ramblingsonreason

Welcome fellow seeker!

2020-04-07T12:32:00.000-07:00

This blog is a cooperative effort of

Graf Lüstibert (Lukas Laner)

and Herzog Schamduft (Andreas Propst)...

Here the two of us will post regularly on such diverse subjects as science, freethought, skepticism, religion (or rather criticism thereof) and the likes of that...

We hope you'll enjoy your stay and want to encourage anyone to comment on the posts and create a healthy discussion on the topics treated here!

We are truly looking forward to that!

Anjem Choudary - the public face of the islamic supremacy movement in the UK

2010-04-19T10:38:00.000-07:00

Have you ever heard of Mr Anjem Choudary? If you are British, chances are good you will. The man is given a voice and quite a lot of air and print time in the British media. If you do not know him, it might be worthwile to read up a bit on this man. You could for example look at this very educating wikipedia entry.

I will skip most of his biography, and focus on the aspects I find most troubling about this person. Born British, Choudary is a follower of radical islamist hate preacher Omar Bakri and is the leading sharia judge in the UK - the fact that there even is such a thing in a secular, democratic and egalitarian society is an embarrasment and a disgrace to our modern society. Choudary is what I would call the medially most prominent voice of the British branch of the islamic supremacy movement which can be found in many European countries, such as the Netherlands, France and the UK, as well as in the USA. Choudary makes no secret about what he and his ilk are persueing: Establishing a world-wide islamic theocracy under sharia law - not only for muslims, but for all of us. He proclaims his plans openly on TV and on the streets of Britain. But the ultimate irony is this: Choudary and his whole family life solely off the social benefits provided by the very state system he despises and abhors so much and seeks to overthrow. Yes, Choudary does not need to work for his money, so all hard working, law abiding British citizens are ultimately paying for him and ensure that he can devote 100% of his time for spreading his bigoted, intolerant ideology and hate-mongering.

Here some quotes from Anjem Choudary so you see I am not just making stuff up.

Choudary in an interview on BBC Hardtalk on 8th of August. Asked about the 7/7 bombing in London:

"Look, at the end of the day innocent people—when we say 'innocent people' we mean Muslims—as far as non-Muslims are concerned they have not accepted Islam and as far as we are concerned that is a crime against God."

Yes he actually said live on BBC that the killing of non-muslims is allright because they are guilty of the crime of not buying into his ideology, of not being a muslim. If you still cannot believe it you may want to hear it from Choudary himself in this video clip.

On to some other quotes:

"The domination of islam worldwide, that domination will come - we have been promised - by the establishment of an islamic state. We should have a foreign policy, that removes all obstacles in the way of global domination. So as muslims we do believe that one day, the whole world will be dominated by islam, including Denmark and Britain and even the United States of America."

Watch him saying this on TV here.

"Freedom and Democracy is no (sic) good for the British."

Here's part of the TV debate.

"I want to see the flag of Allah flying over Downing St."

See newspaper clipping above.

I could not believe my eyes as I learned about Anjem Choudary and about what he and his ilk are propagating openly on the British media and on the British streets. Imagine me rounding up an angry lynchmob and we walked down your street toting plackards saying "Behead the Muslims"or "Behead those who insult free speech" or if I appeared on national television and called all muslims guilty and worthy of death because they are muslims. I would surely never appear on TV again and would be sent to prison for inciting hatred - and righlty so. But Anjem Choudary can do all that and more and be free and even is subsidized by the government. And when somebody comes along and critisizes these things, he or she will be called an Islamophobe. A perverse concept in which concern about and criticism of real events and developments in the world are declared a form of mental illness and criminalized. To quote a fearless Brit, Pat Condell (see our links section for his classic rants) I am far more concerned about "elestherophobia (sp?)- fear of freedom. Epistomophobia - Fear of Knowledge. Prosophobia - fear of progress. Picatophobia - fear of sinning or imaginary crimes. Categeliphobia (sp?)- fear of being ridiculed. Senophobia(sp?)-fear of new things and ideas Keraphobia - fear of gaety (big fear of gaety) and the biggest fear of all of course, gynophobia - fear of women."

