The 5 Most Awful Atheists

[bleeding heart]

I didn't really know which forum in which to post this, but as it's a humorous piece (albeit obviously quite serious, too), this seems as good a place as any.

I haven't decided which piece I like best. Anyway, worth a look, and a laugh. Here's a sample from each:

Sam Harris:

Most grating, for someone who wrote a book titled The Moral Landscape, Harris' “War on Islam” zealotry is numerically unjustifiable. You're four times as likely to die of a lightning strike than you are from a terrorist attack, and yet this constitutes the gravest threat to Western civilization, but 100,000 (at least) civilian casualties in Iraq is mere fodder for thought experiment apologia. Harris is basically a low-rent Hitchens, sans wit or the wisdom to waterboard himself.

Bill Maher

The “Real Time” host's thinly veiled misogyny, obtuse notion that fat, poor people just need to, like, shop at Whole Foods, and self-righteous condescension in all things religious and political might be tolerable were it not for the fact that he's on comedic par with cervical cancer. The only difference being: cervical cancer doesn't blame its victims for failing to laugh. Compounding the unpleasant nature of Maher's wheat-grass pomposity is that, from vaccines to the news items he discusses, he's just not very well informed.

Penn Jillette

Like many skeptics, the bloviating, ponytailed half of Penn & Teller arrived at his disbelief via the world of magic. However, like giant mystified toddlers, the smoke and mirrors of economic libertarianism has the two performers completely duped. Unable to call bullshit on Ayn Rand, they used to carry a dogeared copy of Atlas Shrugged around on tour—to give you some idea.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Hirsi Ali notoriously received death threats for writing the screenplay to Submission, the documentary which inspired the assassination of its director Theo van Gogh, and her ridiculous objectivist spin on this tragedy was nothing short of shameful:

“[The killer] was on welfare....he had the time to plot a murder, which in the United States he would not be.”

The consummate over-reactionary, what could have been an inspiring career based on reason and social justice quickly devolved into one of neoconservative lunacy. As a former Muslim and current fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, she lends an illusion of street cred to all manner of egregious “free-market” worship, global warming denial, and Western aggression.

S.E. Cupp

she's chummy with Glenn Beck because idiotic atheists and idiotic Mormons have a natural alliance. Cupp's self-loathing-token-atheist-in-the-conservative-media routine seems so geared toward delegitimizing atheism, and selling books to fundie Fox types, that is strains credulity. She recently said, “I would never vote for an atheist president. Ever,” because she thinks religion serves as a “check” on presidential power.

http://www.alternet.org/belief/5-most-awful-atheists?page=0%2C0&paging=off

[Guest American Woman]

Ah, yeah. Of course some of them are going to suck, just as some religious people suck.

But since you started a thread about atheists, let's include Peter Ferguson, from Kimberley, Ontario. The recitation of the Lord's Prayer before city council meetings is causing him all sorts of emotional pain.

Peter Ferguson is suing, claiming that the practice is causing him “anguish, discrimination, exclusion, rejection and loss of enjoyment of life.”

"Loss of enjoyment of life." Nothing takes away the enjoyment of life like a prayer before a city council meeting. He's suing for $5,000 because, well, his life sucks, and someone has to pay him compensation for that.

[eyeball]

I didn't really know which forum in which to post this, but as it's a humorous piece (albeit obviously quite serious, too), this seems as good a place as any.

I haven't decided which piece I like best. Anyway, worth a look, and a laugh. Here's a sample from each:

S.E. Cupp

She recently said, “I would never vote for an atheist president. Ever,” because she thinks religion serves as a “check” on presidential power.

You'd laugh too if you'd just posted what I did here.

[sharkman]

Ah, yeah. Of course some of them are going to suck, just as some religious people suck.

But since you started a thread about atheists, let's include Peter Ferguson, from Kimberley, Ontario. The recitation of the Lord's Prayer before city council meetings is causing him all sorts of emotional pain.

Peter Ferguson is suing, claiming that the practice is causing him “anguish, discrimination, exclusion, rejection and loss of enjoyment of life.”

"Loss of enjoyment of life." Nothing takes away the enjoyment of life like a prayer before a city council meeting. He's suing for $5,000 because, well, his life sucks, and someone has to pay him compensation for that.

Some days all you can do is...well, you know!

It's funny how they feel that standing silent and waiting for a prayer that they are not participating in to end is never an option for these types. No, money has to change hands.

