I spent a while thinking (hate-mail)

Published June 14th, 2011 by Bobby Henderson

I spent a while thinking of a good reply to this, without sounding like some sort of inbred hick or perhaps maybe to get your attention. However, I realize that there pretty much is no way for that to happen, if you put this in your hate-mail section, I’ll probably be mocked just as much as the next guy, who put the stupid comment about how you could never buy a pirate ship. I’m OK with that, I just wish people will actually think about what I have to say rather then ignorantly mocking what I believe personally. Whatever may happen, I don’t really mind, except that I cannot bring myself to be silent on this issue.

I am a Christian, whatever you may think about me, or absurd assumptions you may have about what I look like, think like, or speak like, realize this, I think all beliefs should be treated with equality. Atheism, Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Muslim, Agonist, Voodoo, whatever, I don’t care, if you believe that you are correct, then you have every right in the world to believe that with all your heart, and nobody should force you to believe what they believe. Now I also believe in open criticism of any of these religions, meaning your Pastafarian view that openly mocks religion. However, it is also my right to criticize the criticism, meaning though while I believe it is your right to mock, harass, and generally make religious persons miserable, I don’t believe it is morally right.

Atheism is a belief just as much as Christianity. Say whatever you want about facts and how religion is stupid and all those who practice it are all idiots, but it still comes down to the fundamental truth that you must believe this to be more true over the other option. I am again, completely fine with that, and that is why I love America so much, because we CAN believe differently then one another, and still live peacefully (to a degree) together. However, mocking is not the right way to go about arguing your belief.
By the way, here is the definition of mocking:

1. Tease or laugh at in a scornful or contemptuous manner.

2. Make (something) seem laughably unreal or impossible.

To laugh at someone else’s belief that they dedicate their lives to is not funny or humorous, but I believe is rather childish and immature. This is the main reason why I would much rather sit down calmly with an atheist and have a rational discussion about each other’s beliefs, instead of smacking them in the face with a bible, and shouting how they are going to hell for not believing the undeniable truth that is the bible, or worse, calling their belief idiotic and getting my group of friends together and laughing and pointing in his face.

Of course there are people that do this, hence, you, and there will always be people like you. My job is try to convince you to be rational and discuss each others view points.

I could never put myself in your mindset and read this the same way through your eyes. To you, I just look like another idiot who took this seriously and decided to write a concerned letter and waste his time trying to teach you to be respectful, but the truth is, writing this helps me put my thoughts in order anyways.

If you do have one ounce of thought for my beliefs, at least view this letter with respect, and try to think about what I am thinking when I read this:


What I am thinking is that the joke has gone to far. Of course this letter asks for intelligent discussion, and that seems to have never existed in your website, so before I go, let my put it in your language.

Fuck you, and lay off religion asshole.


2,161 Responses to “I spent a while thinking (hate-mail)”

1 7 8 9 10 11 78
  1. Big Guy says:

    Creationism is backed by the worlds elite scientist because they realize there has to be a supreme being guiding us forward. Additionally 2.1 billion Christians 1.5 billion Islamic 2 billion Buddhist 1.5 billion Hindus & Sikhs the common thread is creationism… That leaves the very few agnostic’s & atheists who believe mankind crawled out of the primordial pool of sludge to eventually turn into man. Your collective antipathy towards Christendom reveals the ignorance evolution teaches.

    • Big Guy says:

      I told you before I majored in religious studies but never graduated. That is why I can’t even make my fallacies sound convincing.

    • TiltedHorizon says:

      Elite? Is Stephen Hawkings elite? I guess he is not elite.

      He states God is not needed to create the universe: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7976594/Stephen-Hawking-God-was-not-needed-to-create-the-Universe.html

      • Spammyboy says:

        Just because he is probably the smartest person on the planet, he’s not elite, because he doesn’t agree with the inbred sect of Christianity… Also, in my form I have a handful of Christians and one Muslim. I appreciate that’s not a huge sample size, but they aren’t Creationists… OBVIOUSLY not elite scientists then…

    • Gordon_UK says:

      Big Guy

      I like you, you do more to promote secular with you random moronic religious mumblings then any of us Atheists or Agnostics could hope to achieve, so I would just like to say thank you.

      Anyway, you said “Creationism is backed by the worlds elite scientist” care to back this up? My understanding is that in a recent survey only 3.3% of the members of the Royal Society* believe in god and only 7% of the members of the American National Academy of Sciences. This casts some doubt as to your claim does it not?

