immoral, disgusting pieces of lying crap are probably hopeless, but some can be saved. It is for those and for the kids that we fight the good fight.

The rest of the Abrahamic Fundy Asshats are for mocking until it's legal to put them in straight jackets or feed them to the lions. Ideally, education will cause them to go extinct before then, but I doubt it.

Again, I'm sorry you were molested by the nut-job.

February 11, 2008 8:47 AM  
Blogger Forthekids said...

"WOW! And I do mean WOW! FtK seems to expect everyone to be rather dumb and owning short memories. Please, FtK, give us a reason PZ would want to hear from you? Let us see, what did your good pal Sal call PZ: Paul Zoophile Myers. And you did your part in spreading that lie and defending the liar. Don't you dare play innocent. You sound like you are sniveling."

Oh, for the love of Darwin. I didn't spread any lies about PZ or Skatje. The woman posted *at my blog* on the topic in question. Then she went back to her blog and wrote a lengthy post on the subject (even refered to me in the post). Three months later, I linked to her post in it's entirety so there were no misunderstandings when I commented on her views.

I didn't "lie" about anything. Get your facts straight, please.

February 11, 2008 9:30 AM  
Anonymous Janine said...

FtK, sorry, I do not buy that. I know the difference between arguing a point in order to try to understand the event and advocating the event. And you and your pal Sal misrepresented Skatje's point. In more blunt terms, you lied.

This is all I have to say about the subject. Anything else will be just both of us going "Neener! Neener!" at each other. I will end with this, learn what facts are. Please.

February 11, 2008 9:58 AM  
Blogger Forthekids said...

Janine, you'll have to point out where I "lied". I await your response. There was no lying involved.

Nor did I misrepresent a thing Skatje said. I didn't use the word "advocate" like you seem to be implying. I also backed up every single word I wrote with links to her original post.

You're simply ill informed, didn't follow the entire episode or refuse to acknowledge the truth.

February 11, 2008 10:38 AM  
Anonymous Janine said...

Last time, you lied when you said she approved of bestiality. Please learn what words mean, you might finally understand. This ends now. This has gotten way off topic. Unlike you, I really do not try to hijack threads.

Kristine, for that, I am sorry.

February 11, 2008 11:06 AM  
Blogger Kristine said...

This fight between religion and atheism stops the minute people call off all their creationism, global warming denial, "changing" homosexuals, praying to convert the Jews, and the rest of their nonsense. Because it's immoral. End of story.

February 11, 2008 11:18 AM  
Blogger Forthekids said...

You've still not made your point. I said she "condones" bestiality, not approves of it.

I also wrote in my post that...
"her views are that it is acceptable if you enjoy that type of a relationship."

Obviously, *she* doesn't enjoy that type of relationship as that was very clear in her post. Yet it was also clear that she doesn't deem it unacceptable for others if they want to become "more expressive and intimate like we in human-to-human relationships?" dug up this topic, not me. I will not have people accusing me of lying when I was *extremely* careful in relaying all the fact. I knew that if I was not *specific to a fault* I would be called on it.

I've found no mistakes in how I relayed the information in her post. She obviously wanted me to know about her views because she came to *MY* blog, commented, and then wrote the post in question and refered to me in it.

February 11, 2008 11:29 AM  
Blogger Kristine said... dug up this topic, not me.

Well, I'm putting a stop to it.

Beastiality is off-topic. Everyone lay off this issue here. I've about had enough.

February 11, 2008 11:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My own agnosticism is rather muted these days. I feel no great urge to convince the religionists about me that their beliefs are just so much hogwash. As long as they don't attempt to proselyte me, I leave 'em be. Don't bug me about my religion, or lack thereof, and I won't bug you about yours.

Lo these thirty years back, I was amusing myself by poking fun at the fundies in letters to the editor of the Emporia, KS "Gazette." Some responses were quite vehement; they made me laugh. All those poor beggars were doing was to hang their own ignorance and stupidity out in front of God and everybody. Innocent and naive are the kindest words one might use to describe them.

