You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘atheism’ tag.

The entire post is pasted here, without permission, from the infidel professor’s blog, after the jump.

(Warning:  It may be a near occasion of sin for some to read the following anti-God, anti-intellectual diatribe, and the picture may make you think violent things.  Pray in reparation for this horrid crime, and remember, Our Lord’s body has undergone worse things as a consequence of our sins.) sacrilege

Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

My thoughts, made better, by Mark Shea. The militant atheists daily and obsessively rage against the god who doesn’t exist They are either crazy, stupid, or afraid. I choose No. 3:

One of the constant boasts of the atheist is that he maintains a clear-eyed focus on Real Life while the theist (and especially those odious Christians) spend all their time trying to please an imaginary sky god.

And yet here are their priorities: “The Jesus Project may be the single most important commitment that the Center for Inquiry and its affiliated organizations—among them the Council for Secular Humanism, publisher of FREE INQUIRY—will ever make.”

Jesus, the imaginary sky god is the Most Important Thing in the World for them. Far more important the doing one damn thing about the oppression, exploitation, corruption and murder happening right under their noses at the hands of their Chinese hosts.

Let’s for the sake of argument, grant that Jesus doesn’t exist. Duly noted. So why are you spending all your time fighting with somebody who doesn’t exist and spending none of your time actually, like, dealing with real oppression at the hands of…. ohhhhhh!!!!!… at the hands of your fellow atheists! Ah! Got it!

Proceed. Beat that sky god! Get him boys! He’s the real problem!

WAC

A thoughtful article on the Right’s unlikely union with intellectual atheist Christopher Hitchens over the war. Recently, Hitchens advocated total victory through the eradication of the fundamentalist Muslim population. Written by Stephen Braunlich:

The constant history of large scale atheistic movements has been one of mass slaughter and oppression of the religious, as was seen in the French, Russian, Chinese, and Mexican Revolutions as well as countless other smaller revolutions. Now this isn’t to say that every individual atheist is a genocidal maniac, simply that those revolutions that have been atheistic typically use the strategy of “putting a bullet through every god-haunted brain.”

(. . .)

If the argument advanced by conservatives to persuade traditionalists to take an interventionist posture in the war on terror is the necessity to protect our very culture, they ought to consider what company they are keeping. When your allies in a conflict have the same goals as your enemy, are you really doing the right thing?

Fifty years ago, on December 28th, Whittaker Chambers, writing in National Review, drummed Ayn Rand out of the conservative movement with a single line. “From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard, from painful necessity, commanding: ‘To a gas chamber — go!’“ Chambers knew that both Rand and Stalin were an end that was the same in essence if different in appearance: a godless world. One was capitalist, the other communist, but “a materialism of the Right and a materialism of the Left first surprisingly resemble, then, in action, tend to blend each with each, because, while differing at the top in avowed purpose, and possibly in conflict there, at bottom they are much the same thing.”

So 50 years later, here’s the question to National Review and its modern counterparts: do they have the courage to drum out of their movement those individuals who, like Rand, may seem to be worthwhile allies in a cultural conflict, but who in the end share a goal with our enemies?

Read the whole thing here.

WAC

By Chuck Colson:

One of the biggest obstacles facing what’s called the “New Atheism” is the issue of morality. Writers like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens have to convince people that morals and values are possible in a society that does not believe in God.

It’s important to understand what is not in doubt: whether an individual atheist or agnostic can be a “good” person. Of course they can, just as a professing Christian can do bad things.

The issue is whether the secular worldview can provide a basis for a good society. Can it motivate and inspire people to be virtuous and generous?

Not surprisingly, Richard Dawkins offers a “yes”—grounded in Darwinism. According to him, natural selection has produced a moral sense that is shared by all people. While our genes may be, in his words “selfish,” there are times when cooperation with others is the selfish gene’s best interest. Thus, according to him, natural selection has produced what we call altruism.

Except, of course, that it is not altruism at all: It is, at most, enlightened self-interest. It might explain why “survival of the fittest” is not an endless war of all against all, but it offers no reason as to why someone might give up their lives or even their lifestyle for the benefit of others, especially those whom they do not even know.