      Another question is you state “agnostic’s & atheists who believe mankind crawled out of the primordial pool of sludge” so care to explain where you god “ crawled out of”? We have evidence for our claim so much so the both the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of England accept as fact, which is odd as if the bible is the word of god have they just called him a liar?

      I expect that you may respond though I not holding out hope for an answer as over the passed 3 months it’s become quite clear that you are really a spherical idiot, no matter what way we look at you, you are still an idiot!



      * The Royal Society is a fellowship of the world’s most eminent scientists and is the oldest scientific academy in continuous existence.

    • Midnight Rider says:

      Just because lots of people believe in something does not make it true. I personally think Big Guy is a bot since he doesn’t really answer any questions we put to him.

      Big Guy is really a client-side script with a small database of regurgitated assertions.

      • Midnight Rider says:

        Actually, I think I just defined the fundamental Christian fanatic: A database of regurgitated assertions.

      • TimmyAnn says:

        “Just because lots of people believe in something does not make it true.” This is very true, Midnight Rider! A lot of people believe that bats are blind, that doesn’t change the fact that they can see. A lot of people think that Roy Orbison was blind, that doesn’t change the fact that he was not. Facts are not determined by majority vote!

    • theFewtheProudtheMarinara says:

      Name some, and don’t include those who “graduated” from some podunk diploma mill specifically set up to crank out “scientists” who believe in Creationism.

    • TiltedHorizon says:

      Back in April of this year, 43 Nobel Laureates called for a Repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act (to exclude the teaching of creationism in science)


      According to Newsweek article from 1987:

      “By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) who give credence to creation-science…”

      That would make the support for creation science among those branches of science who deal with the earth and its life forms to be about 0.14%


      Creationism is backed by who? .14% (Note the decimal) Another weak argument from Biggy. You should have listened to your mother’s warnings, all that wanking has made you blind.

      • wulff says:

        I think this biG guY is using the same mathematical formula that led to a bunch of Ultra-right-wing whack-jobs calling themselves the Moral MAJORITY.

        • TimmyAnn says:

          The “moral Majority” was neither!

    • wulff says:

      Can anyone here answer if Buddhism HAS a creation myth? I thought they didn’t bother with such things.

      • TiltedHorizon says:

        I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong…. I believe the purpose of Buddhism was to liberate the mind from illusions. That said, any speculation on the subject would likely be deemed counterproductive to that goal and avoided.

    • Former dupe of a more ridiculous religion says:

      Just done the arithmetic. 7.1 billion creationists out of a world population of 6.97billion.
      So every man, woman and child on earth plus (presumably) 100,000,000 extra terrestrials believe in creation.
      Begs the question – what are we debating here?
      I take it you didn’t get high school maths either.

      • Former dupe of a more ridiculous religion says:

        obviously we atheists are just a figment of our own imaginations

  2. Big Guy says:

    Of course creationism is true. An the name of creator, as we know through revelation, is the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I am looking forward to my beer volcano and stripper factory after I die.

  3. Big Guy says:

    impostor my post’s are in gray purgatory conversely your crap is odiously spurious and remains visibly ignorant.

    do you want to be me?

    If so start praying for your forgiveness and eternal salvation, time is short for the Godless mob’s…

    • Big Guy says:

      Arrgh matey, you have been trying to be me for the past 3 month but you have failed miserably, like you did in school.
      And you will be stuck with stale beer and diseased strippers while I will be laughing at you from the beer volcano.
      The One and Only Big Guy

    • Midnight Rider says:

      I will call your odiously spurious and visibly ignorant and raise you an odiously ignorant and visibly spurious. Furthermore, I’ll heap on some spuriously visible and ignorantly odious and top it off with spuriously odiously visibly ignorant! woohoo!

      • puppygoogoo says:


        that made me laugh. cheers


      • Pesto says:

        I really needed a chuckle – thanks Midnight Rider!!

      • wulff says:

        Can I get a side of chide with that?

        • TiltedHorizon says:

          Lets not forget the ‘sacrosanct sacrilegious porn’ he used to speak so highly of.

        • wulff says:

          TH – that’s for dessert!

  4. Big Guy says:

    you’ll be laughing until you’re old & alone dieing from aids hep c or a football size liver.

    Then you will cry out for the one and only Big Guy

    You’re no different than anybody else pal. If death knocks on your door you’ll cry like a baby and turn to God
    so quick you pastfarian brethren heads will spin from there shoulders.

