Google
 
Internet Goosing the Antithesis

Monday, January 23, 2006

The Christian Pollution of Public Discourse part 1

Most of us agree that an individual should be free to think, or believe, whatever he wants in the privacy of his own mind. For example, one is absolutely free to fantasize about mass murder (although this may be very unhealthy). But to take that fantasy into public life, and commit mass murder, is criminal. What is acceptable in one's private arena, is not necessarily desirable or even acceptable in the social arena.

Should Christianity have a presence in public discourse ? The influence of Christianity is not only in the obvious - such as Creationist propaganda, anti-choice propaganda, or organized gay-bashing - but also hidden in more subtle forms. The ideas of "human dignity" or "playing God" as arguments against scientific progress have evolved from Christian attitudes. The teleology that permeates people's beliefs about nature is derived from the Christian dogma that nature was created for man's use, and that the universe serves God's plans. I would say that even a subtle belief like the anti-GM belief that there is such a thing as "human genes" and "fish genes" is derived from the teleology of Creationism, which emphasizes the discrete nature of Creation instead of the continuous, fundamental unity of all life. The anti-choice, anti-pleasure, anti-materialist Christian attitudes also influence moral debates to a large extent, so much that "morality" is now synonymous with "repression".

In short, as I've also discussed in "Christians are our cultural enemies", the Christian moral, teleological and anti-scientific ideas are totally opposed to secular science and Western values. Christianity is therefore polluting public discourse with premises which have no place in the 21st century, regardless of whether they are obvious propaganda or subtle semantics. These premises have been wholly discredited by both the success of science and the choices of the vast majority of people living in Western countries.

To even allow Christian voices or premises in a non-religious conversation is inherent treason to everything we stand for as modern upright human beings. Christian beliefs are Middle Eastern canards declaimed furiously by pompous asses.

It is also equally obvious that Christians have no incentive to change their ways. To have faith that one's beliefs are the right ones, despite all evidence, is praised as the highest virtue. Christians, by the nature of religion itself, can have no goal but to strenghten and propagate their belief system. There is no virtue of truth-seeking, honesty or progress in Christianity.

Their aim is to smash materialism, maintain ignorance about human nature, and ultimately to restore the power of religious authorities against Western governance and secular science. But hey, you don't need to take my word for it :

Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies. Bringing together leading scholars from the natural sciences and those from the humanities and social sciences, the Center explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the case for a broadly theistic understanding of nature.

(...)

The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. If we view the predominant materialistic science as a giant tree, our strategy is intended to function as a "wedge" that, while relatively small, can split the trunk when applied at its weakest points.

(...)

Governing Goals
* To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies.
* To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and hurnan beings are created by God.


These quotes come from the infamous Wedge Strategy, the Creationist blueprint for their cultural battle against naturalist, secular science. Nothing in this document, or in the Creationist movement in general, is based on fact, hypothesis or even conjecture. Rather, it is an extremist political and religious movement mascarading as science.

In addition to all these crimes, if you want to take the PC route, you can also say that Christianity - the idea that an all-good god justifies and trivializes all human suffering - is the most offensive belief imaginable. So even from that route Christianity should be persecuted on the same grounds that the Neo-Nazis ar persecuted, if we're going to be consistent.

Is it hypocrite for me to call to persecution ? Not at all. Christians sometimes accuse us of holding a position no less questionable than theirs. They are correct in one little respect : like them, I have chosen sides in the cultural struggle within which we find ourselves in this modern world. This struggle, which has persisted for centuries, opposes the individual and his values to the crushing forces of the religious and political collectives and collectivist ideals. Both sides desire to impose their worldview on society.

So what's the difference between me and a Christian evangelist ? He wants to enslave minds and institutions so they perpetuate his belief system. I'm fighting for people to be free to express their personal values and choose freedom or, if they must, a belief system, as long as they don't hurt anyone. I am morally responsible for my actions and the principles I espouse, and I promote moral responsibility for all. He preaches total irresponsibility. That's what makes me morally superior.