Since I have other things to do than bruit my religious opinions from the housetops, I've not been accosted lately because of my views. Should someone tell me that he will pray for my soul, My response is "Go right ahead!" That person may be supplicating a nonexistent deity about a nonexistent item, but if it makes him feel better to do it, why let him pray. I do request that he do it out of my hearing. After all such a person is not talking to me. Let him talk to God, then that being, if he, she, or it exists, can talk to me if he, she or it is so inclined.

So far as I know, I have received no divine messages, nothing that cannot be explained without invoking the supernatural.

February 11, 2008 12:51 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

Well, Ftk, how you can buy one thing that Sal Cordova, Casey Luskin, William Brown, or Duane Gish and the rest of these characters say is beyond me too, when their methods and “math” are demonstrably lacking. I don’t know why you prefer them to Wesley Elsberry and Kenneth Miller and Scott Hatfield, who have taught me much about tolerance. So I guess we’re at an impasse.

Frankly I have no idea how those mountains along the mid-Atlantic Ridge were formed by the Flood when some are eroded and some not, and some are buried by what looks to be millions of years of sediment and some not. I cannot understand how the fossils show that the flowering plants outran the trees and the trees outran the ferns if a Flood laid down the fossils in a 6000-year-old earth. I would rather invoke Occam’s Razor and take the common-sense scientific answer, but then I would have nothing to say to a dying child, I guess.

February 11, 2008 1:03 PM  
Blogger Rev. Barking Nonsequitur said...

For the record, the jerk in questions name is Dick. Dick is over 80 years old and he is extremely Scottish - even wears a kilt sometimes so the cliche of being a stubborn ol' Scott fits and he is proud of it. And yes, he is a bit senile - on several occasions I have thrown up my hands in frustration trying to slide out of uncomfortable one-sided conversations with him blabbering on and on about trivial crap and being angry about this and that. Ugh.

Perhaps the hard reality that one are falling apart makes one cranky and lash out to those around you - I suspect so. Ask me when I am 80 if I can still make full sentences.

I will ask him to apologize next time I see him and I don't mind spurning him in the future. There are many more interesting people to chat with at Cahoots who won't try to make you feel like dirt if they disagree with you.

As for Creationists, I see nothing to admire in a person that spreads misinformation and promotes ignorance. They are little more than parasites and contribute nothing to humanity as a whole.
Feel free to hate them as you would a wood tick.

February 11, 2008 1:53 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

I guess I didn’t realize he was that age. Maybe he’d better surrender those belly dance photos of me to Said. Doesn’t seem right for him to goggle at them while asking the object in the photo why she exists.

I don’t hate creationists – I just don’t understand why they’re never curious about real things, and can’t be interested in normal explanations, and aren’t interested in writing more about, you know, life.

February 11, 2008 2:25 PM  
Anonymous Janine said...

Perhaps the old man thinks you are a figment of his imagination. That would explain why he asked you why you exist.

February 11, 2008 3:08 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

I suppose I should feel sorry for him. Oh, hell, I don't need him to apologize, it's a free country.

February 11, 2008 4:19 PM  
Blogger Forthekids said...

I'd really like to know how it is that you can consider yourself any more "tolerant" than I am.

I'm glad you've learned about tolerance from the trio you alluded to. But, you might also remember that they don't disagree with you in terms of your scientific position. Hence there is nothing to be intolerant of.

They haven't taught me a thing about tolerance because they are completely intolerant of my position in regard to ID.

February 11, 2008 5:38 PM  
Blogger Forthekids said...

As for Creationists, I see nothing to admire in a person that spreads misinformation and promotes ignorance. They are little more than parasites and contribute nothing to humanity as a whole.

Feel free to hate them as you would a wood tick.

Now that right there is a marvelous example of "tolerance".

Let's see...if I change a couple words, how would it sound?

"As for Darwinists, I see nothing to admire in a person that spreads misinformation and promotes ignorance. They are little more than parasites and contribute nothing to humanity as a whole.

Feel free to hate them as you would a wood tick.

