I came across Exodus 21:22-25 while performing research for my rebuttal to a reply by C_Andy_3. I would like to thank C_Andy_3 for the discussion that led to my discovery of this passage.
Old Testament quote, emphasis mine (thanks to Mechon Mamre for the RaMBaM translation):
22 And if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow, he shall be surely fined, according as the woman’s husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
23 But if any harm follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
25 burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
This clearly states that the fetus was not a life. In fact, it indicates that a miscarriage could be caused without causing harm. The loss of the fetus can be compensated by mere money. After that, if there is harm, it is life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, ….
First, let me be clear. I am not joking about this. I am being as serious as an atheist who believes that real sin lies only in harming others can be on the subject. For religious readers, if I have any, I hope this encourages thought and dialog. I welcome all serious responses regardless of whether we agree on the topic.
So, here are my points about why I believe abstinence is sinful from both a biblical standpoint and more importantly to me why abstinence only education and the encouragement of abstinence pledges and the like are inherently sinful.
Of course, the first day of suspension was for standing up to the bully. Both children got suspended. But, why did only the atheist get the lecture about respecting others? Why did only the atheist get an extra day of suspension? Wouldn’t it have been nice if the principal explained to the Jesus freak preaching child that preaching in school is wrong? Wouldn’t it have been nice if the principal had explained a bit about respecting the choice not to believe? Oh well. At least mom got it right.
At last, we finally know why God is too busy to stop wars and solve hunger. It’s not just because He is too busy creating droughts, floods, extreme storms, wildfires, and all the rest. It’s because he’s busy interfering in the fair competitions of sporting events. Instead of allowing sporting events to remain fair, the Lord God Ruler of the Universe feels the need to get involved on the field and choose the winner.
At least, a quarter of Americans feel that this is what He is doing.
Why can’t humans dream up a god who is superior to us? What’s the point of creating an imaginary friend to whom one can pray for the temporary suspension of the laws of physics if said imaginary friend is no better than we are?
For the record, count me among the small number who disapprove of the expressions of faith mentioned in the article. I disapprove for the same reason I disapprove of thanking god for rain after a drought. Why not blame god for the drought in the first place?
Sorry, I couldn’t resist modifying FFRF’s title to be a humorous reference to Stephen Colbert. I hope he won’t mind.
Anyway, this is a fantastic article about what the Catholic church requires for someone to call themselves a Catholic. According to church doctrine, if you don’t meet the requirements, you are not a Catholic. Read the article and try coming up with a guess of how many of the world’s 1.2 billion self-proclaimed Catholics are really Catholic under church dogma. I’m guessing the number of true Catholics is actually 2 or 3 orders of magnitude smaller.
Just on the very very off chance that Stephen Colbert or one of his staff actually (dare I say it) inadvertently stumble across my blog, I’ll plug Colbert’s book with the reference for my hybrid title in hopes of appeasing his lawyers him.
I’m sure many who read my blog have been convinced for a while that I’m somewhat of a fear monger with respect to climate change and overpopulation. Perhaps. Before you make up your mind, read this:
The figures come as one of the world’s leading environmentalists issued a warning that the global food supply system could collapse at any point, leaving hundreds of millions more people hungry, sparking widespread riots and bringing down governments. In a shocking new assessment of the prospects of meeting food needs, Lester Brown, president of the Earth policy research centre in Washington, says that the climate is no longer reliable and the demands for food are growing so fast that a breakdown is inevitable, unless urgent action is taken.
Good thing climate change is just a hoax. Dig hole in sand. Insert head. Fill in hole. Ignorance is bliss.
“Armed aggression is no longer the principal threat to our future. The overriding threats to this century are climate change, population growth, spreading water shortages and rising food prices,” Brown says.
One could debate the ethics of a doctor having an affair with a patient. The answer is likely that it depends on the case. No one is suggesting that this case was anything but consensual. In this case though, it’s just a start. This shithead then went on to pressure the woman he impregnated to have an abortion. IMNSHO, women should be free to make that choice on their own without undue influence. But, that’s not bad enough. This Republican member of congress claims that abortion is murder. He fights against abortion rights. Well, he does unless it’s his illegitimate fetus.
Can one get any more hypocritical than this? Is it possible?
250 million years ago, this planet suffered the greatest mass extinction of multicellular life in the long history of the planet. The ocean conveyor current stopped. The ocean became anoxic, meaning it had little or no oxygen. Fish died; sulfur producing bacteria thrived. As the anoxic layer of the ocean reached the surface, hydrogen sulfide gas was released into the atmosphere in toxic quantities. The sky turned green. The mass extinction was brought onto land.
95% of all species on the planet died. This was due to global warming.*
Congressman Paul Broun has publicly stated that he is deliberately failing to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States of America. As such, he should be forcibly removed from office for the failure to follow his oath of office. Here is a direct quote from this idiot who has proclaimed that the earth is 9,000 years old, and that evolution, the big bang theory, and embryology are lies straight from the pit of hell.
As you congressman, I hold the holy bible as being the major directions to me for how I vote in Washington DC. And, I’ll continue to do that.
Paul Broun’s act of legislating based on his personal religious beliefs is in direct contradiction to this famous quote.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ….
Great news! Someone is dealing with the biggest environmental problem in the world. Most environmental groups won’t even say the word. But, Monsanto is actively addressing the real issue, the cause of climate change, ocean acidification, overfishing, deforestation, all forms of pollution, world hunger, and possibly even war.
Monsanto has taken it upon themselves to address overpopulation.
This is great news folks. If we do not limit our population, nature will limit it for us … mercilessly. So, when I read this, I was thrilled.
