The Disease and the Remedy

     Tonight while listening to a Chariots of Iron podcast they read a listener letter from a girl who had been sexually abused as teen and how that affected her faith. Rather than shake her faith, this caused her to immerse herself deeper into the church and become very devout. However as she did so she was told "god must have caused this to happen to her because she was not faithful enough and he wanted to wake her up to his glory". It was also implied that she was now unfit for marriage and that she should dedicate her life to god instead.
     This is the same logic that an abuser uses, blame the victim for causing this to happen to her. We see this often when rape victims dressed provocatively are blamed for being raped. In this case the church steps right in and uses the tactics of an abuser on someone in a weakened state, blame her and provide her with the path to make it right. Rather than get her the counseling she actually needed they continued to reinforce that because she had done something wrong, that this was her punishment. She was told "Jesus marked her out to be his special servant". How can any reasonable adult tell a child that this is how Jesus would select her, through abuse.
     It is a common attack from the religious that "all atheists are angry", this certainly isn't so as most of the time I am very happy. However when someone hears of injustices such as these I think that they should be angry. Atheists should be angry because religion is being used victimize someone for a second time. Believers should be angry that their religion is being used as a tool for abuse. I think that any rational adult should be upset by what has taken place in this situation, and this is by no means an isolated incident. This struck close to home for me when I listened to this, in high school I had a friend that was in a similar situation and she was told that it was her fault because she had stopped attending church, and god was sending her a message. So by that logic god is what caused it to happen and god is the answer, both the disease and the cure, convenient. When it takes advantage of the weak, we should all be angry.

Religion on Discovery channel

  .
     I turned on Discovery hoping maybe to catch an episode of Mythbusters and to my surprise I was greeted with an evangelical preacher. This man, Peter Popoff, was making some pretty spectacular claims, if only you call for his "Miracle Spring Water."
 

While most people were claiming to have received money or jobs after following his directions included with the water, other claims were even more outrageous.

 These are claims that are looking to prey on people in times of weakness and that just disgusts me! He doesn't come right out and claim to be able to cure cancer but as you can see here, he clearly implies it. These are on between 2am and 9am, this is their paid programming section of the day, however they know by being on Discovery it will add to their credibility. During this 7 hour block at least 3 hours are evangelical con men. Between selling their time to evangelists and and airing so many reality shows that have little to no educational benefit, the network has really strayed from what it used to be.

     Are there other channels or shows that you feel inadvertently lend credence to religion or crackpot science?  Ancient aliens on History channel comes to mind as a good example. 


   
   

Choose your words carefully

   

     So the story in my inbox today is a post from the examiner that is critical of a post by Al Stefanelli, the Georgia state director of the American Atheist. In his post Taking the gloves off... he speaks to the dangers of the doctrine of fundamental christianity and radical islam and says that because "They don’t respond to lawsuits, letters, amicus briefs or other grass-roots campaigns and they must, must, must be eradicated. " He is clearly speaking about the doctrines and not individuals, but this is quickly seen as an opportunity to frame him as a "radical atheist" and claim that he is encouraging or at least advocating violence. Joe Newby of the Examiner writes his post American Atheist leader tears the mask off radical atheism with violent rhetoric and claims that this reveals the "radical nature of modern atheism" and that "atheists have declared a jihad of their own".

     Now I have met a number of atheist, none of which advocate violence against others, even those we strongly disagree with. Most atheists just don't want religion and its doctrine forced upon us. I believe that most people believe that there are behaviors that need to be "eradicated", sexism, racism, and violence towards others. I think that was the point Stefanelli was trying to make. However, because of word choice, the real message of his article is being overshadowed. So let's keep participating in the marketplace of ideas and standing up for what we believe. But while you do so remember if you want to make sure it is your message that is focused upon you need to choose your words carefully.
           
http://atheists.org/blog/2011/09/14/taking-the-gloves-off - Al Stefanelli's post

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-spokane/american-atheist-leader-tears-the-mask-off-radical-atheism-with-violent-rhetoric -Joe Newby's post

Predictions

     I welcome those who are affiliated with the Metro East Atheist Network and everyone else who wishes to endure the diatribes that I hope to post on a regular basis from here on out. I am sure in the beginning I will be borrowing some ideas or at least the kernels for my discussions from some others. This first post was born from thoughts I had while listening to an episode of Freakonomics Radio, which I highly recommend as they intelligently cover a number of topics.
     This particular episode was about predictions. People are constantly making predictions, whether it's some guy predicting the end of the world or just predicting what traffic might be like on the way in to work today and deciding to leave a little earlier. They were speaking of how "experts" make big predictions because if they are correct there are big payoffs to them being right. Take for example the guy earlier this year predicting May 21 being judgement day, if right he is seen as a prophet and will gain great fame and following, wrong and people forget all about him several months later.
     This got me thinking about how religion is in itself a prediction and one in which one can never be proved wrong. Pascal's wager came to mind, for those not familiar, the basic idea is if you gamble on god and are right it pays off with eternal salvation, wrong and you are no worse off. The flip side is, if you deny god and are right, there is no benefit and if wrong the consequences are eternal damnation. For either side this is a prediction that will never have to be proved to anyone else, however you can strongly be judged by others on what choice you make now.
     I do understand making predictions and taking precautions based on the fear of the unknown. I for instance have emergency gear and food so that I am prepared for a number of disasters. However, I feel that religion uses the unknown to capitalize on that fear and use it to control people. This is evident by the fact that religion frequently denies and fights scientific explanations and advances. The more that science explains, the fewer unknowns there are for us to be afraid of and less fears to be exploited. I feel this creates an incentive for religion to hinder scientific advances and that is a reason many people are concerned about how much religion is being inserted into politics recently. This has caused nonbelievers to become more active, the "New Atheist" movement is a statement "We do not want supernatural predictions and the fears they cause to guide the policies of our country"