12309 Views
73 Comments

Who’s doing the demonizing?

Published December 8th, 2007 by Bobby Henderson

Who’s doing the demonizing? I suppose you live south of the 49th, but Athiests who refrain from thrusting an agenda on others (and yes, lots of religious folks do do that) do not get very much flack here. Nor do Sihks, Buddhists or Unitarians. These sects do not, and this is where it might be instructional to your group to sit up and pay attention, construct websites with the single clear purpose being to discredit spiritual people. You are disrespectful and frankly, not too evolved. The rest of the world is striving to move toward to-ler-ance and you’d be well advised to follow suit. I don’t wear a turban, carry a hymn book, wear a cross, a ceremonial sword, I don’t wear blessed underwear or confer with tree goods but I do know that we’d all be better off saying, “I agree to disagree” and cease and desist with campaigns to uncover someone else’s faith as a sham. I think defamation is the word you’re looking for, as opposed to demonisation, unless whereever you’re from really IS the way it’s depicted in South Park (I thought it was a parody!) no one is “DEMONISING” intellectual curiousity,…that’s called ‘science’.

Your logic is not up to snuff. So, if this is not in the name of humour, it’s in the name of logic. Excuse me while I go and ponder that disconnect. There are many, many illogical things that happen in the world with amazing regularity. Does that necessitate a campaign to discredit it? One example, so many people gorge on fastfood that obesity is an epidemic. —> Therefore we should start a campaign to uncover their stupidity and shame them into more informed behaviour while acting as laugh material for the rest of us non-fatties. (the ones who know “the truth” about food)

Have you ever heard of relativism? Do you know that the chances are very, very good that Jesus, the Bhudda (arguably several incarnations) and Muhhomed (sp?) all walked the earth?
-Meichan



73 Responses to “Who’s doing the demonizing?”

  1. Admiral Chiflado ☠ says:

    Dear Meichan,

    Just because Jesus, Buddha (spelt that way, by the way) and Muhammed walked the earth does not mean that they were real prophets/messiahs/whatever. We know for sure that L Ron Hubbard walked the earth, but that doesn’t mean that we should respect his teachings. However, we probably have the only religion with a prophet walking the earth AS WE SPEAK. That makes us the MOST UP-TO-DATE RELIGION EVER.

    I would have other things to say to you, but I have booty, wenches and grog waiting.

    I bid you farewell

    Admiral Chiflado

  2. Captain W says:

    1.“…, but Athiests who refrain from thrusting an agenda on others (and yes, lots of religious folks do do that) do not get very much flack here. Nor do Sihks, Buddhists or Unitarians.”
    - Well most of the regulars here are against forcing religion on others, so that would on make sense.
    .
    2. “You are disrespectful and frankly, not too evolved.”
    - Phew, glad to know I have evolved just the right amount. Man, it would suck to be overly evolved.
    .
    3. “…I don’t wear blessed underwear or confer with tree goods…”
    -Good because that would just be weird
    .
    4. “Your logic is not up to snuff. So, if this is not in the name of humour, it’s in the name of logic. Excuse me while I go and ponder that disconnect.”
    - I find it interesting that you question our logic. Based on the statement above, here it your proof
    P1= Your logic is not up to snuff
    P2= This is not in the name of humor
    >C= This is in the name of logic
    Hmm…you don’t really seem qualified to question anyone else’s logic. Not only is this illogical, it’s nonsensical. The disconnect you are off pondering exists only in your logic.
    .
    5. “There are many, many illogical things that happen in the world with amazing regularity. Does that necessitate a campaign to discredit it?”
    - a. The design argument relies heavily on the notion that order and purpose only result from design. Yet everyday we see order resulting from presumably mindless processes, therefore design only accounts for a small portion of our experience with order and purpose.
    b. You may see it as a campaign to discredit intelligent design, while others may see it as a campaign for the truth.
    .
    6. “One example, so many people gorge on fastfood that obesity is an epidemic. —> Therefore we should start a campaign to uncover their stupidity and shame them into more informed behaviour while acting as laugh material for the rest of us non-fatties. (the ones who know “the truth” about food)”
    - Nice example. Michael Moore did just that in the movie “Super size Me” and made millions.
    .
    7. “Have you ever heard of relativism? Do you know that the chances are very, very good that Jesus, the Bhudda (arguably several incarnations) and Muhhomed (sp?) all walked the earth?”
    - I have but it seems unlikely that you understand what it is. Relativism in no way makes it more or less likely that Jesus, Buddha or Muhammad actually existed. Relativism actually kind of weakens you argument, most religions are Absolutists.