I would *never* in a million years write something like that....I'm not that *intolerant* of the views that other people hold.

It's always baffling how some people are soooo irritated with the "intolerance" of others, all the while displaying their own intolerance in spades.

February 11, 2008 5:46 PM  
Blogger Forthekids said...

Not only that...he's promoting "hatred" which is even worse.

I'm struggling to see how promoting hatred against creationists is any different than the Phelps promoting hatred against homosexuals.

Kristine, as much as you will never believe this, I *really* thought that you were someone that I'd be able to get along with in this debate. Honestly, I've always seen a lot of simliarities between us. The only real noticeable differences are your position on ID and atheism. I think it's a shame to "hate" someone merely because of philosophical differences. I certainly don't hate you...I don't even dislike you.

February 11, 2008 5:53 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

Did I write this?

Feel free to hate them

or this:

I don't hate creationists

I don't hate anybody. If other people do, that's their problem. It seems that PZ, Dawkins, everyone at AtBC and Rev. Barky are different personalities within my body in somebody's opinion.

I'd really like to know how it is that you can consider yourself any more "tolerant" than I am.

Stick around. I'll throw a little Jean Genet your way.

It's about time I got back to being the bohemian, I think.

February 11, 2008 7:36 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

I'm glad you've learned about tolerance from the trio you alluded to. But, you might also remember that they don't disagree with you in terms of your scientific position. Hence there is nothing to be intolerant of.

I'm not going to "tolerate" methodological incompetence and tricks.

You have had plenty, plenty, plenty of people, including me, explain to you why creationism cannot be tolerated in schools or as "science." If you didn't get the message, read this post, or don't. But don't expect me to give in on this one inch.

Want to wage a "who's more tolerant" contest? Okay. Don't be intolerantly shocked by what you'll see posted here in the future, "Hate-the-homosexual-sin-but-love-the-sinner" gal.

February 11, 2008 7:53 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

February 11, 2008 7:53 PM  
Blogger Scott Hatfield . . . . said...

Hey! No fair! I can't get in on a 'Toleration Contest', as I'm a public school teacher!...:)

More seriously, I thank you very kindly for mentioning me in the same breath as Dr. Miller and Dr. Elsberry. I am unworthy.

Tolerance is nice, but to me it conveys a "I'll just look the other way when you do THAT" sort of mentality. What is needed is not the Tolerance of Others, but the Acceptance of Difference. I think that, whether or not we agree with the choices of others, we need to convey to them that we ACCEPT them as human beings, whose worth is not any more or less than our own.

This can be difficult when we encounter strong opposition from those with views different from our own, and especially for those foes who don't play the game the way we think it should be played.

Still, we should start with the premise that there is a person behind every viewpoint, and try to distinguish between the two. For example, I reject both Ftk's version of ID creationism and PZ's atheism. I also cringe at some of the rhetoric, as when (ahem) one questions my faith, and the other questions my reason. But at the end of the day, I'm not going to get anywhere by taking those kind of things personally.

When we can get past those attitudes, we can actually learn from each other. You tip your hat to me, Kristine, about tolerance. Well, let me say that I not only learn things from your blog, but that it brings me joy. I wish you would post more often, frankly.

Anyway, a shot of badly-needed kindness to everyone (yes, EVERYONE) on this thread, because life is difficult and all of us make mistakes.

February 11, 2008 10:49 PM  
Anonymous Janine said...

Step up and shake the hand
Of someone you can't stand.
You can tolerate him if you try.

February 12, 2008 1:33 AM  
Anonymous JanieBelle said...

The discussion here misses an important point. There are situations in which intolerance is entirely appropriate. We as a society are not tolerant of murderers, thieves, sexual predators, tax evaders, non-religiously oriented con-artists etc. etc.

Tolerance is a lovely sentiment, but it's not the end all and be all.

Religious folks generally? Sure, doesn't offend me one bit that they're religious. They're welcome to be as religious as they choose. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.

...until a group of them attempts to violate the law, force their religion on me, uses government money to promote their religion, and/or get their religious beliefs taught as fact in public schools.