A person like Anjem Choudary, who so openly pursues anti-democratic and anti-confessional activitis and agendas, before the very eyes of the British public, should not be given air and print time in the media, should not receive state benefits and should not be entitled to holding a British passport, but should instead be either put on trial for said activities or, maybe even better, expatriated and shipped to some social paradise like Saudi Arabia, where he would not any more be obliged to fight freedom, justice and equality, cause none exists there. And most important: All the moderate, non-radical, tolerant muslims in the UK, who are supposedly the vast majority, should finally take a stand and denounce persons like Choudary and their ideas of islamic supremacy publicly and vehemently! If there is such a thing as islamophobia, and I seriously doubt it, then in my opinion there is no other way to dispel it.

If you are British, I urge you to sign this petition to stop government funding of Anjem Choudary:
http://www.petitiononline.co.uk/petition/stop-anjem-choudarys-benefits/21/

The sad truth is that Mr Choudary is only one man in a vast movement urging for worldwide islamic supremacy and sharia law for all that is at times very clandestine. If you doubt that the beliefs and motives of Choudary are held only by a small albeit very vocal minority, and that they are not shared by the people we would call moderate muslims, then I highly recommend watching the Channel 4 documentary "Undercover Mosques", in which a reporter films undercover at Britains biggest and most mainstream mosques and uncovers a shocking reality of hate preaching, intolerance, antisemitism, homophobia and anti-democratic, anti-egalitarian and anti-western progaganda. Watch this eye-opening documentary at: http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/dispatches-undercover-mosque/

----------------------------------------------------
And here this time's book recommendation from the Herzog himself:

Londonistan by Melanie Phillips:

The suicide bombings carried out in London in 2005 by British Muslims revealed an enormous fifth column of Islamist terrorists and their sympathizers. Under the noses of British intelligence, London has become the European hub for the promotion, recruitment and financing of Islamic terror and extremism - so much so that it has been mockingly dubbed Londonistan. In this ground-breaking book, Melanie Phillips pieces together the story of how Londonistan developed as a result of the collapse of traditional English identity and accommodation of a particularly virulent form of multiculturalism. Londonistan has become a country within the country and not only threatens Britain but its special relationship with the U.S. as well.

Would Muhammad be considered a child molester today?

2010-04-19T04:02:00.000-07:00

In 2008 a proponent of the FPÖ, an Austrian right wing party, said in a speech that "the prophet Muhammad would be considered a child molester in the present system". This (as we will see quite factual) statement caused severe outrage, not only from austria's muslim community, but from any party and organisation and even from inside her own party which is not exactly known for being considerate in dealing with islam. Regardless of my personal political convictions, I found it highly exaggerated and unfair how she was attacked from all sides and was even threatened with a 2 years prison sentence for freely expressing her opinion. So let us look wether or not such a claim, namely that islam's prophet Muhammad would be considered a child molester in our present society, is true. The aim of this article is not to cause insult to any muslim nor to denigrate islam (although i think any muslim who will read it will be offended anyways, as this seems to happen very easily these days) and I will use only the hadith, the deeds and sayings of the prophet, to prove my point.

Some of you, dear readers, will already have heard that Muhammad married and had sex with Aisha when she was very young. Is that really true? Let us look at the hadith, and see what Aisha herself has to say:

Bukhari vol. 7, #65:

"Narrated Aisha that the prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: "I have been informed that Aisha remained with the prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).""

From the hadith of the Sunan of Abu Dawud, volume 2, #2116

"Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old." (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years."). "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old."