Darwinist accounts of human morality bear such little resemblance to the way real people live their lives that the late philosopher Michael Stove, an atheist himself, called them a “slander against human beings.”

Being unable to account for human altruism is not enough for Sam Harris, author of Letter to a Christian Nation. In a recent debate with Rick Warren, he complained about Christians “contaminating” their altruistic deeds in places like Africa with “religious ideas” like “the divinity of Jesus.” Instead of rejoicing at the alleviation of suffering, he frets over someone hearing the Gospel.

In response, Warren pointed out the inconvenient (for Harris, that is) truth: You won’t find many atheists feeding the hungry and ministering to the sick in places like Africa or Mother Teresa’s Calcutta. It is precisely because people believe in the divinity of Jesus that they are willing to give up their lives (sometimes literally) in service to those whom Jesus calls “His brothers.” And that’s why my colleagues and I spend our lives ministering in prisons.

In contrast, the record of avowedly atheistic regimes is, shall we say, less than inspiring. Atheist regimes like the Soviet Union, Red China, and Cambodia killed tens of millions of people in an effort to establish an atheistic alternative to the City of God. For men like Stalin and Mao, people were expendable precisely because they were not created in the image of a personal God. Instead, they were objects being manipulated by impersonal historical forces.

One atheist understood the moral consequences of his unbelief: That was Nietzsche, who argued that God is dead, but acknowledged that without God there could be no binding and objective moral order.

Of course, the “New Atheists” deny this. Instead, they unconvincingly argue that you can have the benefits of an altruistic, Christian-like morality without God.

Nietzsche would laugh—and wonder why they don’t make atheists like they used to.

Welcome to FIB!

Uninformed Commentary on Religion, Law, History, and Society, Provided by a Complete Outsider.

Your Comments are Welcome and Encouraged.

Updated periodically.

Blogroll me, and I will Blogroll you.

Holding the Shotgun

Mr. JPM, Papal altar designer, Vimp of the ferulo, and very important guy in certain D.C. liturgical circles: At the eye of Hurricane Benedict.

Out for Smokes (Editor Emeritus)

Mr. WAC, founder of FIB, now retired from active duty.

Join The Bloger!s’ Crusade

Readers Respond to FIB

I just want to congratulate you . . . for the great work you’re doing on your blog. I’m fairly new to blogging myself, but your blog seems to get a lot of traffic and it’s very well done. You certainly are “giving back” in a substantial way, and thus providing a wonderful service to the Church. . . . I’m going to visit your site more often and will offer comments as I can.

-Leon Suprenant, Past-President, Catholics United for the Faith

I much enjoyed your conversion story . . .. Your other material is also very interesting.

James Likoudis, Past-President, Catholic United for the Faith

Even though we’ve always had differing opinions on things like politics and religion. I have always felt proud of your conviction, even in our younger days. I have always felt I was a better person for knowing you . . ..

You rock.

-Eliza Pointer Lee, Childhood Friend

God bless you for standing up for Christ and His Church.

-Dan Hunter

Keep up the good cyber-work.

-Jim Herrick, Lexington [Kentucky] Latin Mass Committee

I enjoy the blog.

-Rev. Msgr. Charles Pope, Pastor, Holy Comforter, Washington, D.C.

Your blog lacks all the pretension and egoism that characterizes the vast majority of the blogosphere, and as such, is to be counted among the few, the proud, the only blogs worth reading.

-JPM, Frequent Commentator

I perused your site and was quite pleased with what I saw. Adding you to the blogroll now.

-Mike from Conservative Donnybrook

. . . it may be encouraging for you to know that we occasionally (read: approximately once monthly) mention your blog on our morning show. Because of your diligence, we were able to prepare adequately for a Padre Pio interview this morning. Keep up the good work.

Matt Swaim, Catholic Broadcaster and Author of Apoloblogology

I like the blog, too.

-Mrs. LMC, Wife of the Author