In any and all of the above scenarios, intolerance is entirely appropriate and I will not for one second apologize for being intolerant of them. I will not tolerate a theocrat any further than I will tolerate a murderer, thief, sexual predator, tax evader, or non-religiously oriented con-man.

Going after kids just makes them all the more despicable, and I will in no way abide that quietly with tolerance.

For their own "tolerance", it's interesting that it's OK for them to stand in their pulpits, and on the street corners, and in public office, and say that people not like them deserve to be tortured forever, that they shouldn't be allowed to be U.S. citizens, that they're evil, that their voices should not be heard.

For them to then climb up on their cross and nail themselves to it, with much wailing and gnashing of teeth about how mean ol' PZ Myers intolerantly said they were sanctimonious asshats is deceptive and hypocritical.

It's all the more hypocritical that they can take Phreaky Phred Phelps, put a suit on him, make him pro-military, teach him a few code phrases, and suddenly we should tolerate him enough to be a serious contender for the Presidency.

Count me with Rev. Barky:

wood ticks.

Count me with PZ:

sanctimonious asshats.

Count me with Mister DNA:

Pseudo-Scientific Douche-Bags.

February 12, 2008 7:56 AM  
Blogger Kristine said...

I *really* thought that you were someone that I'd be able to get along with in this debate. Honestly, I've always seen a lot of simliarities between us.

Yeah, I get that a lot, from people who really have very little in common with me, because they live very conventional lives and I don’t. I don’t get it. Do they, and you, fantasize through me? Is it just wishful thinking on their part?

I’m not married, I don’t have or want kids, and my evenings are spent going to school, writing, and going to events, not with a family. I’m an active person, not someone who likes to sit and chat. Work with me in an office and you’ll see I don’t get excited about girly things like ultrasound photos, engagement rings, gossip, and the like. I hate the telephone, I don’t like church, but if I were religious I’d go for Voodoun/Santeria with some Buddhism mixed in. I hang out with artists and activists, go to Kenneth Anger films and the like, I wrote a book about a heterosexual man falling in love with another hetero man (set in 1920s Paris with surealists and prostitutes running around), and I worked all my life to get away from bourgeois suburban life. I don’t see how we’re alike at all!

I don’t know why you think that someone you only know on the Internet is going to help you out. I have a whole rest of my life that can’t be expressed on the Internet, because it can’t be expressed in words. If you’re lonely, and it sounds like you are, then I’m sorry, but I was lonely too, and I finally did something about it. Bored with your life? Maybe you should read what I said earlier about never rebelling.

It's not my job to be a friend to all these lonely people who end up railing at me!

February 12, 2008 10:13 AM  
Blogger Rev. Barking Nonsequitur said...

Non-believers have a great breadth of opinion since there is no dogma to tell them what to think so it is pointless to categorize them.

People hate - it's a fact and there is actually a place for it unless you exist in a polly-anna world with daiseys and lions that you can pet. Hate is part of a survival mechanism what allows one to fight back with the full force of will. It's a strong word, but I don't mind using it at times.

Am I supposed to be tolerant when some deluded tool blurts out "this is a Christian country"? That's an insult to non-Christians and should never be tolerated. Even a wood tick would never say a thing like that.

Anyway, there is no way in hell I am going to allow the fundies make me into a second class citizen based on my philosophy and I don't mind hating them as I fight for my rights against an overwhelming army of morons trying to drag me back to the church. There is no seeing eye to eye with a person who firmly regards me as evil because I don't believe in their ghosts. You can't reason with them and tolerating that attitude gives them a pass to spread their lies. This is what ID is all about and I hate it.

February 12, 2008 10:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Holy saints preserve us!!!
So many of these comments are just multiplication of words without wisdom(Job 38:2), vanity and a striving after wind(Ecclesiastes 1:14).
Why do we exist? The Preacher answered it well, 2500 years ago.
We are to eat and drink and enjoy our labor under the sun. That is our portion(Ecclesiastes 5:18).

February 12, 2008 2:29 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

striving after wind

Don't mock my hobbies.