    • Big Guy says:

      Lol. Good things I am good at making things up and not letting facts get in my way. Jebus be proud, I am lying to spread the Goo Word.

    • puppygoogoo says:


      Dont be scared of punctuation. It’s not that hard.


    • puppygoogoo says:

      @ Gib,

      Sweet im going to be laughing for a while. My drinking patterns arent good enough for a football sized liver, and hep c and aids are out of the question due to common sense that we here all share. If death knocks on my door, doubt it but anyway, ill welcome him in, we’ll have a beer then head off to the beer volcano and stripper factory. Dont see how my heads going to spin from that?


      • Thomas L. Nielsen says:

        “Dont see how my heads going to spin from that?” – I’d say that depends in the number of brewskies you and the Grim Reaper knock back before heading off to that great big pirate ship in the skies.

        Or if Death gets to the point of inebriation where he goes “Why wash I here anywhoos…???”, you just tell him that he got the address wrong, that you were happy to see him and that you’ll help him to the door.

        Along those lines, when the day comes, hopefully in many years time, as it inevitably does for all of us, I sincerely hope that Terry Pratchett has gotten him right in the Discworld books. That would be seriously cool :-)

        Regards & all,

        Thomas L. Nielsen
        Scythes, Cloaks & Bone-polish Emporium

    • Spammyboy says:

      This is going to be one of those “No atheists in fox holes” arguments. Then again, there are no atheists in fox holes, because we would have had a quick discussion, killed, incapacitated or avoided the fox and gone and had tea with the liberal Christians, while giB prays…

    • wulff says:

      And since giB yuG hasn’t been paying attention, I will repeat this important news flash:

      SCIENCE has discovered a cure for AIDS.

      • TimmyAnn says:

        When did this happen? I know they have treatments that can lengthen AIDS patients’ life expectancy but I have not heard anything about a cure.

        • wulff says:

          It was a recent story about a man who received a combination bone-marrow-transplant/stem-cell-therapy. Do a Google search for “man cured of aids” and take your pick of the articles to read.

          While the articles I read did state that this treatment won’t work for every HIV/AIDS patient out there, it is still a major step toward eliminating a disease which so many have called “the wrath of God”.

        • TimmyAnn says:

          Well, for whatever reason there is no “reply” option on your post so I will have to reply to my own.

          That is great news indeed but the article I just read (and I admit I only read one) says, “The bigger miracle, though, is how his case has experts again believing they just might find a cure for AIDS.” I think it may be a tad premature to say they have found a cure exactly but this is certainly a very encouraging development! Thanks so much for bringing this to my attention!

  5. Big Guy says:

    I am arrogant, presumptuous and mendacious, and as such I am the embodiment of faith in Christ.

  6. Gordon_UK says:


    So sorry to offend your sensitive nature with our mocking, it must be nice to be part of a group that does not try to enforce it’s will on the people or put peoples lives at risk or treat Women as second class or persecute gays.

    Hang on a minute, whoops sorry I inadvertently described Christianity.

    So why is it the church continually tries to enforce it’s dogma of on the whole of society despite being at odds with the majority (abortion, divorce, same sex marriage)?

    Why do they continually try to stop the use of condoms in Africa where one person every 2 minutes dies of AIDS when it has been proven that condoms help stop the spread?

    Why can Women not rise though the ranks in the Church? Why where they not at the forefront of the Women’s Rights campaigns in they 1920’s?

    Why do they hate gays if we are all gods creation?



    • puppygoogoo says:


      You bring up some very good points. Additionally,

      1. Could it be they dont want to accept that God could be any of the sexual persuations that dont agree with their ‘writings’?
      2. Cant accept change within society and want to hold onto past lifestyles/glories?
      3. Want followers and not free-thinkers that might sway a crowds thinking pattern?
      4. Finally, have trouble accepting a persons real worth and that everyone, regardless of position, might have something of worth to contribute?


      • Gordon_UK says:

        Too true puppygoogoo

  7. Insightful Ape says:

    Our nutjob friend does have a point. Most of the world population are creationists of one stripe or another, just as at one point we were all geocentrists. It is not hard to see why: pattern recognition (often nonexistent patterns) and agency (attribution of man-like mental faculties where they don’t apply) are evolved human features. It is not hard to see why: having a very low threshold for “discovering” living things based on the flimsiest hint would have an important survival advantage for our hunter-gatherer ancestor dealing with all sorts of dangerous animals on the open prarie. Which is why humans have traditionally attributed eveything they didn’t understand to witches, ghosts, gods, evil spirits (like Jesus thing they caused epilepsy), “the illuminati”, etc.
    There are a number of books written on thi subject over the last few years by prominent scientists. My favorite two are “the Belief Instict” by Jesse Bering and “the Believing Brain” by Michael Shermer.