From the hadith Sahih Muslim, volume 8, #3311

A'isha reported that Allah's Apostle married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house AS A BRIDE WHEN SHE WAS NINE, AND HER DOLLS WERE WITH HER; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

These are only a few of many examples in the hadith proving that Muhammad had sex with his 9 year old wife (when he was already in his early 50s). Notice the last one: Aisha took her dolls with her when she moved to Muhammad's house. She was a mere child...
Regarding the clear state of affairs in the hadith, it can be surely said that in our present system, in our society, Muhammad would be guilty of sexual child abuse.
It does not matter if Aisha voluntarily had intercourse with him (which I would doubt), he was taking advantage of her.

Now you might say that these were different times, child marriage was normal back then and whatever, and why bother what some 7th century merchant and highway robber did anyways. Well first of all, I think there are things which have always been wrong and will always be wrong. In the same sense it could have been perfectly allright to kill a jew 70 years ago in Germany, but still we should consider such an act a crime. Secondly, and more important, we have to understand the special role the prophet Muhammad plays in islam. Let us consult the holy book of islam, the quran:

"We have indeed, in the Messenger of Allah, a good example (of conduct) for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day." [Quran 33: ayat 21]

The quran about Muhammad:

"And you stand on an exalted standard of character" (Qur'an 68: ayat 4)

So we see that the prophet Muhammad is considered to be the standard of good conduct, the universal role model, the perfect man so to say - not only back in the 7th century but forever and even today. I think you see the problem already. If the prophet had sex with a nine year old girl, not only is such an act not forbidden, no it is desireable, and a good thing to emulate. From this follow some very grave and concerning real world consequences, which we can see in the news every week:

The phenomenon of child brides in the muslim world and, even worse, the horrible deaths these girls die because of the example of the prophet.

Again and again we see reports of child brides dying either from vaginal or anal injuries, bleeding to death, after intercourse or when giving birth. The bodies of pre-pubescent girls are simply not ready - neither for sexual intercourse, nor for giving birth. Common sense would dictate that, but common sense is oft times suspended by pious men following the example of their prophet. Here is a report of a 12-year old Yemeni girl that died from internal bleeding after her husband forced himself on her:

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/04/09/yemen.child.bride.death/index.html

I will end this article with Ayatolla Khomeini, the founder of the islamic Republich of Iran who is considered a high authority on islam, wrote extensively about islamic jurisprudence. In his two volumes book "Tahrirolvasyleh" he wrote, among many other subjects, about the regulations of having sexual intercourse with minors. Have a look at what the Ayatolly has to say:

A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate vaginally, but sodomising the child is acceptable. If a man does penetrate and damage the child then, he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl will not count as one of his four permanent wives and the man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister... It is better for a girl to marry at such a time when she would begin menstruation at her husband's house, rather than her father's home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven.

Tahrirolvasyleh, fourth edition, Qom, Iran, 1990

Verily: And We have not sent you [O' Muhammad], except as a mercy to the world's. - Quran 21:107

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And now for our Book Recommendation:

The truth about Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion

"May Allah rip out his spine from his back and split his brains in two, and then put them both back, and then do it over and over again" - "Praise" for the author on revivingislam.com

Do i need to say more?

The Atheist's Nightmare: Definite Proof for Creationism

2010-04-17T09:33:00.000-07:00

Well, I think it is about time for the scientific community to admit defeat! Watch this:

The banana fits perfectly into your hand and mouth, so it must have been wisely designed for just that purpose? Well I am quite sure that it would fit quite well in the anus as well, as numerous "extreme insertions" porn sites will impressively demonstrate - although I am very tempted to do so, I will refrain from linking to any graphic examples here, if you do not believe me, just use the power of google. So does this mean the banana was divinely created to be inserted analy? The banana was in the same way designed to fit your hand or mouth as a penis was designed to perfectly fit into a gay man's mouth...

