A quick perusal of PZ Myer's "science" blog, pharyngula, has revealed the following sentiments, taken from the series of postings available just today:
Christians are perverts, "..if you're a good Christian you can also watch these two attractive young men being affectionate with one another. You can watch it over and over. You can watch it until those strange, funny feelings drive you to embrace Jesus." (referring to AFA's protest of open-mouth homosexual kissing on a soap opera, and including video of the incident).
Christians are "dreaming of the day the Jews are exterminated or converted, bringing on Armageddon".
Christianity is mind control, as shown by a fellow who reports on his experience at a Christian retreat. PZ:"Insulating yourself against the taint of all religion is a kind of psychological, informational hygiene. Abandon all rigor and requirement for reality-based evidence for one's ideas, and you open the door wide for the kind of conditioning in dogma modern religion promotes." "Atheism is a condom for your mind". Need I extrapolate that in PZ's world non-Atheism is a disease?
PZ is tolerant? Of exactly what is he tolerant outside his own views? And how far do "rigor and requirement for reality-based evidence for one's ideas" make it on PZ's blog?
For rigor and evidence of your own, just visit PZ's place and inject any contradictory comment of your own. Then examine the response you receive for rigor and evidence. That's all it will take to answer the above questions empirically.
2 comments:
Isn't it funny how I, a theist, can go to PZ Mwahaha's on a regular basis and not take the slings and arrows aimed at religion personally, but you (who describe yourself as an atheist) find the whole place so distasteful that you have to post about it?
Let me suggest that you're confusing personal tolerance (which, based on my experience, PZ manifests) with an attitude that your ideas might be automatically deserve a respectful hearing in that forum. You might be entitled to the former to some degree, but I think you sound kind of insecure on the latter. The fact that you and I can disagree in a civil matter and have a nice back-and-forth, that we are actually interested in listening to each other,etc....Well that's nice, and I value it, but having said that, I don't think that's a given at PZ's place. If you want to get a more considered treatment of your ideas, you would have to stick around, ignore the personal jabs directed your way and put up with a certain amount of crap in order to be taken seriously.
If you don't want to spend that kind of effort, can't say as I blame you, but really, neither of us is entitled to have our ideas treated respectfully there. No privileged beliefs!
This particular post was not about the childishness of the commenters at PZ's, it was a synopsis of the lies and hate that PZ himself spews. The commenters take their cue from him of course, and in that atmosphere there is no room for an "other".
As for being an atheist, I was definitely an atheist for 40 years, until I applied the rules of logic to atheism itself. The irrationality of atheism becomes apparent when one does that. The purpose of this blog is to continue to do that in a public forum, so those who are susceptible to things like atheist bombast have a rational alternative available to help them form a logical worldview.
In my small way I hope to provide a rational antidote to atheist hate spewers, by showing it for what it is, and where possible, giving logic for the rejection of atheism.
It is unconscionable to post that Christians are "dreaming of the day the Jews are exterminated or converted, bringing on Armageddon". PZ is a hate monger, pure and simple. And he preaches to a pack of jackals. If you find comfort there, so be it. I'll occasionally read PZ and comment here. But I'll not waste time commenting there.
And I guess I need to look over my personal description: I was an atheist.
Post a Comment