The Christian Sense of Siege in America Baffles Me

Yesterday, I saw something on Right Wing Watch.  The Jim Bakker show features there regularly.  That guy is one of many Christian hucksters who sells belief to old-ass stupid people along with his merchandise.  For the longest time, it was his Bonus Buckets.  A bucket filled with disgusting slop that you could keep for 20 years and it would be just fine.  There was even an episode where they ate some of it, and I could visibly see them cringing with every bite.  Oh, and you can shit in the buckets when they’re empty.  Because plumbing is gonna be gone in the apocalypse.

This most recent bit had this chick named Cindy Jacobs, who decided to say a whole bunch of really stupid shit.  First, she said that God is looking to come back all the time.  He’s tired of how much gay sex is going on, and he’s itching to come back with his smiting arm.  But the prayer of Christians is what holds him back.  Wow.  The ego of these people.  However, it goes further.  It seems there’s a civil war coming!

Why is a civil war coming?  It’s quite simple – because evil heathen atheists like me are attacking the Christians.  We’re taking away their Bibles!  We’re stopping them from worshiping their bullshit deity!  From preaching their gospel to the people!  My only thought when I hear shit like this is – who?  Who is doing this?  Who, where?  Citation, bitch.

I have always found this Christian concept of siege so fascinating.  Especially here in America!  Like, you can’t get elected to public office in most states unless you kiss the church’s ass.  Roughly 80% of this country identifies itself as Christian.  That number is the overwhelming majority.  So where are these instances of complete siege where the Christians are having to prep for civil war because they are so oppressed?  Where are these places?!  Someone please inform stupid-ass me where this is happening.  I’d love to know.

Part of me wonders where this comes from.  This sense of persecution.  Hell, it’s a fucking need, at this point.  They need to feel that their beliefs are being fought for in some big way.  Maybe it’s because the mainstream media is very left-leaning, and tends to showcase values that they find antithetical to their own.  Like how a PBS cartoon had two anthropomorphic gay characters getting married and people just lost their shit.  Never mind that they never kiss on screen.  You don’t see the furry people fucking.  The most you see is them linking arms and walking down the aisle.  That’s it.  But so much of the conservative Internet lost its shit.

Maybe it’s because Christianity has never had any legitimate resistance to their values and ideas for the bulk of human history.  Now, young people are leaving the church in droves.  The well of money that they depend on to continue is drying up.  Values that they despise are on television and becoming more and more accepted as time goes on.  Part of me wonders if the world is a very scary place for an old Christian who grew up in post World War II America.  It must be.

Meanwhile, in the world outside of Christian fantasy, there’s a very different reality that I see.  One of the people dearest to my heart was disowned by her family because she’s gay.  She tried to hang on to her belief to be closer to her mom, who left the family too after the father kicked my friend out.  The two were so close growing up, and my friend’s mom chose the relationship with her daughter over that with her husband.  Proud of her.  There are also the people who lose relationships with their families because they don’t believe in God.  Not anything nearly as big as being gay, but I’ve heard countless stories from young people and disowned teenagers about how their families hate them now because of not believing in Bronze Age mythology that has no proof outside of a fucking book.

These people want a sense of siege.  That their beliefs are being fought for against the heathen enemy of liberal culture.  All while Christian bigotry kills relationships for things like loving someone of the same gender or not buying what’s in that stupid book.  It pisses me off seeing stuff like that bitch Cindy Jacobs talking about how the Christians are under so much backlash and will have to get guns to go out and fight for their values.  What world do these people believe in.

I mean sure, they’re preaching to a crowd of REALLY old white people.  People who will never actually be getting their guns and going out to the streets.  It’s people who they want to scare into paying them more of their money to buy their merch.  I’m a firm believer in the idea that all of the big preachers who have big shows and have big scams are just as much of an atheist as I am.  From Ray Comfort, all the way to Jim Bakker.  I think all of them know this is a scam and are just trying to fleece the gullible for their silver shekels.  But there are people I know in my extended family who buy this bullshit.  And it’s always so frustrating to me at holidays (which is the only time I see these people, by design) when I have to hear them talk about this and just bite my finger to keep myself from destroying their bullshit arguments and thereby burning the bridges between all of them and myself.

Christianity is the dominate religion in this country.  By a massive margin.  This idea that they are so oppressed is pure fiction, from the minds of people who want to profit off their fear.  Countless movies now exist with this message.  Pure Flix basically has this mantra as their bread and butter.  And I don’t know where the line has to be in order for these people to buy that it’s all garbage.  Though, these people believe things on faith.  Belief without evidence.  So trying to hope for a growth in logical thinking is commensurate to hoping for my cat to come from the grave and fly.

Until next time, a quote,

“But if anything else, what this press conference shows it that the NRA hates on video games for infringing on their own violent hero fantasy and binary morality.  What’s scary, though, is that that’s actually their worldview.  And their political platform.  And they have lots and lots of guns.  I’m sorry, who am I supposed to be afraid of, again?” – George Weidman

Peace out,

Maverick

So Your Feelings Prove There’s An Afterlife? (A response to Dennis Prager)

One of the big modern conservative talking points is that they are “facts before feelings.”  They don’t need pathos, they have logic and reason on their side.  All those leftist (a term I still hate) snowflakes just appeal to emotions and attack people they don’t like!  So the mantra goes.  You know, until you say something that Ben Shapiro doesn’t like.  Then he immediately runs to “anti-semite!”  Or if you say something Jordan Peterson doesn’t like, and then he talks about how he wants to assault you.  And don’t even get me started on what a thin-skinned little bitch Trump is.  The story with the USS John McCain was fucking hilarious.  This guy is the Napoleon of little bitches.

So it doesn’t surprise me that Dennis Prager decided to make a video about the existence of the afterlife, and rather than making any kind of rational argument, he immediately runs to the emotional appeal.  Same as he did when making his perfectly logical defense of the death penalty.  I’m sure he considers himself “pro-life” too.  Conservative America is big on being full of shit in that department.  Let’s watch the video, then we’ll talk about it.

He begins by asking – is there and afterlife?  Nope.  Glad we got that out of the way.  All of your existence is tied in to the brain, which has your personality, emotions, actions, and ability to feel anything.  Without that, you’d die.  So yeah, the idea that life continues after that is gone is ludicrous.  His answer is just the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard – if there is a god, there is an afterlife.  How could you possibly know that?  Assuming that a deist god of unknown properties exists, how does that immediately correlate to there being an afterlife?  There could be a deist god and still be no afterlife.  Or after you die, you could become part of some greater subconscious, a la Code Geass: Lelouch of the Rebellion.  What happens after death is something that no one really knows, but the possibilities are potentially limitless if a deist god does exist.  However, since none has been proven, the reality is that it is almost certain that after you die, you blink out of existence.  Not the most comforting thought, but there it is.