[kimmy]

Some days all you can do is...well, you know!

It's funny how they feel that standing silent and waiting for a prayer that they are not participating in to end is never an option for these types. No, money has to change hands.

Suing for "anguish" et al is pretty ridiculous. Personally, if I was on that council, I would put in my earphones and listen to some Skynyrd and do some work while the rest of them were praying.

However, I have no idea why the prayer needs to be part of the council meeting in the first place. If people need to pray before council meetings, why don't they show up a couple of minutes early?

I wonder how a Christian might react if some council member insisted that each council meeting should open with a couple of minutes of native dancing, chanting, and drumming, to invoke the Great Spirit. As an atheist, I see both as an equally stupid waste of time. What about you guys? If there's 2 minutes of prayer for Jesus, what about another 2 minutes of native drumming? Seems fair, doesn't it?

-k

Edited September 3, 2012 by kimmy

[msj]

Suing for "anguish" et al is pretty ridiculous. Personally, if I was on that council, I would put in my earphones and listen to some Skynyrd and do some work while the rest of them were praying.

However, I have no idea why the prayer needs to be part of the council meeting in the first place. If people need to pray before council meetings, why don't they show up a couple of minutes early?

I wonder how a Christian might react if some council member insisted that each council meeting should open with a couple of minutes of native dancing, chanting, and drumming, to invoke the Great Spirit. As an atheist, I see both as an equally stupid waste of time. What about you guys? If there's 2 minutes of prayer for Jesus, what about another 2 minutes of native drumming? Seems fair, doesn't it?

-k

I agree.

Why don't they just have a "two minutes to do whatever the heck you want" time prior to council meetings.

If I was on council I think I would do some chanting - "ooohhhhhhmmmmmm etc etc ooooohhhhhmmm etc etc"

[Guest American Woman]

Suing for "anguish" et al is pretty ridiculous. Personally, if I was on that council, I would put in my earphones and listen to some Skynyrd and do some work while the rest of them were praying.

What makes you think he's on the council?

I wonder how a Christian might react if some council member insisted that each council meeting should open with a couple of minutes of native dancing, chanting, and drumming, to invoke the Great Spirit.

Personally, I think that would be awesome. I could get into that.

As an atheist, I see both as an equally stupid waste of time. What about you guys? If there's 2 minutes of prayer for Jesus, what about another 2 minutes of native drumming? Seems fair, doesn't it?

I already answered, so I'll just point out that instead of focusing on the atheist's ridiculous reaction, desire for money, and cries of 'persecution,' your response has been focused on the council meeting prayers. Aren't there enough threads already to discuss 'awful Christians?'

[kimmy]

Sam Harris:

I don't know much about Sam Harris, but I don't think characterizing him as an anti-Islam zealot is accurate. His point is not that "the terrorists are going to get us". His point, as I understand it, is that Islam is a terrible religion full of terrible ideas and that it has been afforded a respect it does not deserve because being critical of religion has been deemed inappropriate. Harris recently got in trouble with the Political Correctness Police when he argued in favor of racial profiling at airports. His argument is that refusing to consider race and religion as criteria in screening is a triumph of political correctness over rationality and observable empirical evidence. Considering the number of recent "angry white dude" terrorist incidents, perhaps his empirical evidence needs updating and his argument can be challenged on those grounds. However, characterizing it as Islamophobia falls short.

S.E. Cupp

S.E. Cupp is a big fat fraud.

I have sometimes wondered if I could get a little gig going by donning a head-scarf, adopting a pen-name like Kimmy al-Ghazzar, and appearing in conservative media outlets as the Token Muslim. They'd keep bringing me back because I'd say exactly the kind of stuff that conservatives want to hear about Muslims, and it would have Authoritah because it came from the Token Muslim on the panel.

That's basically S.E. Cupp's gig. She's the Token Atheist that conservative outlets get to represent atheists on their TV shows because she says exactly the kind of stuff that social conservatives want to believe about atheists. She's not there to represent atheism in good faith, she's there to provide bias confirmation for social conservatives.

And when her current act starts wearing out and not getting her on TV as much as it used to, she will take the next step. A remarkable conversion! She will write a new book called something like "Seeing the Light: an atheist finds God" and go on all the conservative media again to talk about how empty she used to feel and how fulfilled she feels now that she has Seen The Light. And social conservatives will eat it up, and Betsy will post here that "even Prominent Atheist S.E.Cupp has rejected atheism and Seen The Light! Rejoice on this day!"