    • Big Guy says:

      monkey man evolution is an appropriate topic for you…

      • Big Guy says:

        Arrgh matey, ya don’t like the fact that yer ancestors were apes. Just like those who burned Giordano Bruno at the stake didn’t like the fact that the earth they stood on not be the center of the cosmos.
        That, and earth going round the sun debunked the book of Joshua, exposing it fer the lie it be.
        Shiver mi timbers!

  8. Big Guy says:

    @ Gordon_UK posting June 20, 2011 at 1:37 PM

    Darwin lived as a Christian his entire life he reconfirmed his religious conviction on his death bed in the Lady Hope story published in 1915. Scientist by nature are at odds with religion but having the one scientist who by virtue of his work epitomized secular views for atheists being a Godly man is comforting to Christians. Darwin new there was a God and he and his wife were believers.

    Consider the lack of verifiable evidence offered by science. No missing link, inadequate knowledge of the earth & universe, unknown earth mysteries discovered daily. The more science attempts to explain life and remove God the more apparent it becomes how small science actually is when it comes to the big picture.

    God made the primordial sludge,

    “Science imagined for alternatives from everything from Religion to politics.
    University Professor and Donald Bren Professor of Biological Sciences, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of California, Irvine
    TOPIC: Darwin’s Gift to Science and Religion

    BIO: Ayala is an evolutionary geneticist and molecular biologist who won the 2010 Templeton Prize. A former Dominican priest who was awarded the National Medal of Science in 2001, Ayala has championed faith as an important window for understanding the purpose and meaning of life while warning against the intrusion of religion into science. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences who has authored more than 1000 papers and 40 books, including ‘Darwin’s Gift to Science and Religion.’ He was the principal author of ”Science, Evolution, and Creationism’, a National Academy of Science publication refuting creationism and intelligent design. His most recent scientific achievements include demonstration that great apes serve as reservoirs for malaria causing parasites. He holds the title of University Professor, the highest rank in the California university system and is the only person at Irvine with that title.”

    “Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and Director of the Center for Computational Chemistry at the University of Georgia
    TOPIC: C.S. Lewis: Science and Scientism

    BIO: Schaefer is one of the most distinguished physical scientists in the world. The U.S. News and World Report cover story of December 23, 1991 speculated that Professor Schaefer is a ‘five time nominee for the Nobel Prize.’ He has received four of the most prestigious awards of the American Chemical Society, as well as the most highly esteemed award (the Centenary Medal) given to a non-British subject by London’s Royal Society of Chemistry. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Moreover, his general interest lectures on science and religion have riveted large audiences in nearly all the major universities in the U.S.A. and in Beijing, Berlin, Budapest, Calcutta, Cape Town, New Delhi, Hong Kong, Istanbul, London, Paris, Prague, Sarajevo, Seoul, Shanghai, Singapore, Sofia, St. Petersburg, Sydney, Tokyo, Warsaw, Zagreb, and Zurich. For 18 years Dr. Schaefer was a faculty member at the University of California at Berkeley, where he remains Professor of Chemistry, Emeritus. Since 1987 Dr. Schaefer has been Graham Perdue Professor of Chemistry and Director of the Center for Computational Chemistry at the University of Georgia.”

    “Physics Laboratory, Stanford University
    TOPIC: Mystery in Science, Reason in Religion: How the Two Intersect and Overlap
    BIO: Everitt, an expert in both space research and physics history, is principal investigator of the Gravity Probe B (GP-B) experiment, a collaboration between Stanford, NASA, and Lockheed Martin Corporation that is testing predictions of Albert Einstein’s 1916 theory of gravitation using four ultra-precise gyroscopes that have been orbiting the Earth in a satellite since 2004. He obtained his doctorate at the University of London (Imperial College) in 1959 for research under Nobel laureate P.M.S. Blackett, then spent two years at the University of Pennsylvania working on liquid helium before joining the Stanford faculty in 1962. His efforts have advanced the state-of-the-art in the areas of cryogenics, magnetics, quantum devices, telescope design, control systems, quartz fabrication techniques, metrology, and, most of all, gyroscope technology. A fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science since 2006, Everitt has been a member of numerous national and international committees, including the International Academy of Astronautics Committee on Relativity, the NASA Management Operations Working Group in Shuttle Astronomy, and the NASA Astrophysics Council. His many awards include the Tyndall Prize in Experimental Physics, a Guggenheim Fellowship, the 1997 Marcel Grossmann Award, and the 2005 NASA Distinguished Public Service Medal.”