February 12, 2008 3:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1000 Years of Creationist Achievements

February 12, 2008 3:38 PM  
Blogger vjack said...

Trackback from Atheist Revolution:

February 13, 2008 5:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What can I really say? The term "Psycho Christian" exists for a reason. Unfortunately you were subjected to the definition of this term.

February 13, 2008 9:29 AM  
Blogger bullet said...

"They haven't taught me a thing about tolerance because they are completely intolerant of my position in regard to ID."

I'm new here, and I don't know to what you're referrng, but I have this to say.

"ID" is put forth as science and fact. As such, it is not subject to "tolerance" but to argument and criticism. "Creationism" is faith and, as such, should be tolerated as any other belief.

Intelligent Design is either a matter of fact or a matter of faith. You can't have it both ways.

February 13, 2008 12:06 PM  
Blogger bruce said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

February 13, 2008 12:17 PM  
Blogger Rev. Barking Nonsequitur said...

I certainly don't mean to imply that Fundie Christians are constantly confronting me directly aside from the infrequent wing nut I meet or those robots that invade my doorstep every once in a while. I am speaking of the pervasive thread of dogma that permeates American culture - in our government and in the media and in our communities. God on our money, in our oaths and the tendency to exclaim at any hint of drama. It is similar to what Blacks experience with a long history of repression and a WASP authority hanging over them at all times. What do they do? They exercise civil disobedience in anyway they can get away with it and they don't even realize they are doing it because it has long been part of the culture. What use do they have for tolerance?

February 13, 2008 12:19 PM  
Blogger Rev. Barking Nonsequitur said...

Thanks bullet - good point. If the scientific community had tolerance for religious dogma, crackpot theories and untestable processes then there would be no science and we would be still in the dark ages.

Next time you have a headache,
1. Take an aspirin.
2. Pray for it to go away.
3. Put a chicken foot under your bed.

Then try to figure out which of those 3 got rid of your pain.

Also, try to pet a lion and see what happens.

February 13, 2008 12:26 PM  
Blogger Lui said...

This guy sounds deeply insecure. I know that feeling of losing one's composure when confronted with such vicious stupidity and all-round fuck-headedness; the frustration and shock is enough to make any non-retard cry. I remember some creo-fundie at a bus stop shouting about how Darwin "admitted" that the eye couldn't have evolved and that the fossil record should show millions of animals with three legs. After that, I felt like crying, because here I was, in the 21st century, and still there are those who seem to genuinely believe that the Earth is younger than the domestication of the dog). And that was in Australia, but the United States of Bible-thumping Disneyland.

On a more positive note Kristine, I have finished reading two more Gould books, "Bully for Brontosaurus", and "Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms", both of which I highly recommend.

And just so everyone has it perfectly clear, ID/creationism is deeply retarded. Otherwise its propagandists wouldn't need to resort to lying and distortion 24/7, and would actually yield something of practical scientific significance instead of just bitching about how they're being "excluded" (catch a clue, cretins: you exclude yourself with your drooling nonsense and lies. Don't be surprised if honest people view you with little more than contempt). America is becoming the laughing stock of the Western world; you fundies should try to show some national pride and stop embarrassing your country in the furtherance of Bronze Age mythology. PZ Myers is "intolerant" in the same sense that geologists are "intolerant" to those who would come at them with "overwhelming evidence" that the earth is flat. It's the IDiot and creationazi propagandists that are intolerant: they care not one whit for science and reality, only for maintaining their antiquated, delicate beliefs that collapse when even a smidgen of scrutiny is applied. So they are pretty much obliged to lie copiously and continuously, to children and adults alike. They care not one whit for the education of children or for the state of science in general. And they care not one whit for their followers, who they treat with contempt, seeing them as little more than sheep that can be manipulated and turned into an army of unthinking goons. As long as they keep Yahweh happy, then it's all sweet. Fuck creationism, and fuck its lying, conniving, rat-bag leaders.

February 13, 2008 9:37 PM  
Blogger Lui said...