Then we get into the emotional appeal.  Prager argues that the world is filled with injustice, and since those guilty of injustice aren’t punished in this life, the only way they get punishment is in the next one, from some kind of Hell concept.  So not only are we going to stipulate that a deist god has to be involved, but there has to be a concept of Hell too.  How do you know that’s a thing?  How do you know the deist God doesn’t just sent everyone to the same place?  You make so many assertions, without proving any of them.  This is all just emotional bullshit.

We then get to him acknowledging that this afterlife pathos he argues for only exists if the deist god is “good and just.”  Well then, that rules out the god you believe in.  He sent bears to maul children for making fun of his prophet being bald.  He commanded his armies to kill pregnant women and smash the heads of babies against rocks, along with taking the virgin girls as sex slaves.  His only son said that he wasn’t here to bring peace but a sword.  Makes me wonder who you’re talking about.  Oh wait, you’re not gonna defend this position.  It’s just a postulation you’re making to be able to justify your point of view.  Brilliant.

Your next postulation is that the physical reality we exist in isn’t the only reality.  Wow.  I’m sure he’s not talking about alternate universes, which is an easy thing to believe in.  After all, nothing in this universe exists in ones, so why is there only one universe?  No, he’s talking about some ethereal plane of existence that just exists.  In addition, part of this postulation is that the soul is real and it exists there.  Just…wow.  So many things without one lick of evidence.  It’s all just a thought he has.  None of this has any basis in fact.  None of this has any amount of proof.  It’s just him talking.

He briefly acknowledges atheists like me who think all of this is bullshit, but his counter-argument is – if you believe the stuff I do, there is an afterlife!  O-kay.  I guess so.  To you.  But reality doesn’t just conform to the way you want it to be.  He says that if there is a god, but no afterlife, then that god is cruel.  Um…are you really opening this can of worms, Prager?  I mean, the deity you believed in condones murder, has a punishment for rape that is a bad joke, doesn’t like women, has no real compunction against abortion since there is a passage where he talks about forcing women accused of adultery to drink “bitter water” that causes a miscarriage, and is unfathomably petty.  Not to mention, he created a realm of existence where you are tortured forever and ever until the end of time, but claims that he loves you.  The existence of a mythical heaven doesn’t negate these traits, dude.

Again acknowledging the other side of the argument, he says that those who don’t believe say that immortality is gained through the good works that people do, and the memories of those who loved them.  Yeah, that makes perfect sense.  The great writers and painters and intellectuals and those who made a mark of society are remembered through those works.  I read Michael Crichton’s books, and he lives on in me loving them.  But naturally, Prager doesn’t accept this.  He said “that’s what they want to believe.”  How is it untrue?  His argument is that it’s “meaningless.”  Um, no, dumbass.  It’s meaning that the individual has for their own life.  Meaning is something unique to everybody.  Some people find meaning through making lots of offspring and furthering the overpopulation of this planet.  Some people find meaning through travel, or making works of art, or leaving their mark in a career.  Every person has their own sense of meaning.  You are spitting on all of those people’s beliefs because they don’t have your sense of belief about the nature of reality.  Fuck you.

Then he goes on to make one of the most insulting arguments that I’ve ever heard – dead children and dead babies cannot leave behind good works.  What a fucking asshole.  I have a cousin who had a Down Syndrome baby who didn’t live to see their first birthday.  But that child lives on in the heart of the parents who had him.  You spit on that child’s memory because it was too young to accomplish great things.  Maybe you missed that bit about living on in people’s hearts, you unsympathetic pile of shit.

His next argument is that bad works usually live longer than good ones.  I mean…I guess?  It depends on who it is.  Bad things are happening all over the world right now that nobody outside of those they are happening to will ever remember.  I can’t tell you what warlord is slaughtering people in some African nation right now, but I can tell you what I read about in Neil deGrasse Tyson’s latest book.  Part of the problem is that in modern society, where we have click-bait Internet news that loves a good bad story is that it makes it harder to see the bright side.  That is a problem and I do think it needs to be addressed.  But that’s a problem society has to deal with.  We have an issue with nihilism and the despair that comes with it encroaching on society and causing suicide rates to spike.  We have a lot of work to do.  Not that you care, you unrepentant prick.

Then he goes after people who don’t have children.  Because I guess only children can have someone live on in their memories?  Yeah, because fuck extended family, friends, loved ones of all stripes, the occasional fur-baby.  This idea that we need children to have meaning in such bullshit.  This is part of the problem.  We venerate parenthood.  Especially motherhood.  It needs to stop.  Overpopulation is killing our species.  It’s an unpopular opinion, but it’s true.  He goes on to say that living on in anyone’s memory isn’t immortality.  Well yeah, Prager.  It’s not.  Immortality in the strictest sense isn’t real.  At least not with the current scientific knowledge.  I’m sure the day will come that people live forever.  That sounds awful, to me.  The idea of being stuck having to work a job and do this same shit that I do now, over and over for all time, that sounds like my personal definition of Hell.  Screw the lake of fire.  At least there I’d talk to some unique people.  Being stuck in the cubicle I’m in now sounds like real Hell.

So all of this culminates with him saying that without an afterlife, we don’t live on.  Period.  He decided that his “brilliant” refutation of this is so profound that he destroyed the counter-arguments one could make.  Gee, seems like I broke down his positions pretty handily.  So no, it isn’t “period”, Prager.  Maybe to you, but not me.  We then go back to the emotional appeal – you won’t see your family again!  Your murderer won’t get punished!  He describes it as a roll of the dice.  Not entirely, moron.  Half of the things in life will be things you have no control over.  Half will be things you do.  It’s up to you to know the difference.  That’s part of the human experience.  One that you get to wall yourself off from, waiting for that day you die and then get to go to your sky-daddy and be told how awesome you are.  Though, I believe there was some religious figure you confirmed that there is no sex in Heaven.  Fuck that.  I’m not getting any in this life.  Why would I want to go to an afterlife where I still get none?

It ends with him recapping his emotional appeal, and saying that his belief in God and the afterlife keeps him sane.  Well, buddy, you do you.  If it weren’t for the fact that you are part of a conservative think that that shits on science and reality, I wouldn’t care.  You’re an idiot with stupid ideas.  And that’s all I have to say about that.