Part of our Western values considers us to be on equal grounds, but on that point I have to disagree. As long as there are people who actively seek to destroy our Western way of life, it remains self-destructive to place them on a pedestal of "equal time". True equality can only exist when all collectivist power is destroyed. This is one lesson that has not reached modernity yet.

What must be done ? All Christian strategems must be exposed and rendered impotent. All Christian rhetoric must be publically ridiculed, persecuted, censored. All Christian politicians should be forcibly outed as followers of a foreign belief system that sanctions genocide, slavery and communism. Christian brainwashers, child abusers, must be jailed. Churches must be taxed until they drop, and their bells must be torn down from their high places. Only the end of the lax attitude of atheistic organizations and communities can bring this about.

I have done my best to fight against this attitude, but I am alone, and there's not much I can do about it. If you want to help, then the next time you see a Christian spout his rhetoric on an atheist message board or in an atheist discussion, speak up against the religion and the premises of the rhetoric. Make it clear that Christianity is not wanted. Maybe they'll get the message.

In part 2, I address the objections that no doubt a lot of atheists will have at reading this entry.

Post a Comment


8 Comments:

At 1/23/2006 9:05 PM, Blogger Mike declaimed...

Objection Number One: You're a freakin' fascist. Yikes.

 
At 1/23/2006 9:44 PM, Blogger Francois Tremblay declaimed...

No, Mr. Straw Man. I'm an anarcho-capitalist. I don't believe in government or race. Fascists worship government and race.

I don't want anyone to be censored by the government, I just want people to become aware of the evil nature of Christianity.

You've got some nerve being such a jackass.

 
At 1/24/2006 1:32 AM, Blogger The Atheist Messiah declaimed...

First, I'd just like to say that I think this is one of the best posts I've read of yours. It's at least now one of my personal favorites.

I was just thinking about something similar to this today. I find taking the time and energy in rebuttal to Christian arrogance and stupidity very taxing and an obvious waste of time better spent focusing on discussing philosophy, morality, sociology and science in general. We should be focusing more on spreading rationality or at the very least critical-thinking skills. The ammount of time and energy wasted by active atheists, freethinkers and the like debating people unable to grasp reality or to accept reality would be much better spent educating the many who want and need a better understanding of life. I'm not saying I'm going to quit arguing with theists. I don't think that is possible when trying to engage the public in open discourse.


Anyway, onto my thoughts on your post:

Franc said:

"True equality can only exist when all collectivist power is destroyed. This is one lesson that has not reached modernity yet."

I don't think this is possible or desirable. Man is a social animal. While many brilliant minds were very independant people, they still interacted with and benefitted from a social structure to their indigenous population.

I understand that if everyone thought like you or me or many freethinkers that the idea of collectivist power would become obsolete. Societies would thrive on healthy communication of substantiateable information. I think of this as Utopia. The problem is that there will always be disagreement in facts and opinions and factions dedicated to different belief systems. The world will never be perfect. We can only continue to try to progress towards that Utopian ideal. That brings me to your next point:

"What must be done ? All Christian strategems must be exposed and rendered impotent. All Christian rhetoric must be publically ridiculed, persecuted, censored. All Christian politicians should be forcibly outed as followers of a foreign belief system that sanctions genocide, slavery and communism. Christian brainwashers, child abusers, must be jailed. Churches must be taxed until they drop, and their bells must be torn down from their high places. Only the end of the lax attitude of atheistic organizations and communities can bring this about."

I agree with much of this. There is no longer the luxury of time regarding religious influence. It is becoming more obvious all of the time how religion is directly and indirectly harmful to everyone.

As far as persecution and censorship of religious dogma goes,I admit I find this desirable. I find this to be counter-productive though. I loathe the censorship of anything except acts deemed completely and universally unethical by most any standards. (i.e. exhibiting/selling videotaping of forced rape or of torture or killing for pleasure, etc.).

