Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – a three-fer this year

Some of the big holidays/months for the abrahamic religions happen this month. Easter is this weekend. Passover starts on Friday. Ramadan is the whole lunar month.

Passover – we have a celebration that the Israelites got their freedom, the “exodus”, but it’s not quite that simple and requires the death of children and people who had no choice in the matter where this god was mind controlling a man in order to show off. There’s no evidence for this nonsense at all.

Easter – we have a celebration because a god needed a blood sacrifice by torture of part of itself to make itself happy because of its failure at the very beginning of the creation myths. No evidence for the victim, torture or supposed resurrection.

Ramadan – we have a celebration because a man claimed an angel showed him magic writings in a cave that would become the holy book for a religion. At least there is no direct death involved here. There’s also no evidence for this story either.

For my new followers, here are some oldies but goodies on Easter and Passover. I don’t have much on Islam on my blog. I’ll have to correct that at sone point. Here’s a post about how similarly silly it is to the other religions of the “book”.  (you can find links to the other parts at the bottom of the post)  And thou shalt of eat of this guinea pig in rememberance of me

Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – happy ridiculous holiday weekend!

What the Boss Likes – conservative idiots here in PA

I live in Pennsylvania here in the US. We’re a battleground state since one of our senators, a QOP Republican, isn’t running again. So we have a bunch of carpetbaggers trying to claim they are from Pennsylvania and are trying to be Trumpier than Trump.

One of those is the medical shill Mehmet Oz, a tv doctor who has no problem in lying to people about actual medical issues like taking a useless drug for covid. He has put up this completely idiotic video on twitter, trying to blame President Biden for the price of “crudités “, aka a veggie tray as 99% of people in PA would call it. This is a fantastic example of just how stupid these conservatives are, that they would accept an idiot like this. Oh, and he’s supposedly a Muslim too, which just must make their heads explode.

Oz of course isn’t the only QOPidiot here. They are all doing a fantastic job of destroying each other and giving the Democrat senate candidates plenty to work with. I’m personally for John Fetterman, a big dude who does the right thing.

Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – Christians are atheists too

I, and many other atheists, have pointed out to theists that they are atheists too.   They simply don’t believe in other gods, often for reasons just like I do: there is no evidence.  They often get upset by this revelation, since it neuters their common attacks on atheists e.g. atheists are those scary communists, etc.

Nothing much new here. I’m just writing responses to various theist since I am desperately bored at work. A month’s shutdown is wearying. There are some fun memes at the end if you want to just scroll down.

Now, unsurprisingly, the Chrisitans who put up this bit don’t allow comments on their website.  As usual, they don’t want anyone actually thinking about what they claim is true and definitely don’t want anyone to think that someone can show them wrong.  (Dave has put up a response to this post that you can read here where I put it in the comments, since he was too afraid of posting it here as a comment and having to deal with responses. He certainly is concerned by how I wrote and manages not to refute my points: )

Dave Williams, the Christian making the claims starts with this baseless bit of nonsense “Now, belief in the one true God can only come through revelation as he speaks to you, reveals his true character and causes you to see your need for him.”  Well poof goes free will then.  But, as I know very well, Christians don’t agree whether free will or predestination is a thing and neither side can show their nonsense to the right answer. 

This assumption has nothing to support it.  It assumes that there is only one god, and that Dave’s version is it, as well as that this god talks to anyone.  We can see that claim as being rather doubtful since this god supposedly talks to every Christian per their own claims, and funny how this god gives entirely contradictory information to its “chosen”.  For all of Dave’s claims of “serious logical missteps” he’s already made a few. 

Dave’s claim is that there simply has to be a right version of Christianity. There does not.  I would make the educated guess that Dave would not agree that there must be a right version of Islam, though his argument “that there are many different options does not take away from the potential truth of one” would make Islam with just as much chance of being true as his version of Christianity.  Dave also gets rather confused trying to claim that atheists would not want our conclusion that there are not gods set along side the many claims of theists for their gods.   Since he also claims that there are no gods, in each individual case, other than his god, he has his own no god option.  How is that to be put alongside his god option? 

As usual, the theist has little idea about how logic works.  He does indeed need to show that other gods don’t exist and his does, and proceeds to offer illogical and indeed baseless claims as truth. 

He promptly defines his god as the only possible definition of a god.  He claims a binary choice when there is none.  This is a false dichotomy fallacy e.g. “there being a god or there not being a god.”  There could be many gods, there could be two.  They could work in gestalt, they could each have a function in a process, and on and on.  There is nothing to show that his god is the only god.  That is his baseless premise and thus makes any conclusion from it worthless. 

Dave claims “Now, even at this stage we are not putting all the god options in competition with each other.”  He then promptly says “The discussion is now between people who do believe in God’s existence. The priority now is to make sure that we are talking about the true and living god. The aim is to make sure we know him correctly and worship him properly.”

hmm, where did that other possibility go, that there are no god or gods or that there are multiple gods?  Oh yes, Dave assumes there is a god required.  He also tries to claim that polytheism isn’t really putting up their pantheon against a single god.  Really?  Then why the difference in terms?  These gods are indeed rivals to Dave’s god in their ontological status.  He tries to pretend they aren’t, by insisting that his god alone deserves worship, but he gives no reason why this should be he case.  There may indeed be considered a vague power over these pantheons, but again, why does only Dave’s god deserve worship? 

Dave claims then that this somehow “boils down into one question ““Do you believe in an eternal, personal, loving God who created the World, continues to sustain it?”” and then claims that the only possible answer is that one must.  Funny how that works. 

All of this doesn’t end up leading to Dave’s god, no matter how hard he hopes it does so he can be validated. We still have other gods possible, and there is no problem with worshiping something, no matter if it is “distant and unknowable”.  Dave’s claim “Then, we have in fact denied the eternal and personal God and in practice chosen the atheist option.”  Aka “If you don’t believe in my god, then you are an atheist” Is entirely false. 

The point that Christians are also atheists and disbelieve in other gods, therefore being atheist towards them, still stands. I could wish that the term “pan-atheist” would be accepted for those of us who disbelieve in all gods, but that hasn’t happened yet. So we are stuck with atheism potentially meaning two things, the lack of belief in a god or gods, and the lack of belief in all of them.  

Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – lying is no problem for a conservative Christian who want to claim persecution

This is about a case going to the Supreme Court of the United States.

“The case, Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, involves a Washington public high school football coach, Joe Kennedy, who wants to be able to pray publicly with students. Kennedy had a long history of leading his players in prayer, in the locker room and on the field. When this was brought to the attention of the school administration in 2015, he was asked to stop. He refused, insisting he must be permitted to pray publicly with students.

Kennedy and his lawyers at the Christian extremist First Liberty Institute advance the narrative he was fired for praying silently and privately. First Liberty claims: “The school district fired Coach Kennedy for taking a knee and praying a silent, 15-30 second prayer.” The truth is that Kennedy refused an accommodation that would have let him pray silently and privately, and his contract was not renewed because he demanded to be able to pray audibly and publicly with students.”

How not surprising at all. I guess that the poor dears find that their god’s words against liars don’t apply to them and/or that they can treat their god as a vending machine, demanding forgiveness for the sin they chose to do.