Until next time, a quote,

“The worst thing about war is the effect on children. If they’re lucky, they’re raised believing the galaxy is a good place.  Some rough spots here and there, but overall, life makes sense.  Now they find out that everything they were told is a lie.  That there are monsters in the shadows that want to destroy them and everyone they care about.  If we succeed, there are going to be a lot of angry orphans, looking for answers.” – Garrus Vakarian, Mass Effect 3

Peace out,

Maverick

Let’s Answer a Question You Should Ask Your Non-Christian Friends

For those who didn’t know, in addition to being a filthy liberal, I’m also a heathen atheist.  I have heard all the arguments for the existence of God, and I find them all to be lacking.  I don’t go into this all that much anymore, because my days of being the anti-religion shit-kicker are long behind me.  Not to mention, I haven’t heard an original argument.  However, I was made aware of this video, that has a Christian speaker who has a question that can seal the deal on turning a non-believer into a believer.  Okay, let’s hope this is an original argument.  Let’s watch this video, and then we’ll talk about it.

We start off with a very timid girl asking a question while chewing gum (that is so annoying.  Don’t be one of those people) wanting to know how to get through to her non-believer friends.  This dude’s answer should be good.

He begins by saying that this is the question he has when he goes “back and forth” with non-believers and feels there is “some resistance.”  Yeah, resistance to his religious nonsense that I genuinely don’t understand how people can believe.  It is so ludicrous on the face of it.  The idea that there is a magic man in the sky who created everything.  How can anyone buy that?  Not a rhetorical question.  Feel free to try your shot at giving me an original argument.

Then he says the question – if Christianity were true, would you become a Christian?  What?!  That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard!  For starters, you have to not only prove that God is real, but that the God that’s real is the one you believe in.  The ego of this assertion is mind-boggling.  I’m supposed to be unable to answer this?  Really?  Because my answer is easy – assuming you could prove that not only does a deity exist, but it’s the one that you believe in, my answer is – no.  I wouldn’t.  Why?  Because this deity of yours is sitting back and doing fuck-all while humanity is both fucking and polluting ourselves into extinction.  While children are getting limbs blown off by landmines.  While there are parasites designed to eat brains.  That’s all they do.  This world is a festering pile of shit, and if you can prove to me that your God exists, I would point to that and then ask the holier-than-thou fuck why he expects me to be cool with that.  I’d ask where he gets off think that that is okay.

Now of course, you’d say “then I guess you aren’t going to Heaven.”  Fine by me.  I want no part of a Heaven that the God this man worships is involved with.  A God who is small.  Who created this massive, incredible universe, but for some reason actually cares where a man sticks his penis.  A God who was able to create the countless worlds in the ever-expanding vastness of our universe, yet decided to send a bear to maul children to death for making fun of one of his prophets.  A God who is able to create life from absolutely nothing, as it says in Genesis, yet is also very concerned if a youth is bad-mouthing their parents.  Yeah, I want NOTHING to do with that God.  Not one damn thing.

The dude decides to make my point for me and say that other atheists have had the same answer I have.  Okay.  Curious to see what his rebuttal is to this position.  He begins by saying that because atheists claim to be reasonable, but then says that if something is proven to be true, would we believe it, and says we don’t.  Wait a minute!  That ain’t what you asked, dude.  You asked that if Christianity were proven to be true, would we become Christian.  Asking that and then asking if I believe it are two very different things.  I would not become a Christian because the God you worship is either malevolent, incapable, or not a deity at all.  Your God is pathetic, yet demands that we all think that he’s all-knowing, all-loving, and completely omnipotent.  Why would I want to become part of you?  Believing in something that has been proven and accepting that and following it are two very different things.  As if your beliefs being proven would be so powerful that I would have to instantly become a Christian on the spot.  No.

I love when Christians do this.  They try and make a point but then turn it into something else.  The reason they do this is because they know that they can’t win a straight argument with someone who is an educated non-believer.  Their beliefs don’t hold up to scrutiny.  So instead they have to make it about something else.  They have to take their points and then stealthfully tweak them to an argument that works for them.  Kirk Cameron was cited pointing this out by telling people to get around atheist’s logic and appeal directly to their emotions.  This dude is dealing with a strawman who is really stupid and wouldn’t see what he did there.  Idiot.

We then get into “they just want to be God of their own lives.”  Ugh.  I was really hoping for an original argument.  I really, really was.  I hoped this dude had something I haven’t heard before.  Armoured Skeptic once said he’d give up his left nipple for an original religious argument, and part of me wants to go in on him with that, before he moved on to other things.  Dude, you are the God of your own life.  Why?  Because God follows all the same values and prejudices that you do.  Find any Christian, and they will tell you that God and Jesus think all the same things they do.  It’s quite something.  Don’t like gay people?  Neither does God.  Don’t like openly sexual people?  Neither does God.  Don’t like the idea of your money going to help people you don’t like?  Well, you can make it so your God doesn’t like that either.  It’s really amazing.  It’s almost like the fucker can read your mind.  Isn’t that amazing?

Oh, we got another question!  Wait, never mind.  It’s him asking the audience if the non-believer they want to convert is someone who is “actively seeking truth” or just someone who is openly hostile to religion.  Wow.  Strawman Atheist strikes again!  Dude, I do look for truth.  The difference is, your world has no truth.  You believe in a magic man who has properties that could not be real if not for magic.  It’s a fact.  He flooded the Earth and had two of every animal in a boat and then had all those animals spread across the world without leaving any trace of themselves.  Magic!  He had a dude with Hulk strength all because of his hair.  Magic!  He created a man by forming dirt and then breathing into it.  Magic!  He turned a woman into a pillar of salt.  Well, that one could be the Crimson Alchemist.  Oh wait, it’s magic!  There is no truth in what you have to say.  I’m not openly hostile to your religion.  I’ve just heard all the arguments and found it wanting.

And what do you know, his audience agrees with him!  When he asks if the person the audience is thinking of is seeking truth, none of them raise their hands.  It’s all just hostility towards God and the idea of God.  This argument is so fucking dumb.  I’ve heard it all a thousand times in a thousands different forms.  “You just want the freedom to sin!”  “You just don’t wanna believe in God!  The evidence is everywhere!”  And naturally this dude sits in a room full of people who agree with him and they can all have their confirmation bias safely stoked without any fear of contradiction.  Because that’s how the Christian world works.  A magical echo chamber, just like pretty much every other group in this country.

He concludes saying to just pray for the person who doesn’t believe in God and that will do the trick, because they’ll have some tribulation in their lives that will bring them to Jesus.  Bullshit.  I’ve had a TON of tribulation, never once did I think Jesus could do anything for me.  It’s all a crock.  But whatever.  That’s the world we live in.