But on a more serious note:
Mr Ray Comfort missed a very central point in his proof for creationism:
The banana as we can buy it at the shop was not created the way it is by god, but by men. It was cultivated over centuries from the wild form of the banana Musa balbisiana, which was not as delicious or convenient to handle like the bananas we have today. It was not created by god - far from it: It was mankind who shaped it and transformed it to its modern form.
Here is what, Musa balbisiana, the ancestor of the edible banana looks like:

This whole issue rather reminds me of one thing the late and magnificent Douglas Adams, the creator of the "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" used to say:

"Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!'"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's for another book recommendation straight from the Herzog:

The Salmon of Doubt is the late Douglas Adams' third comic novel about "holistic detective" Dirk Gently. Ten tantalising chapters of this unfinished project are padded to book size with about 50 short Adams pieces, mostly non-fiction. Additional material includes introductions by Stephen Fry and editor Peter Guzzardi (who stitched together the Salmon fragment from disk drafts), The Guardian's Adams biography, Richard Dawkins' farewell piece, and the order of the memorial service.

(The above quote is taken from "The Salmon of Doubt".)

Basing your morals on the bible?

2010-04-09T11:29:00.000-07:00

I love the Bible! Seriously. And you know why? Beause it is the best way to disprove Christian beliefs and best for disproving itself due to its many, many inherent contradictions which require massive conjecture and mind bending by for example theologians to make only the slightest bit of sense.

You know, what I find even more ludicrous than basing any scientific statement on the “good book” is to actually base your morals and ethics on it. I claim that no one today, not even the most devout Christian bases his or her morals on the bible, although Christians love to pretend they do and pride themselves for example with their Christian family values (more on that later on). Now what most Christians do is they pick and choose the bits from the bible with which they are comfortable with and base their morals on those bits. How do they choose which teachings to embrace and which to ignore? Using their modern values and ethics which are not biblical but rather modern and humanist in their origin. Values that did not arise from but developed independently from religious teachings and scripture, which in fact had to be established with blood, sweat and tears against the massive resistance of all major religious institutions, most notably the catholic church.

Before we start with our little tour through the chamber of horrors of biblical moral and values, I want to sort one thing out: In the following I will quote heavily from the old testament. Now some Christians may say that some of the teachings of the old testament are rather archaic (which is true) but were revised or updated by the good lord Jesus Christ, who preached nothing but love and mutual understanding (not true if you actually read the bible). Let’s hear right from his sweet, sweet lips what our lord and saviour himself has to say about this:

Matthew 5:18
Solemnly I tell you that until Heaven and earth pass away, not one iota or smallest detail will pass away from the Law until all has taken place.

So that’s that. And another thing: It is not valid to obey one of god’s commands and ignore the other, simply based on whatever suits you best or makes you feel comfortable. Either the entirety of the bible is of god, or none is. If you disagree, tell me on what basis you can tell apart the parts that are godly, true and have to be obeyed and the ones that are not.

Guilt is inheritable:

I think there is no need to quote the bible here. A central doctrine of all Christian faiths. Adam and Eve made a mistake and we all have to pay for it by death and disease. If you apply that principle in your daily life or even in the legal system, be sure to have a convicted murder’s children gassed with him.

Your wrongdoings can be redeemed by someone else being punished for it:

Another (quite absurd) tenet of Christianity. You can be washed clean of your guilt (be it real or imaginary, the latter being commonly known as “sin”) by having an innocent being punished as a scapegoat. This is simply based on an archaic belief and tradition. Many ancient cultures sacrificed animals to make up for certain mistakes and wrongdoings. Many such traditions are recorded in the Old Testament. If you embraced biblical values, you would have to apply this one as well: Next time when a murderer is on trial, have a random child executed in his stead (if you live in the US, if you live someplace where they don’t do capital punishment just have it imprisoned for life) and let the man get on with his life…

The slaughtering of innocents (both humans and animals) is a good thing:

Remember that great flood where god drowned everyone except for a few chosen ones? That included unborn babies, children, grannies as well as cute puppies, kitties and guinea pigs. Also you may be familiar with how wisely the almighty god punished the Pharao by killing all firstborn children in the land, whether they endorsed their rulers policies regarding Israelites or not. If you are a true Christian embracing biblical values you should not have any concerns about the killing of 3000 innocent people in the 9/11 attacks…

Genocide is acceptable or even encouraged if serving god’s will:

If you believe in what the bible says about the conquest of Canaan, ten or even hundred thousands innocents (women, children and elderly) were slaughtered, whole cities and people utterly eradicated by Moses, Joshua and others, obeying direct orders from god.