Meant to say "That was in Australia, not the United States"

February 13, 2008 9:40 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

You know, back when I was studying for the GRE, some old lady plopped down on the bus stop bench next to me, took a look at my page of mathematics review, and blurted, "I just don't see why anybody needs to learn that garbage!" When I objected, she sneered, "Yes, I know it 'expands your mind.' My son makes a lot of money without that stuff!" I said, "Excuse me, I wasn't even talking to you, was I?" How rude!

There's an immense amount of pressure not to learn something in America. I don't even know how to describe it. This country is something else. Frankly, one of my goals is to retire in another country because I'm not sure what kind of social security/health care situation we'll have here when I'm 65.

February 14, 2008 12:05 AM  
Anonymous Corey Mondello said...

Fundamental Christians are the enemy of America and the world.

I think they need to be removed from the face of the earth.

Religion ruins EVERYTHING !!!

The Founding Father's of the USA knew this, they believed alone, both Religion and Politics are worthy of human interaction, but together, they destroy each other and humanity.

Corey Mondello
Boston, Massachusetts

February 14, 2008 8:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sounds to me as if you shook the old man's faith with your booklets. He lashed out in response. I'm a rather large male so I don't get the "try to intimidate" often, but when I get a real response I take it as a plus. Got 'em thinking! And that scares jesus freaks.

February 14, 2008 9:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The old bat that denigrated mathematics at the bus stop spoke evil of that which is fair beyond the reach of her thought, and only little wit can excuse her. She merely let her ignorant provincialism, her backwood hickism, hang out in front of God and everybody. Personally, I study mathematics for the fun of it.
I don't figure this old lady's head should be split with a Dwarvish axe for her stupidity, but such people are something of an annoyance. They are proof that God must love stupid, inane people.
He made so goddam many of them.

February 14, 2008 12:28 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

Well, the old guy was the one who asked for our stupid newsletter in the first place.

It's not like I go around provoking arguments, for pity's sake. In fact I’ve been pretty silent about it except for blogging, interviewing people on the radio, and writing, and sitting on a board.

As for the old bat, there I was, minding my own business. But this was just before all those layoffs in the 1990s - I hope her precious son got it good. (WTF was I supposed to care about him, anyway? I had a feeling she was trying to play matchmaker in some weird way.)

February 14, 2008 12:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I didn't think you were pushing your view. I meant that maybe the "Reason" in the booklet made inroads into his "unreason" and it scared him. Just a possibility

February 14, 2008 12:58 PM  
Blogger Kristine said...

Oh, sorry, I didn't mean to imply you were saying I was pushing my view. It's just that, I can't get over the fact that he asked for one. I'm just saying.

February 14, 2008 5:08 PM  
Blogger The Lorax said...

Too bad you had to deal with that crap. It's nice to know the main reason to "believe" in something (at least from this bully's perspective) is because if you don't you'll suffer eternal damnation. Hmm, you know this guy seems to act much like the god he worships, a bully.

February 15, 2008 7:56 AM  
Blogger Rev. Barking Nonsequitur said...

I think you all have the misapprehension that the old guy was a religious nut - actually he doesn't fit the mold. I always thought he was an Atheist by the way he talked about religion. I think he was complaining about how the newsletter criticized religion. So it was OK for him do the bashing, but reading the same kind of sentiment in the MNA newsletter made him defensive - this may be somewhat common in folks who eternally wrestle with their faith and are plaugued by a lot of doubt.
They may hate their faith, but they can't seem to get out from under it either. One may call this an Ambivalent Personality Disorder. People like this are internally conflicted about where their source of support comes from and exhibit inconsistent behavior in this regard.

February 15, 2008 11:25 AM  
Blogger Kristine said...

Man, why the hell didn’t I just summon up some Dorothy Parker!

Razors pain you;
Rivers are damp;
Acids stain you;
And drugs cause cramp.
Guns are lawful;
Nooses give;
Gas smells awful;
You might as well live.

Hahaha! That’s my favorite poem of hers.

February 15, 2008 3:40 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home