So, this was stupid.  I beat that argument to death fairly easily.  Always hoping for that one person who asks me a question that really gets me thinking.  A man can dream, after all.

Until next time, a quote,

“But in the bullshit department, a businessman can’t hold a candle to a clergyman.” – George Carlin

Peace out,

Maverick

Let’s Answer 10 Questions Atheists CANNOT Answer

Another day, another religious person who has a video they’ve made asking ten questions that they claim no atheist can answer.  None.  We’re all stumped by these ten questions.  Alright, Christian.  You’ve got my attention.  Here’s a link to the video in question (pun intended), now let’s get started.

Do you believe science answers everything?

No, I don’t.  There are plenty of things that science doesn’t know.  The difference is that the science is willing to admit the things it doesn’t know.  It is the pursuit of knowledge.  And that knowledge has to be tested, because sometimes it is wrong.  When was the last time that your religious book was updated?

Why do atheists care if people worship God?

You know, if everyone was civil to one-another, and didn’t try and use their religious beliefs as justification for violence and hate, I wouldn’t.  No joke, I would think that you are misguided, but live and let live.  The problem is, I know too many people like my girly-mate who was kicked out of her home because she’s gay.  It’s a sin and God hates it.  That’s why she lost her home at the tender age of 15.  So many religious people claim that religion isn’t hurting anyone, but between the violence that Islam inspires, to the hate that conservative believers of the Bible do, you cannot argue that it doesn’t.

Can nothing create something?

How do you know there was nothing?  How do you know that the universe hasn’t always existed in one form or another?  How do you know that our universe wasn’t birthed into existence because of another universe?  Not to mention, since this is the cosmological argument, and the argument is that you needed a God to create the universe, what created your god?  Why does that have to come from nothing?  Man, these questions aren’t stumping me the way the title of this video suggests.

How do you know God doesn’t exist?

I’m not a nostic atheist.  I don’t know for certain.  The existence of a God with unknown properties is an unfalsifiable hypothesis.  You can’t prove he does exist, just like I can’t prove he doesn’t.  However, atheism isn’t a claim on that.  It’s a claim that, given what I’ve learned and the lack of evidence of this Christian God out there, I do not believe that he does exist.  Christians love to argue that atheists just think – God not real!  But in reality, there are some who do, and some who don’t.  However, your evidence for the existence of God does not hold up to scrutiny.  Especially your god.  Like I said, a God whose properties are up the air, I cannot disprove.  But your God, who is wrathful, prejudiced, ignorant of the world as if he was created by desert primitives, that part I can disprove.

What is the origin of life?

I don’t know.  It’s one of the big questions that science is trying to answer.  There is the prevailing theory of abiogenesis, but it hasn’t been proven.  Science is the perspective of cosmic humility.  It doesn’t say “I have a book of desert fairytales!  Therefore I know everything!”  It says “that’s an intriguing question.  Let’s find an answer.”  The thing that a lot of religious people take for granted is that one day, science will be able to create life in a laboratory setting.  It will be basic life, sure, but we will be able to create it based on the tools that exist in the real world.  No spiritual powers required.  On that day, religion is going to be pushed up against a wall because one of the last bastions it has will be gone.

Where does morality come from?

From those in power.  People in power give moral systems to those under them.  This idea that religious people have of “objective morality” doesn’t exist.  The closest we will come to seeing that is with empathy.  But some people have more empathy than others, so it’s not a perfect system.  But every culture throughout history has had a different sense of morality.  Hell, your own book has differing sets of morality from the Old Testament to the New.  So yeah, it’s not holy.  It’s human.

If you were given evidence of God, would you become a Christian?

Assuming it stands up to scientific scrutiny, I’d believe that God exists.  Though, given how many horrible things this all-powerful being sits back and does NOTHING about, I don’t think I’d want to follow him.  As Stephen Fry put it, I’d have some words for the guy if we met.  Heaven be damned.

Why are there no transitional forms in the present?

Human perspective has this really dumb thing where it doesn’t understand how long it takes for speciation to occur.  We live short lives.  On the grand scale of the growth of life in the universe, our time has been unfathomably short.  Shorten down the growth of life on Earth to a day, and humanity as we know it today wouldn’t have existed until literally one second ago.  It takes hundreds of generations for complete speciation to occur.  Though, we can see smaller versions of it.  Like when a species that can breed together is suddenly separated by a seismic event or something of that nature.  Then they evolve in different paths, and when they find each other again, they can’t breed.  That is one example

Do you live according to what you believe, or your lack of belief?

I live based on my own sense of integrity that has been informed by years of being alive.  It has been informed by my sense of empathy, and my experiences of over 30 years of being alive on this world.  It isn’t a belief that guides my life.  It’s values I have culminated over my entire life.  And yeah, part of that is not believing in God, but that is just a small pieces of a much larger tapestry that is myself.  Ya dig?

If God exists, will you not lose your soul when you die?

What?  I don’t even get the written question.  However, I think the question he speaks out loud is more toward what he is talking about.  He basically puts out Pascal’s Wager.  The idea that if I die and don’t believe in God, I risk more than the Christian.  Well, let me put it to you – what if you religion is wrong?  What if you end up in the same Hell as me?  What if the real God sees your faith in this fake God and sends you to Hell, but rewards me for not believing in it and welcomes me to Heaven?  There are an infinite number of permutations of this thought process where either we both lose, or you lose and I win.

But to put it another way – I would rather not sacrifice my intellect to a belief that makes no fucking sense because I am afraid of a mythical place that doesn’t even make scientific sense.  After all, only our bodies can feel pain.  That’s where the nerve endings are.  Do souls have the ability to feel pain?  Since a soul has NEVER been demonstrated to exist, how do you prove that they can feel pain?  This whole wager makes no sense on any level, and thus I have never bought into it.

And that’s all the questions that an atheist CANNOT answer.  I answered all of them pretty handily.  Yay!  This guy is another stupid creationist.  Wow…

Until next time, a quote,

“I’d say, ‘bone cancer in children?  What’s that about?  How dare you!  How dare you create a world in which there is such misery that is not our fault.  It’s not right.  It’s utterly, utterly evil.  Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God, who creates a world that is so filled with injustice and?’ That’s what I’d say” – Stephen Fry

Peace out,

Maverick

You and Your ENTIRE Church Are Gutless Worms (A response to Archbishop Paul Etienne)

For those who are unaware, a case has gone before the Grand Jury in Pennsylvania, part of the result of a two-year investigation into six diocese where abuse has taken place.  The report reads like something out of a psychological horror novel.  Here’s a link to an article about it.  Check that shit out.  It will blow your mind.  But in my home state, there is an Archbishop who decided to issue his own statement, and I take some SERIOUS umbrage with it.  Here’s a link to that garbage, now let’s talk about it.