Deuteronomy 20:13-17 says it all:

And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:
But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, [even] all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.
Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities [which are] very far off from thee, which [are] not of the cities of these nations.
But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee [for] an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:
But thou shalt utterly destroy them; [namely], the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:

That’s right: Kill everything that breathes: Babies, Children, Mothers, Pregnant Women, the elderly, little Puppies and so on. Ahhh, the beauty and subtle wisdom of the bible baffles me again and again…

Oh yeah, don’t forget: Thou shalt not kill!

Corporal punishment and physical abuse against children is recommended

Proverbs 13:24
He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.

Proverbs 23:13-14
Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.

Proverbs 29:15
The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.

Sirach 30:1
He that loveth his son causeth him oft to feel the rod, that he may have joy of him in the end.

So go ahead Christians and beat your kids as you please, for the lord commands you! And what the hell, Christians have beaten their children for centuries and always found justification for doing so in their holy book.

Disobedient children should be killed

It gets even better:

Deuteronomy 21:18-21

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and [that], when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son [is] stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; [he is] a glutton, and a drunkard.
And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all

Israel

shall hear, and fear.

Honestly, I ask you Christian mothers and fathers: Have you children ever disobeyed you? If so, have you stoned them to death? If no, expect the wrath of your loving god in the afterlife, for you have not obeyed his command.

Kill anyone whose beliefs differ from you without showing mercy:

Deuteronomy 13:6-10

If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

You heard it straight from the main man: Kill the infidels. Even if it is your brother, sister, mother, father or child.

Oh yeah, don’t forget: Love thy neighbour.

Women are inferior to men:

Here’s something from the old testament at first:

Leviticus 12:2

Speak unto the children of

Israel

, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.

Leviticus 12:5

But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.

So a woman giving birth to a baby boy is unclean for 7 days, whereas a woman giving birth to a filthy baby girl is unclean for two weeks!

Here two even more compelling statements from the new testament:

I Corinthians 11:3

But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

I Timothy 2:11-14

Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

You heard it. Shut up women, the bible compels you! Ever had a female teacher Christians? ‘tis an abomination unto the lord!

Rape victims shall be killed if they did not scream loud enough and should be married to their tormentors:

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her

Deuteronomy 22:23-24

If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife.

I think we should reconsider and change our legal system to a more Christian, a more biblical treatment of rape victims. Marry her to the guy who raped her and kill her if she did not scream loud enough. Truly, justice and mercy lies in the law of god!

Slavery is a good thing and even more so a part of the natural order of things. God even instructs you on how to sell your daughter off into slavery (not your son of course):

The new testament tells us in

Ephesians 6:5

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.

and in

1 Peter 2:18

Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.

And here comes some information that may be especially useful for Christian parents who want to make some quick and easy money:

Exodus 21:7-11

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.

Isn’t that interesting: Detailed instructions and regulations on how to sell off your daughter as a sex slave right out of the holy bible, god’s eternally true and infinitely wise word!

All authority is endowed by god – Therefore obey any worldly authority:

Romans 13:11

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

Every worldly authority was and is endowed by god himself? So notorious looney Kim Jong Il was enthroned by god? So Hitler was enthroned by god as well? And so was Stalin, although he and Hitler were arch-enemies? If we think logically, all the wonderful things both of these godly rulers have done during their reigns must have been god’s will then. So stop thinking for yourselves, fellow sheeplings and obey your masters, dictators, kings and emperors, for all of them were instituted by and are acting in the grace of god.