If by persecution you mean public ridicule and discouragement of religious practices through education, evocation of tax-exempt status, and financial, social and political incentives to be religion-free, then I agree with you. I have the feeling you want more than that. I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that is a slippery-slope. Using the law and the military to control any group of people will not only eventually result in the collectivist power you are trying to eliminate, but it leads to complete intolerance, fascism, war and genocide. Whether or not you feel, know or believe a race or minority is evil (such a religious word) or inferior or a hindrence to the rest of the planet there is no justification for eliminating, jailing or impeding the well-being of a group of people. It is such an overgeneralization in the first place to label an entire group of people (whether it be Christians or Jews or Mexicans or Inuits...). There are undoubtedly many genuinely good and intelligent people that would fall into your group-persecution that are undeserving of becoming collateral damage.

 
At 1/24/2006 1:45 AM, Blogger Francois Tremblay declaimed...

"First, I'd just like to say that I think this is one of the best posts I've read of yours. It's at least now one of my personal favorites."

Thank you. I value your input. I'm really glad someone liked it. I strongly meant every single part of it.


"We should be focusing more on spreading rationality or at the very least critical-thinking skills."

That would be one part of it, yes. But the educational system, as long as it stays controlled by government, will never have any incentive to do that.


"The ammount of time and energy wasted by active atheists, freethinkers and the like debating people unable to grasp reality or to accept reality would be much better spent educating the many who want and need a better understanding of life."

Hear, hear.


"I don't think this is possible or desirable. Man is a social animal. While many brilliant minds were very independant people, they still interacted with and benefitted from a social structure to their indigenous population."

Sure. But that's perfectly compatible with equality and individualism.


"As far as persecution and censorship of religious dogma goes,I admit I find this desirable. I find this to be counter-productive though. I loathe the censorship of anything except acts deemed completely and universally unethical by most any standards. (i.e. exhibiting/selling videotaping of forced rape or of torture or killing for pleasure, etc.)."

I have to make clear once again that I am talking about a decision of personal responsibility, not of government. Atheists should understand that by sanctioning Christian speech they are sanctioning extreme hate speech. Few atheists would actually desire to do that.


"If by persecution you mean public ridicule and discouragement of religious practices through education, evocation of tax-exempt status, and financial, social and political incentives to be religion-free, then I agree with you."

Yes, definitely.


"I have the feeling you want more than that."

No, I don't want more than that. I just want people to understand the immorality of Christianity and be aware of the atrocity of what they are sanctioning in their public lives.

Right now, very few people are actually aware of this.

 
At 1/24/2006 6:02 AM, Blogger Mike declaimed...

No, Mr. Straw Man. I'm an anarcho-capitalist. I don't believe in government or race. Fascists worship government and race.

In a certain way, you're right. I should have just called you a totalitarian - that would have been more accurate. I didn't expect you to want to quibble terminology, so I just used the snazzier sounding term.

Why are you a totalitarian? Because you want to limit public discourse, thereby controlling the flow of information, thereby attempting to control the thoughts of others. That is the moral and philosophical aspect of every totalitarian from the Cromwellian Puritans to Stalin to Pinochet.

 
At 1/24/2006 6:15 AM, Blogger Francois Tremblay declaimed...

Talk about not fucking listening.

I AM AN ANARCHIST ! I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO CONTRL ANYONE'S THOUGHTS ! WHAT I DO WANT IS FOR ATHEISTS TO REALIZE THAT CHRISTIANITY IS EVIL AND NOT TO SANCTION IT !

Maybe if I type it in all caps, even fanatic tolerentists like you will GET IT !

 
At 1/26/2006 11:51 AM, Blogger authenticpoppy declaimed...

Thank you for saying this! Finally someone gets it. I'm so sick of censoring myself I could just cry. The Islam and Christianity are arrogant and bigotted religions. If they were described in honest terms they would be shouted into the ground with the Nazis and the KKK.

I'll be hanging around if you don't mind. :)

 
At 4/15/2006 7:17 AM, Blogger Hellbound Alleee declaimed...

Mike: do you know what an anarchist is?

 

Trackbacks:

Create a Link

<< Home