    need I go on? from the one and only Big Guy

    • Big Guy says:

      Yeah money corrupts. The accomodationist Templeton Foundation has bottomless pockets and it gets credible scientists to say things that 90% of their colleagues disagree with. Never mind that those scientists themselves are never crazy enough to deny evolution, their statements are taken advantage of by the craziest of creationist like me.

    • Big Guy says:

      Incidnetally, my idiotic alter ego, the lady Hope story is a fake. Even Answers in Genesis recognizes that.

    • theFewtheProudtheMarinara says:

      Dr. Ayala has made significant and wide-ranging experimental and theoretical
      contributions to evolution theory. His scientific research focuses on population and evolutionary
      genetics, including the origin of species, genetic diversity of populations, the origin of malaria, the
      population structure of parasitic protozoa, and the molecular clock of evolution. He also writes about
      the interface between religion and science, and on philosophical issues concerning epistemology,
      ethics, education, and the philosophy of biology. He was a chief witness in the creationist trials in
      Arkansas in 1981 that prevented religion from being taught as science in the classroom.
      He was the principal author of ”Science, Evolution, and Creationism’, a National Academy of Science publication
      REFUTING creationism and intelligent design.

      Schaefer is often cited[citation needed] as an example of the Discovery Institute inflating the academic credentials and affiliations of prominent intelligent design advocates. The institute prominently and frequently mentions the Nobel Prize in connection with Schaefer,[7][21][22] referring to him as a “five-time nominee for the Nobel Prize” despite the fact that Nobel Prize nominations remain confidential for fifty years.

      Hoist on your own petard, Big Fraud. You cited a man who refutes your point, and another whose credentials are artifically inflated. Nice try, dumbass.

      • Big Guy says:

        Ayala is a legit scientist. But by taking money from Templeton he has become a mouthpiece for this corrupt organization, with an agenda to paper over the chasm between science and religion that is growing wider every day.
        Scientists are only human.

    • Gordon_UK says:

      Well spherical idiot Big Guy has responded but as expected it’s no answer.

      Wow the ‘Lady hope story’ right big guy there is a clue in it’s name ‘STORY’ which is confirmed by his daughter Henrietta Litchfield who stated “I was present at his deathbed, Lady Hope was not present during his last illness, or any illness. I believe he never even saw her, but in any case she had no influence over him in any department of thought or belief. He never recanted any of his scientific views, either then or earlier. We think the story of his conversion was fabricated in the U.S.A. … …The whole story has no foundation what-so-ever.”

      Anyway moving on..

      Francisco J. Ayala, Even as he has warned against religion’s intrusion into science.
      Henry F. Schaefer, III, is a computational and theoretical chemist (not quite the right field)
      Everitt (to quote your own post) “His efforts have advanced the state-of-the-art in the areas of cryogenics, magnetics, quantum devices, telescope design, control systems, quartz fabrication techniques, metrology, and, most of all, gyroscope technology” – Sorry how is he an expert to back up ID??

      Try giving us 10 evolutionary biologists who would be considered in the top of their field who do not receive funding from a religious group to back up you claim.

      You are still to explain where your god came from, who made him? The FSM maybe?



    • Spammyboy says:

      All your talk of Darwin is as confused as your ‘odiferously studious’ posts from before. The fact that the discoverer of the most bulletproof theory of evolution ever was Christian just shows that Creation ‘science’ has nothing to do with Christianity and everything to do with ignorance.

    • Gordon_UK says:

      Big Guy

      So after a bit more digging around I came across an article with seems to indicate some merit to ‘creation science’ techniques. Namely classic multidimensional scaling (CMDS) and taxon correlation which when used by Dr Senter of Fayette State University seem to prove the validity of the method.

      Unfortunately for creationists when used correctly (i.e. using all the available date rather then cerry picking what fits you model) it seem to prove evolution, whoops!!

      If you would like to see the full article follow the below link.



1 7 8 9 10 11 78

Leave a Reply