Wish he hadn’t just put the letter as a document on there in this post, because then I could take snippets of it directly.  I’m too lazy to write it out, so if you think I am ever taking this out of context, I encourage you to consult the letter to make sure I’m not.

I couldn’t help but notice something was missing from your letter, Archbishop – a call for the Church to turn over the pedophiles in their ranks to the law.  That’s curious, since we have YEARS of proof of the church covering pedophilia.  There are records sealed in the Vatican laying out the names, places, and how much money was paid to cover up the pedophilia of those in the ranks.  I would give my last 30 years for SOMEBODY to break in to Vatican archives and leak that information.  Imagine all the good it would do to have the names of those responsible out there, so the public could be safe!  Because it is so fucking obvious that not one of you gutless worms is going to do the heavy lifting to try and protect the children.  No, that might be something Christ would do.

You tell people who suspect abuse to go to the cops and for those in the church to believe allegations of abuse.  Okay, but here’s the problem – the victims are children.  And in the link above, you’ll hear stories about adults who were abused as children and had Priests or members of the clergy threatening them with Hell if they didn’t keep their mouths shut.  The bullshit concept that you all foist upon children based on a God that doesn’t exist anyway aside, you have abusers using that as a weapon for silence.  So forgive me if I don’t take that advice as something other than you just virtue-signaling.  That’s what all of this bullshit reads like.

In the post, you say you’re embarrassed that members of the clergy are more concerned about the reputation of the Church than of “rather than for the care and healing of those who were harmed.”  No!  Instead of that non-statement, how about you actually do a REAL call to action!  Like telling your fellow clergymen that if they suspect abuse, to IMMEDIATELY go to the police.  Instead of having the church deliberate on what to do, have them give that child-touching/child-fucking piece of shit over to the law?  This entire letter reads like you just trying to virtue signal that you are doing the right thing.

We are LONG past time when the government needs to get involved in this.  The Vatican is nothing more than a corrupt aristocracy.  They lie for each other.  They protect each other secrets, instead of doing the right thing and trying to actually help children who are being abused.  Hell, this gutless worm cares more about who is attending the Latin Mass than the raping of children!

He says that the church is doing background checks now.  Well how would these fuckers have a pedophilia background if they are being protected by your fucking Church?!  Not yours, specifically (though I am ALWAYS suspect of anyone in Catholic clergy not being suspicious or having known someone who is a pedophile), but the Church at large.  This whole things makes me so fucking pissed.  I have to read this little worm’s none-response to a Grand Jury report that is nightmare stuff.  I have a friend that, thankfully, I have convinced to keep her children away from there.  Which makes her sad, since her kid is coming to the point of having their first Communion.

Yes, let’s pray.  Let’s have a day where we all fucking pray.  You know, an activity that serves no purpose, accomplishes nothing, and doesn’t address the ACTUAL problems.  How about NO?!  How about you start reporting the pedophiles to the police?!  Maybe you can tell the public who the pedophiles are, so that parents can actually keep their children safe.  Protecting kids from pedophiles.  You know, something Christ might do!  There’s a fucking thought.

I know why this gutless coward won’t name names or come out strongly against it.  Why Pope Jorge won’t do it either.  Speaking of gutless worms, his response was even worse!  Yes, say that the Church is not looking after the children, all the while being the keeper of the records that could actually do real good!  Oh, but you know you can’t leak that information.  Lay bare the Church’s corruption for all to see.  Then it might hit the people going there that they are giving their time and money into a corrupt aristocracy, where nobody will take a hardline approach for fear of having their future in the church destroyed.

That’s what it is!  It’s the reason that Archbishop Etienne isn’t taking a hard stance on anything.  It’s why none of them are.  Everybody is too concerned about their own future, and don’t want to rock the boat.  To the Archbishop who wrote this insulting letter – fuck you.  Fuck you, and fuck the corrupt aristocracy that you represent!  You’re a gutless coward, and you care more about Latin Mass politics than you do about your fellow clergymen raping children.  I find you to be the most disgusting of the hypocrites I have made responses to on this site.  At least some of them have some grit.  You are a doormat to an aristocracy that, if America wasn’t so busy sucking the cock of religion, maybe the government could take action against.

Imagine if, tomorrow, the government in this country threatened the church with losing their tax-exempt status if they don’t start playing a more active role in bringing this pedophilia to light.  What a wonderful world it would be.

Until next time, a quote,

“If only half you mother-fuckers in the state’s attorney’s office didn’t want to be judges, didn’t want to be partners in some downtown law firm.  If only half of you had the fucking balls to follow through, you know what would happen?  A guy like that would be indicted, tried, and convicted!  And the rest of them would back up enough so we could push a clean case or two through your courthouse.  But no, everybody stays friends.  Everybody gets paid.  And everybody’s got a fucking future!” – Det. Jimmy McNulty, The Wire

Peace out,

Maverick

Let’s Answer 10 Reasons To Not Have Sex Before Marriage

I have forgotten how much there is a well of beautiful cringe with Christian videos.  I have spent so much time with SJW bullshit that I forgot what it’s like.  Naturally, these “pro-life” (anti-woman) Christians are all about waiting for sex.  Because in their mind, sex exists only to create babies.  Because if a bitch isn’t on her back as a brood mare for the state, what else is she good for?  By the way, for any Christians insulted about that statement, your Bible backs me up!  Head on over to Skeptic’s Annotated Bible and see all the great quotes that the Bible has about women.  It’s really good stuff.  And by good, I mean horribly sexist.

Now we have another Christian up to bat to tell us why sex is evil unless there’s a ring on it.  Here’s a link to his video, now let’s get down to it.  This guy says that his reasons for not having sex before marriage are so good you won’t be able to dispute them because they are so right.  This should be interesting.

10. Sex Masks Problems

His argument is basically that if you’re having sex, you won’t notice problems in a relationship.  That’s stupid on a whole bunch of levels.  For starters, what kind of relationships has this guy been in?  If all I’m doing with someone is fighting with them, the sex isn’t gonna stop that.  What guys out there are like “I can’t stand this bitch, so let’s have sex!”?  None.  This is blatantly stupid.

Real relationships are not contingent on sex.  I’ve had plenty of relationships where I’ve taken my time.  I’ve had friends with benefits where sometimes all we would do is hang out and have dinner or just enjoy each other’s company.  The thing that held all of those things together was my liking the person I was spending time with.  If you genuinely believe that sex is going to stop you from seeing what’s wrong with you and another person, you’re an idiot.  Since that is exactly what happened with you, I guess we know what kind of person you are, don’t we?