Killing animals without any reason is a good thing and pleases god:

The guys at goodlessgeeks put it quite aptly:

Leviticus Chapters 1-9:

God gives detailed instructions for performing ritualistic animal sacrifices. such bloody rituals must be important to God, judging from the number of times that he repeats their instructions. Indeed the entire first nine chapters of Leviticus can be summarized as follows: Get an animal, kill it, sprinkle the blood around, cut the dead animal into pieces, and burn it for a "sweet savor unto the Lord."

So you heard what the almighty creator of the universe enjoys most? That’s right, the sweet, sweet smell of burning flesh! So get your favourite pet or just a random cow from the farmer of your choice, kill it and burn it on an altar to the enjoyment of your god! For the sake of your immortal soul, you should rather do it now than later…

Homosexuals should be killed:

Leviticus 20:13

If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.

Plain and simple – kill all homosexual men (oddly the enough, the bible never mentions lesbians – so rejoice all ye who drink from the furry cup!). So true Christians, why not obey god’s command and blow up the next gay pride parade in your general area or your local gay bar?

A few quick words on so called “Christian family value”s:

We have already seen in scripture that a woman has to submit to her husband, that stoning your children to death for disobedience and selling your daughter as a sex slave is in fact highly recommended in the holy books of Christianity. But here some more nice Christian family values, right from your good lord Mr. Jesus Christ himself:

The prince of peace details how he plans to strengthen the Christian family:

Matthew 10:34-37 and Luke 12:51-53

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Here we see how the Saviour talks to his own mother Mary:

John 2:4

Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

Here we see Jesuses family values at their best:

Luke 14:26

If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

See, you have to hate everyone, and heck, even yourself to be a true follower of Christ. Indeed what a mentally healthy fellowship the good lord must have!

--------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I think this should be more than enough to prove my point. I could cite pages and pages more absurdities, but my as my bullshit-meter is about to explode I might be better off if I’d leave it at that…

So in conclusion:

Cherry picking the teachings that you feel comfortable with and ignoring the rest (and from a point of view unbiased by blind faith, the “good bits” are outweighed by far by the absurdities, the horrors, the injustice and obscenities) is not only being intellectually dishonest (which would concern me most personally) but also not being true to and faithful to your god (and this should concern believers most).

Finally, I would really love if anyone who considers himself a Christian could explain this to me. Help me out on this true believers!

---------------------------------------------

And now for a book recommendation by the Herzog himself:

From the book's description on amazon:

.The Bible is not the word of god

Biblical Nonsense is a broad look at the tremendous problem of associating divinity with the world’s most popular book. This part-philosophical, part-scientific overview explores the Bible’s divine treachery, scientific mistakes, historical errors, false prophecies, and comical absurdities. Biblical Nonsense also expands beyond these standard reasons for skepticism by tackling the rationale behind the emergence and perpetuation of Christianity, psychological and sociocultural reasons that drive Christians to cling to their beliefs, and illogical methods of argumentation invoked in the defense of the Bible.

non-believers giving aid

2010-04-08T05:12:00.000-07:00

Just stumbled upon this:
http://givingaid.richarddawkins.net/,
support for the Haiti tragedy & beyond.

Two cartoons from the feather of Herzog Schamduft...

2010-04-07T13:34:00.000-07:00

God buries evidence...

Three brothers in the spirit. (Note to all easy-to-offend muslims:
The gentleman to the right is not the prophet Muhammed -
peanutbutter and jelly be upon him...)

homeopathy - an end of the hipocrisy?

2010-04-07T13:28:00.000-07:00

Not until the 23rd of February, 2010, the House of Commons decided to stop funding homeopathy in Great Britain. According to the guardian, a little less than £12m had been spent on homeopathy funding during the last THREE YEARS.