  3. Nospoon says:

    We advocate intelligence. I’m fine with anyone being religious so long as, and this is where it might be instructional to your group to sit up and pay attention, they don’t actually affect me or my children or anyone else’s children. If someone told you that someone was teaching or advocating teaching children that shooting their friends is a fun and safe passtime, and that furthermore that a number of those people are key officials of your government, and further still that the groups which claim to be “rational” are advocating tolerance for this belief, you’d be outraged. And rightly so. You’d be upset that this belief persisted despite evidence to the contrary. You’d be even more upset if you learned children were being reprimanded for questioning this belief. And yes, parental reprimands and communal demonizing for questioning beliefs are extremely common, everywhere. Even when it’s intellectual curiousity.

    I couldn’t care less if someone else wants to gorge themselves to death because they claim it is the only way to be happy after death. I start objecting when those people encourage this behavior in others, especially children. That would indeed necessitate a campaign to discredit it.

    The chances are indeed good that people named Jesus of Nazarath, Siddhārtha Gautama, and Muhammad did walk the earth, though the evidence is debatable. Regardless, this religion does not object to that. We object to the view of these people as anything more than human. We object to stupidity being done “in their name”. We object to books which claim to be their teachings, moral and otherwise, being uncondictionally accepted without logical support.

  4. Cap'n Poofybeard says:

    Gold?

  5. Spaghetti Scientist says:

    So then the people who want to teach creationism in science classrooms are “DEMONISING” intellectual curiosity, or? And it’s not OK to be disrespectful of that? Teaching creationism in science classrooms is pretty much the opposite of tolerance, as far as I can tell.

  6. Nephelos says:

    Get a sense of humour, mate. :S

  7. lilwench says:

    I got dizzy trying to figure that out (or maybe it was just the xanaflex I took). Your point?

  8. iwishyouwouldlearntoreadafarian says:

    Mechian,
    It is very sad to that you are yet another ignorant “hate-mail” poster who never took the time to learn how to read. If you would just click on “About” tab it would explain the purpose of the FSM, which is not to discredit religion. Bottom line, Intelligent Design is not Science and anyone who believes it is, I am sorry but is an idiot and deserves to be ridiculed.

    In a perfect world it would be great to agree to disagree and leave as that but because of religious zealots we cannot. It is great if people have faith and in my opinion you can pray to a head of lettuce for all I care, here it is pasta.:o) The difference: They try to push their belief systems on others and if you don’t agree with them you are going to their hell. Sorry, but this country(USA) is screwed up enough due to radical religious groups trying to influence government. So, no we can’t just agree to disagree. We must be outraged and fight for religion to be separate from Church and State and should not be taught in schools.

    Hate to be the bearer of bad news but if the only person’s logic not up to snuff as you put it is your own. Your obesity example is just plain stupid. First, fast food in itself does not cause obesity. It is the individual who decides to eat fast food for every meal and then chooses to be inert for the rest of the day. Also, guess what? There are campaigns out there to try to get these people to change their behavior so they will not be obese. They are being singled out. Haven’t you see all those commercials for obese people, take this pill so you won’t be a disgusting any more.

    As for relativism, maybe you should look at the definition. Stating they walked the earth has nothing to do with relativism. Where relativism comes into play is whether or not you believe Jesus for instance is the son of God. Jews believe Jesus walked the earth, heck all the xians pray to a Jewish boy. They just don’t believe he is god. For your reference: relativism – (philosophy) the philosophical doctrine that all criteria of judgment are relative to the individuals and situations involved
    philosophy – the rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge and ethics
    philosophical doctrine, philosophical theory – a doctrine accepted by adherents to a philosophy.
    So once again another “hate” mailer trying to sound intelligent when in fact they are not.

    Thanks
    First time poster

Leave a Reply