He then argues that if you’re not having sex, and you’re really in love, you think “let’s get married!”  What?!  Um, how about, “let’s see where the relationship goes”?  You don’t just go from love to marriage, you fucking idiot.  That’s how you end up in TERRIBLE marriages for young love where they were absolutely sure that this is their forever person and won’t hear otherwise, only to discover that this isn’t that person and now they have this messy and complicated divorce ahead of them.  Before you say I don’t know what I’m talking about, I was engaged once.

9. Marriage allows you to evaluate your real feelings

WHAT?! (I get the feeling this will be my response a lot) To all the dim-witted teenagers who up-voted this and take this moron seriously, let me tell you something  – you damn-well better know before you take that step if you are serious or not.  Once you take that step, it is a legally binding contract.  It’s too late for cold feet at that point.  Taking that step had better come AFTER you “evaluate your real feelings,” because you are making a legal bet of half your shit that you will love them for the rest of your life.  If there is any uncertainty with that thought process, you aren’t ready.

Naturally, this idiot uses the Bible to tell us that his point of view is right.  Yeah, the Bible also says that I can fuck a slave or rape a woman and pay her father 15 pieces of silver.  Just putting that out there.  Using the Bible to justify a point of view involving women is always a bad idea.  The sexism is rampant in that book.

8. Sex connects us

What the fuck does this have to do with sex before marriage?  Yeah, sex can be a powerful connection if there is an emotionally connection between two people.  But it isn’t always like that.  Sometimes, people really are just looking to get their rocks off.  Is that a pretty thought?  No, but life isn’t always pretty.  Sometimes it’s just ugly in the only way it can be.

He makes the claim that having lots of sex partners increases your risk of divorce.  Says there are “lots of studies” about it and tells us to Google it.  Okay, let’s play.  I did Google a couple things, and here’s what I found out.  The common cultural belief that more people are getting divorced isn’t true.  In fact, divorce rates have been going down for several years now.  One common factor in this is more couples choosing to wait to get married until later in life, or those who choose not to get married at all.  As our culture evolves and the role of women in society now that more are having to choose careers due to financial constraints or personal goals, so does the nature of the family and of romantic relationships.  This is a messy subject, and this fucking moron doesn’t seem to get that.  He compares women who have sex more than once with a piece of duct tape being stuck multiple times.  Wow.  Sexist, much?

7. Pregnancy

The access to contraception in the western world is higher now than it has ever been.  If you are not rubbing two brain cells together, for men and women, you can protect yourself!  Or, if something goes wrong, you can get the morning after pill.  None of which involves abortion!  All of which you can get at Planned Parenthood.  There, refuted this point nicely.

6. Everybody else is doing it

What?  Why does that matter?  Are you appealing to the youth who wanna be rebels or something?  Is that what I’m supposed to take away from this?  His statement about the rate of divorce currently is bullshit.  Read the article I linked above.  An expert talks about how the cultural belief of the divorce rate being that high is a complete misconception.  It’s a scare tactic that works against teenager who are too stupid to know any better.  This in America, after all.

He then says that based on his fictitious amount of divorces, he believes the bulk of them aren’t happy.  To quote The Dude, “that’s, like, your opinion, man.”  What evidence do you have for this?  What studies have shown that the bulk of married couples are unhappy?  Please, shared this with me.  I love my Comments section open.  Unlike Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, iTunes, and SoundCloud, I believe in freedom of speech.

5. What we gain to easily we esteem to lightly

His argument is that if you have sex before marriage, you feel like it was earned too easily and won’t appreciate it.  Wow.  This really is going to show what kind of man this is.  He sees women as lesser if the sex is easy to get.  You don’t appreciate it.  Well, buddy, I’m glad you don’t appreciate the relationships you have had with women you had sex with outside of marriage, but thankfully, not all of us are sexist assholes like you.

The guy says he’s been abstinent for six years, so when he finally gets to get into those pants after what he admits will be another year of dating, he will really want it!  I’m just imagining that this dude will cum after two thrusts and then the woman will have to get herself off.  It will be followed with a conversation like “I’m sorry, honey, that doesn’t usually happen to me.”

To the teenagers who take this shit seriously, listen.  Being sexually compatible is a part of a relationship.  If you think that somebody not being good in bed and being able to please their partner isn’t going to damage a relationship, you’re delusional.  And I’m not just talking about skill, either.  I’m also talking about what you want in sex vs what they do.  If they want you to get in a clown costume and fuck them while squirting seltzer water all over them, are you going to be okay with that?  A person’s sexual preferences are many, and part of being compatible as a couple is being able to work with your partner.  If they want you to put on a ball get and get fucked up the ass, and you are vehemently opposed, don’t think for a second that that wouldn’t do gradual damage.  Unless this guy just thinks that if you are married, you will be able to always work that out.  Yeah, good luck with that.

4. Transfer of control

He says that 99% of relationships, the only thing a woman has control over is when they have sex.  What is wrong with this sexist douche?!  That is such bullshit!  The roles in a relationship are something that you decide with your partner!  As the relationship progresses, new roles will arise and you’ll have to figure out whose those are.  It’s part of good communication.  In my late serious relationship, I was the one who always did the cooking when we lived together because my ex was, for all her wonderful qualities, not the best cook.  I like to cook, so it was fun to be able to provide for myself and my partner.  This man’s view on relationships is so ass-backwards!

Then he makes the argument that she has control of sex and he has control of the relationship.  Oh yeah, this dude is a Christian, alright.  After all, the Bible does say that the man’s role is to be head of the home.  What a sexist asshole.  So, if you have sex before marriage, she suddenly gets control of you.  If I believed this guy actually understands what a relationship entails, I might have an opinion about this.  As it stands, I don’t think he does, so I don’t.

3. Talk is cheap

His argument here is that when men say they love a woman to get sex, they’re lying.  The goal is to have women see men as pigs, so they can demand marriage as proof of their commitment.  This is insulting to men and women.  So, instead of promoting dialogue between partners, he decides to just tell women to take the “if he ain’t gonna put a ring on it, you better not give it to him!”

Talk isn’t cheap, you chauvinistic prick.  It’s the cornerstone of ALL healthy relationships.  Every single one.  You could have made a point that don’t just let him say he loves you and that be it.  Promote there being open dialogue.  That is, of course, assuming that this woman isn’t just looking to have something that isn’t serious.  Why is there no agency given to women in this video?  It’s always guys who are the ones pushing and trying to get things.  I fucking hate this dude.

