I finally got a chance to see the second video of the Saturday plenary of the Atheist Alliance convention and I was intrigued by something that Matthew Chapman said. He said that atheism will never get traction and become as common or more common than religious belief as long as most people in America need the social supports that are presently only available through churches. He wasn't suggesting that there was some kind of quid pro quo, ie believe and we'll give you food stamps. He was saying that in the atmosphere of uncertainty and fear created by the present deficiencies in the US social safety net, people are more likely to feel the need to turn to churches for solace and to develop community networks that will help them should they need it. Is it perhaps not a coincidence that small-government conservatives and Christian hardliners have found common cause in the Republican party?

My policy of repeating myself once, then writing off the debate as futile, is working out well so far; at least as a time-saving measure. If someone doesn't get it the second time around, they're not going to the ninth.

[mod edit: "I like it" in stumbleupon, posted to del.ic.ious, posted to reddit]

Sir,

I am writing you concerning a recent article I read of yours titled “Atheism's moral philosophy not consistent with Baylor's mission”. In this article you make several claims that I think are not only irresponsible, but speak to a level of ignorance that make one ponder the pedigree of any organization that would bestow on you the title of PhD.

I am going to respond to several of the claims you made in defense of your mythology and show you how it is you the “theist” who is morally bankrupt. The first claim I would like to address is the following:

Bah, i'm sitting here listening to a person next to me talk about how wikipedia is a reliable source and souldn't be "banned" from science papers in k-12. Whats his argument for this? because wikipedia is often quite correct on some things. If i were less shy i would confront the ignorant person i am talking about. I swear the um ignorance maybe? of some people overwhelms me quite often.

ok i just had to get that off my chest

walang bathala
no god

Some syllables are implied by context, but the text literally reads:

wala bahala
nothing whatever

The native written language of the Filipinos, the Baybayin, is a syllabary that the majority of men, women and children were proficient in. It was used to write receipts, records, and is still used in the writing of poetry by some small tribes to this day. The Spanish Conquistadors were impressed by the literacy rate, and made short work of latinizing the script, and printing prayer sheets for the natives. Magellan, who'd tried to divide and conquer by exploiting existing tribal conflicts, met his end on the archipelago. Legend has it, he was mortally wounded by the spear of Datu Lapu Lapu; and that he retreated to his ship where he bled to death. After three hundred years of Spanish occupation, the Filipinos were able to organize a revolution. While largely successful, the Spanish managed to cede their interest in the islands to the waiting Americans, who at that point had imperial pretensions. The Philippines are predominately Catholic to this day, and many Filipino Americans struggle to find pride in their cultural identity.

Thanks for reading, if you have any comments or suggestions you can reach me directly HERE. Or on Myspace HERE.
Stay rational,
Jack
and the RRS MI team

Table of Contents

Click HERE to find your local affiliate!

Rational Response Squad News

RRS Affiliate News

Science News

Religion

Government

Community

Entertainment

Brian's Blog

Kelly and I are going to Borders to see our story in Radar Magazine.

I'm in a rush, but I just wanted to tell you that the November issue of Radar Magazine has a three page story on us. You can head to Borders Books around the country today to pick up the issue, consider calling in advance to double check. Barnes and Noble stocks Radar, but both stores we visited still had last issue, and the computer didn't think they'd get it for another month. We think that was an error due to the fact that Radar was previously bi-monthly. Another user reports that his Barnes and Noble stocks it.

As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one can prove that there is not a God.
On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism

Tonight I stopped in to work briefly to get one or two things done before tomorrow, and noticed something sitting on my desk. It was a page from one of those daily calendars with little proverbs written on each day, that I had seen on the desk of one of my more religious co-workers. This one said something to the effect of:

There is much diversity of thought in my family. I have the right to my opinions, and they have the right to theirs. Inner Wisdom guides us all.

I agree that we all have the right to believe whatever we want. I'm against banning religion and forcing people to be atheist. That would make us just as bad as our opposition.