"The weight of evidence shows that homeopathy works no better than placebo, (...) " said Phil Willis, the Chairman of the Technology and Science Committee, which was put in charge by the House of Commons to recommend that "The Government should stop allowing the funding of homeopathy on the [National Health Service]." There would have been tons of possibilities on spending that money in a more sensible way, considering the fact, that there is no evidence at all that homeopathic 'remedies' work any better than placebos.
For those who don't know yet:
Homeopathy, was a form of 'alternate medicine' invented by Samuel Hahnemann, (10. April 1755 in Meißen; † 2. Juli 1843 in Paris).The fudamental 'healing principle' is quite simple and says: "let like be cured by like" (Latin: similia similibus curentur). Homeopathic 'remedies' are substances, diluted 10 times, 100 times, 10^6 times, ... , 10^60 times [Dilution advocated by Hahnemann for most purposes; patient would need to consume 10^41 pills (a billion times the mass of the Earth), or 10^34 gallons of liquid remedy (10 billion times the volume of the Earth) to consume a single molecule of the original substance;], 10^400 times. And what I find even more ludicrous, the more diluted, the more powerful the 'remedy'. Homeopaths also believe in a memory of the water; Water memory is a speculation that water is capable of retaining a "memory" of substances once dissolved in it to arbitrary dilution, therefore the substances can still take effect. Nowadays, as medicine has made big leaps and unveiled the myths of the past, we should know better than a german doctor in the 19th century; Sadly, lots of us still don't do, Homeopaths. But as we can see in Great Britain, there is a light a the end of the tunnel. Probably (Hopefully) in a few years the weirdos, who actually still believe in this 'alternate form of medicine' will admit to their failure.I am really looking forward to your comments!

Let's get things started with a question to biblical literalists!

2010-04-07T13:26:00.000-07:00

Deflowering our newly founded blog I wanna share with you a little article I recently posted on my other website: http://ap.o-nan.org. Here it comes:

I wanna ask a question to all ye biblical literalists and young earth creationists out there:

If you believe that A) the bible is nothing but literal, absolute truth dictated by the creator of the universe himself and that B) the universe was created by god through divine intervention in 6 days about 6000 years ago because the bible says so, this is a question I would like you to answer:

Do you believe that the Earth is flat?

Well according to the bible it clearly is and if you take the so called “good book” literally in other similarly important questions, such as how the world and life came about, you should as well believe that the Earth is in fact of the shape of a pizza. I know you like tossing bible verses around quoting the sh.. out of that book, so here come some quotes that clearly demonstrate that the world must be flat, if you think the bible is the inerrand word of god and has to be taken literally:

Isaiah 11:12
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV)

Revelation 7:1
1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. (KJV)

Job 38:13
13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV)

Jeremiah 16:19
19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV)

Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV)

Matthew 4:8
8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; (KJV)

So the logical conclusion: If you do believe in the literal truth of the bible, if you believe the universe is roughly 6000 years old because the bible (supposedly – the vast majority of christians, inculuding 1 billion catholics, does not jump to that rather far tetched conclusion…) claims so, being the inerrand word of god, you must as well accept that the world is in fact flat. If you dont accept that, then you are interpreting one part of the bible (the flat earth part) and taking literally another part (the creation part) and thus being dishonest in an intellectual sense as well as to your own faith.

Therefore if the universe is 6000 years old because god says so, then the earth must be flat for the same reason. Ergo: Sattelite TV, GPS, orbital photographs of the earth as well as countless images of celestial bodies like moons and planets must all be intricate hoaxes and deceptions devised by none other than Satan himself to mislead the faithful and divert them from Jesus. Just like he made up all the lies on Evolution, like many of your phony leaders like Mr Kent Hovind are claiming.

So biblical literalists and young earth creationists, avoid satanic sattelite TV like the plague and burn all navis and other GPS devices. ’tis a mockery of the lord y’know.

But to close on a more serious note: I would be more than happy if any biblical literalist stumbling over this godless blog can refute my claim or even explain that apparent discrepancy to me. It would be much appreciated…

So may Thor be with you all! Peace!