2. Physical attraction fades

My parents have been together for over 25 years.  I don’t know how far away 30 is, but I don’t think it’s too long.  And one thing that my mother told me is that what happens over time is that you aren’t just crazy kids with crazy hormones.  Your partner because less about the physical, and more of a friend and companion that you can’t see yourself without.  And that isn’t done by waiting for sex until marriage!  It is a gradual process of growing in the relationship, It takes years and years of dedication and trust.  This fucking moron is trying to reduce that down to “just wait until marriage and it’ll all be okay.”  What a fucking idiot!

1. Better to have lifelong friends than short-term sex partners

This whole video has been a stunning look into the mind of this man and how he sees women in his life.  How he sees relationships.  How he sees women.  In his mind, the more a woman has sex, the less she will stick in a relationship.  He compares them to tape.  Reminds me of my sex ed class back in middle school, where they talked about women being less clean because they chose to have sex.  It’s sexist.  It demeans women and acts like just because they have had other people that they have gotten physical with, that they are incapable of finding commitment.  He makes the analogy that women only have control in a relationship in regards to sex.  And worst of all, that instead of sex being one of the things you talk about in a relationship, that it’s the man’s job to be the shepherd for his dumb woman because he is the one who gets to decide how the relationship will work.

I cannot stand this fucking dude.  Now he is saying that sex before marriage will make the other person see the relationship as just something they are doing.  As some flash-in-the-pan thing.  I have learned so much about how this man sees relationships as well.

To people out there, let me give you some ACTUAL useful advice.  If you think you’re ready for sex in your relationship, talk to your partner.  Good communication is the best thing for a relationship.  It cannot survive without it.  If you have misgivings and want to wait, that’s fine too.  Just make sure you communicate that as well.  And for the love of Groj, don’t think of yourself or your sexual history as fucking tape!  That analogy is demeaning and insulting to what a sexual connection between two dedicated people can be.  Fuck this sexist asshole and his stupid fucking video.

Until next time, a quote,

“I love the way you look at me.  Like you are about to talk to me or devour me.  I am fine with either.” – N.R. Hart

Peace out,

Maverick

Let’s Answer Questions That No Atheist Can Answer

An pro-Islam YouTube channel has decided to make a series of questions that no atheist can answer.  I figured that since I haven’t done anything atheist in forever, I would take on these questions.  Here’s a link to the video, now let’s do this.

How did existence emerge out of no-space and no-time?

How do you know there was no-space and no-time before reality as we understand it?  The truth is that we don’t know how exactly the universe came into being.  There are a number of theories, but all of those could be proven wrong.  Meanwhile, your religious book says that Allah somehow always existed outside space and time and magically made everything.  Yeah, I’ll take actual science over sky wizard magic.

How can an atheist assume his atheism is valid?

I am an atheist, therefore my atheism is valid.  Given what I’ve seen of modern science and the various religious texts I have read, I have concluded that their beliefs in a divine being are absurd, so I do not believe in them.  Boom, that was easy.  Aren’t these questions supposed to be so hard that no atheist can answer them?

When the moment of the start of existence is stark proof on the creativity of the creator and his ability to originate existence?

Oh, I jumped the gun there.  Well, I can answer this too.  There is NO proof that the universe was created by a magical sky-wizard.  None.  You all talk about sunrises and rainbows and a nice ass on a sexy lady, but then decide to just ignore the fact that most of reality cannot support life, because it exists in a massive void called space.  That there are a TON of things that are not beautifully made on this world, such as birth defects, evil people, and the fact that our planet is one giant asteroid away from humanity being dead.  I can see my atheism as valid because I can see that there is ZERO proof of your creator, and your pathetic supposition about the beauty of existence.  Again, wasn’t this supposed to be hard?

How did no life transform into life?

We don’t know.  See, once-again, this is something science has that religions does not.  We have the humility to acknowledge when we don’t have all the answers.  Meanwhile, ancient books written by primitive savages are what you hold up as absolute truth.  But please, tell me again how you are so enlightened.  There are a lot of theories about the origin of life on Earth.  Eventually, we will be able to create rudimentary life in a laboratory, and on that day, I will smugly look at your retarded morons and say “where is your Allah now?”

How did matter mutate from lifelessness into living cells?

Again, we don’t know for sure, but there are a number of theories.  Science is looking for the answer.  Meanwhile, I haven’t seen your bullshit religion figuring anything out.  Given that your religion has a bad habit of being shit on by actual science.  Like how the Quran says that night is as a cover over day, when we know that is patently untrue.  Or how you can somehow transmute mud into man.  I’ll take science over that stupid shit any day.

With all our techniques and advances, we cannot originate the simplest form of life, so how can we explain the origination of life in the dead matter?

What a weird phrasing.  Matter isn’t dead or alive.  It is.  Living cells are dead or alive.  As I said, we currently haven’t gained the ability to create life in a laboratory, but the day is coming.  And when it does, I cannot wait to watch you eat those words.  Not to mention, isn’t this a tacit admission that it takes magic to do it?  So you do believe in magic.  Good to know.

Wouldn’t we, at least, be able to originate a form of life that supersedes the one that originated in the dead matter by at least a million times?

Someday we will be able to create rudimentary life, but complex life forms grow over millions of years of evolution.  They aren’t just made in a factory.  That’s your religious bias talking.  You don’t just make complicated organisms.  We will no doubt be able to clone current life, but creating organisms that are (as you put it) at least a million times more complicated than current life is asinine.  Genetic modification through gene therapy is one way we can alter genetics of an organism, but creating all that from scratch is ridiculous.  Because you think that life is created, you have this bias.  Sorry that reality doesn’t work the way you want it in your head.

How can the atheist argue against the annihilation of all mankind?

Because I was born with empathy I don’t want to kill my fellow human being en masse.  I joke around that human needs to die, but there is some part of me in the dark recesses of my little black heart that hopes that somehow, some way, humanity figures out how to save itself from its own stupidity.

What is the rational, substantial, scientific evidence an atheist can present to prove the annihilation of all mankind is a mistake?

Easy, the human brain has the capacity for empathy.  We see looking after our fellow human being as a goal to aspire to.  We want to improve the world we live in.  Meanwhile, let’s take a look at your holy book.  It calls for death for those who leave the faith, or to kill non-believers, unless they convert to Islam.  Your religious text condones more murder than atheist secularism EVER will.  But please, tell me again how I believe in genocide.  You then decide to ditch the questions and tell us that we must naturally assume that genocide is rational to save the species.  Um, no.  I believe that sexual education and access to contraception will do more to stop overpopulation than your retarded book.