I should note that I am specifically responding to this quote from the FFRF blog post, not the one about the pill and cancer:
Midway through the rally, a glassy-eyed man with an infant came up to me, held up the baby, and solemnly told me: “Contraception would have killed her.”
In some cases, people really do seem to think that not conceiving a child is the same as killing one. Somewhat humorously, they do not seem to make the same claim about abstinence in general, or more specifically about the priests and nuns who disobey God’s command to “be fruitful and multiply.” (Actually, this may be a mistaken translation. I believe the original quote was “be useful and multiplex.”)
However, pointing out hypocrisies like priests, nuns, and religious murderers who let their own children die rather than use modern medicine to treat obviously treatable conditions like diabetes will only be a sidebar to this discussion.
The real point will of this post is the obvious fact that every person ever born has died or will die. No one gets out alive. Therefore, 100% of all human deaths have as the root cause conception.
Contraception prevents death.
For the purposes of this post, I am going to assume that those who mistakenly claim that contraception rather than conception causes death are the same induhviduals who believe life begins at conception. It seems a fair assumption. So, for those folks, I would point out not only that about 80% of all fertilized eggs “die” without implanting in the womb, but all of the others die as well. Every fertilized egg is a death waiting to happen, some will merely take longer than others.
So, to you religiose wackos who believe that contraception kills, I say this. Contraception has been preventing deaths since 1850 BCE. Contraception is the only means humanity has ever found to prevent death. Fairy tales won’t do it. Prayer won’t do it. Contraception succeeds where prayer fails.
Prevent death. Get a vasectomy or tubal ligation today. Not ready to make a permanent commitment to preventing death? Try contraception. Many types are quite effective at staving off the grim reaper. Ask your doctor which method is right for you.
Well, not actually Christ. But, some who actually read the bible are finding little or no support for the Republican budget created by Paul Ryan. They’re claiming that, while he claims to be a Christian, he is instead a follower of Ayn Rand, a renowned atheist. In fact, Ryan also claims to be a Randroid. So, how can one reconcile his Ayn Randian politics with his stated Christian beliefs? One can’t.
I, for one, am not a Christian. But, as was Jesus Christ, I am a liberal. So, just as Jesus Christ would be, I am appalled by Republican politics. Anyway, here’s a couple of good clips from the Colbert Report about the Ryan budget.
What would you say upon meeting God at your death? For me, I’d do my best to get in one good shot. Before I get zapped for all eternity, I want to at least try to give God, whichever god I come to first, a punch in the nose.
But, I doubt if I could say anything much better than what Adam Brown says in this video.
I’m hearing a lot from atheist friends who don’t want to be offensive. They are upset by the tactics being used by some atheist organizations today. I have an alternate take on things.
Background:
Here are a couple of ads that show the kinds of things to which many on both sides of the fence seem to object.
To me, it’s obvious that the bible is offensive. I’m surprised that believers would agree. But, there you have it. Way to go Pennsylvania for declaring 2012 to be the Year of the Bible. It seems to be spreading the word about the offensive nature of the Bad Book beautifully, albeit with a bit of help from American Atheists and the Pennsylvania Nonbelievers.
Folks, the only thing on this sign that is not in the Bible is the graphic representation of the literal words in the book. If a simple graphic depicting what slavery means is offensive, then so is the concept and the book that condones it.
Again and again and again, our morals do not come from the Bible.
Here’s a short collection of atheist, or more accurately antitheist, songs that I happen to like. Note that rather than having one line about atheism, all of these songs have it as a central theme. There are many more songs that have a single line about non-belief, e.g. Human League’s “Love Action” and The Clash’s “Death or Glory”. I have not included such songs on this list.
This list is not intended to be exhaustive. Please note that for me, the music stopped in about 1988. I know very little music from after that. I have no good excuse. I guess I’m just not that into music as a whole. I like some music very much, but have never really taken a strong interest in it. And, lately what music I have added to my collection has been older rather than newer.
Regardless, here are a few of my favorites with antitheist themes.
Here’s a scene from the TV show ‘The West Wing’ explaining why the Bible should not be taken literally. I’ve also received nearly identical text via email. I believe the email came first.
(google break)
Yup, snopes confirms that the email came first. Still, it’s somewhat more powerful to see it in a video, even though some of the great text of the email was missed. Specifically, the bit about whether one in the U.S. may own a Canadian is missing.
I’m getting a bit tired of being told that some guy 2,000 years ago died for me. So, I’m stating publicly and in no uncertain terms:
No one died for me! Certainly no one died to absolve me of my sins!
This concept of putting all of one’s sins on a goat or a sheep or two turtledoves and then killing the animal or birds has a long and stupid tradition in the Old Testament. It is continued in the New Testament with the killing of the Lamb of God. I will admit that at least in the New Testament, the scapegoating ended there. That’s a good thing. But, it doesn’t change the fact that the entire concept of scapegoating is monumentally idiotic.
Let there be stuff? I don’t think that’s a very satisfying answer. This one is much better.
This lecture is entitled ‘A Universe From Nothing’ by Lawrence Krauss. It is rather lengthy, but amusing throughout and not too technical for a lay audience, such as myself. The introduction is by Richard Dawkins, who if I remember correctly, at some point calls Lawrence Krauss the Woody Allen of physics. It’s a fairly apt description, and a high compliment IMHO.
I highly recommend this. If you’re thinking it’s not worth the time, just replace a couple of reruns of older TV shows with an hour of this. It’s better for your brain anyway and just as entertaining.
Also, check out the incredibly impressive Heart of the Adirondacks project in the Adirondack State Park, the largest park in the continental United States at twice the size of Yellowstone.
Posted by Misanthropic Scott 