Atheism assumes that human beings are just animals who came into existence after a long and slow sequence of evolution from meaner beings, so what if a higher being came into existence?

There is a LOT to unpack here.  Atheism doesn’t believe that we came into existence from really mean beings.  We came from less evolved forms of life.  But since human history is a litany of violence (so is your religion, both post and current times), saying that we came from “meaner beings” is a really strange way to phrase things.  I believe we came from less evolved forms.  Sure, they were violent, but nature is violent.  Humanity is violent.  Violence is a part of life.  One that, unfortunately, humanity can’t get away from.

As for your second question, what would happen if a higher being came into existence?  Well, if the Q shows up one day, I can’t stop it from choosing to destroy humanity.  If we meet some hyper-evolved intelligent being that has figured out the right way to live, I guess we can sit back and realize how bad we fucked up and feel sad.  This is such a strange question.

Will it have the right to put us in cages and use us as lab rats?

The right?  No.  It might have the power to do that.  But if there is a being who has evolved and grown to the point that they realize the nature of reality and that we have to look after each other, they aren’t going to want to do so.  Western society evolved socially to see slavery as wrong.  Here in America, we had a big old war over that belief.  It’s telling about your view on reality when you think a higher being has barbarous intentions.  Islam at work?  You then once-again go out of the mode of asking questions to give your answer – the “darwinist” answer is “Yes!”  For one, Darwinism is a bullshit term that I have only ever heard creationists use.  For another, find me all the biologists who want to enslave people.

Oh, but we can look at your religion and see people enslaving people.  Like how ISIS has taken women all over the Middle East as sex slaves.  Like that?  I love that a Muslim is telling me about how immoral I am, when the immorality of Islam is everywhere to be found.

So, what is the purpose from protecting mankind or providing them with meaning or purpose when it comes to atheism?

Atheism tells people that meaning and purpose is what you make of it.  There is no higher being to give us purpose.  We have to find it in our own lives through our own values systems that are unique to every individual.  I’m sorry that our belief structure is all about freedom while yours tells you to accept easy answers from a sky-wizard despot.  Oh, but you decide to answer your own question again, with the propaganda that you approve of.  Wasn’t this supposed to be questions that atheists like me are supposed to answer?  I’m feeling really gypped here.

What if, according to evolution, we proved that one race is higher than the other?

Higher how?  We have proven that the Asian community tends to favor intelligence in their genes.  We’ve shown that black people tend to have much bigger cocks than white people.  What is your metric for “higher”?

Will the higher race be allowed to transform the lesser race into used matter: as we do with the insects or animals?

You haven’t even defined what the “higher race” is.  I suppose this is to be about eugenics.  Well, since we are all part of the same species, there is no “higher race.”  We are all human.  Different humans have different genetic traits, we we share a same species.  This ties in with that creationist bullshit you hear about “kinds” and shit like that.  But since we know that not all evolution is done by “survival of the fittest,” the argument that only the strongest organism will survive is no longer valid.  We now know that weaker organisms evolve defenses against the stronger organisms.  Or they will go to other areas and once they no longer have that predator, they evolve in different ways.  That’s called genetic drift.  Your whole argument is based on a bullshit analogy of what evolution teaches. Muslim creationists, go figure.

Then you decide to once-again answer your own question and say that your “brilliant” argument is enough to demolish atheism from the mind of anyone that uses common sense.  I just refuted it, so yeah, didn’t do shit to me.

After this he goes into a long diatribe about how atheism says that morals are relative, but that atheists then say that morals are absolute when shit hits the fan in our own lives.  A statement that is blatantly not true.  Citation needed, moron.  I’m gonna try and figure out if I can put into words what this dude is trying to ask here, since there is no question.  It’s just a sermon from this guy for a long stretch of time.

If morals are relative, how can you claim there is immorality for the bad things that happen?

Okay, let’s play a little game with that.  Your holy book tells you to murder people who leave the faith.  It’s a fact.  It also tells you that men are stronger than women and to use that strength over women.  So, when was the last apostate that you killed?  Or the last woman you beat?  Both are fine according the moral precepts of your book?  Meanwhile, in Christianity, it says that you shouldn’t beat women, but you should silence them in church, because they should ask their husband whatever they are confused about.  What Christians tell their bitch to shut up in church?

Morality is relative.  The morals of ISIS are not the morals of contemporary Islam, correct?  However, in places like the UK, it was found that the vast majority of Muslims there would not report to the police if they knew a terrorist attach was coming by a Muslim.  What is the correct thing to do?  The moral thing to do in that instance changes.

Meanwhile, atheism says that morals are relative, and instead of following some moral code set out by some ayatollah or religious leader, to follow empathy and try and be an empathetic person.  That is as close to actual objective morality as we will ever get.

How did the amazing constants of physics emerge?

Stephen Hawking wrote a book about how the universe could easily have come into existence, physics and all, without the need for a God.  I hate to be accused of the argument from authority argument, but this guy was one of the smartest people to ever live.  I think his source trumps your ancient desert tomes.

You then decide to go into the Cosmological Argument.  For those who want my beautiful destruction of that stupid-ass argument, here’s a link.  One thing you make is the argument that if things were even the slightest bit different, reality would collapse.  How do you know this?  How do you know that instead, it would just be another reality where there are new laws of physics?  It’s why Neil DeGrasse Tyson said if we ever do find a door to other words, best to send a probe first, because it may have laws of physics that don’t interact with our reality.

How did the genome emerge within the living cells?

This ties into the emergence of life.  Even the most basic bacteria cells have DNA.  You answer the story of the origin of life on Earth, you answer that question.  Idiot.  But you make the argument of “there had to be writer for it.”  So dumb.  We’ve seen how natural processes can change DNA, through forces like mutation, where the DNA of one cell mutates.  Cancer is a mutation of healthy cells into cancerous ones.  Did Allah decide to just go into all those cells and change things?  Neat fact – cancer cells don’t age, so long as the host organism survives.  In theory, cancer could live forever.

Where do morality and values come from, when it comes to atheism?

I’ve already answered this question.  Next!  Oh, wait, there is nothing next.  You just summarize your bullshit.

Well, that was…not fun at all.  I hate it.  Never doing this again.  I’m tired of answering stupid questions.  I have a headache.  This was beating a dead horse.

Until next time, a quote,

“When the black plague swept the land, people killed cats, mistakenly thinking they spread the disease. In actuality, the plague was spread by rats–and we had done them a favor by genociding their natural predator. We haven’t gotten smarter since.” – TJ Kirk

Peace out,

Maverick