-k

[kimmy]

Personally, I think that would be awesome. I could get into that.

So... 2 minutes for Jesus, 2 minutes for The Great Spirit... how about 2 more minutes for Ganesh?

I already answered, so I'll just point out that instead of focusing on the atheist's ridiculous reaction, desire for money, and cries of 'persecution,' your response has been focused on the council meeting prayers. Aren't there enough threads already to discuss 'awful Christians?'

Of course the focus is on the council meeting prayers. Isn't that what the lawsuit is about in the first place?

-k

[msj]

What makes you think he's on the council?

I don't think Kimmy thinks he is on council.

She is just saying, as am I, what we would do if we were sitting on that council.

A little atheist fantasy, if you will.

I already answered, so I'll just point out that instead of focusing on the atheist's ridiculous reaction, desire for money, and cries of 'persecution,' your response has been focused on the council meeting prayers. Aren't there enough threads already to discuss 'awful Christians?'

Yes, this atheist is suing for money and probably attention and is up there with the likes of Pat "Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians" Robertson and Fred "Thank God for Dead Soldiers" Phelps.

I prefer the way these people (who so far, I think, would not make the list of awful atheists) are handling this type of situation:

Couple to debate right to distribute atheist book

[Guest American Woman]

So... 2 minutes for Jesus, 2 minutes for The Great Spirit... how about 2 more minutes for Ganesh?

If that's sincerely important and meaningful to the people in attendance, so be it. But if it's not, and they are just requesting it because of their feelings of 'persecution' regarding Christian prayer, I say let them grow a thicker skin.

Of course the focus is on the council meeting prayers. Isn't that what the lawsuit is about in the first place?

The post, in case you missed it, was about the 'persecuted Atheist." You seem to have no problem focusing on "persecuted Christians."

[eyeball]

I prefer the way these people (who so far, I think, would not make the list of awful atheists) are handling this type of situation:

Couple to debate right to distribute atheist book

I'd say this couple are more like rational anarchists. Probably scarier than awful to faithists.

[cybercoma]

Am I the only one that thought faithists was fascists with a lisp at first.

[eyeball]

Am I the only one that thought faithists was fascists with a lisp at first.

You're probably the first to take it on faith that fathists and faithism aren't out there, so to speak.

Edited September 3, 2012 by eyeball

[The_Squid]

Ah, yeah. Of course some of them are going to suck, just as some religious people suck.

But since you started a thread about atheists, let's include Peter Ferguson, from Kimberley, Ontario. The recitation of the Lord's Prayer before city council meetings is causing him all sorts of emotional pain.

Peter Ferguson is suing, claiming that the practice is causing him “anguish, discrimination, exclusion, rejection and loss of enjoyment of life.”

"Loss of enjoyment of life." Nothing takes away the enjoyment of life like a prayer before a city council meeting. He's suing for $5,000 because, well, his life sucks, and someone has to pay him compensation for that.

What an awful human being eh?

“I don’t like politicians who break the law, and our county council is breaking the law,” said Mr. Ferguson Tuesday from his home in Kimberley — one of nine municipalities within Grey County. He said if he wins the case, he’ll donate the $5,000 to Canadian Civil Liberties Education Trust.

.

http://life.nationalpost.com/2012/07/31/ontario-man-suing-county-for-5000-in-damages-over-lords-prayer-at-council/

[wyly]

Suing for "anguish" et al is pretty ridiculous. Personally, if I was on that council, I would put in my earphones and listen to some Skynyrd and do some work while the rest of them were praying. -k

he needs a reason to sue regardless if it's real or not, attaching a monetary figure gets the attention of the council if it were not for that they would just ignore it.

However, I have no idea why the prayer needs to be part of the council meeting in the first place. If people need to pray before council meetings, why don't they show up a couple of minutes early?

I wonder how a Christian might react if some council member insisted that each council meeting should open with a couple of minutes of native dancing, chanting, and drumming, to invoke the Great Spirit. As an atheist, I see both as an equally stupid waste of time. What about you guys? If there's 2 minutes of prayer for Jesus, what about another 2 minutes of native drumming? Seems fair, doesn't it?

the religious will need to learn to adapt to changing demographics they're destined to become a minority in this country in another generation or two...there is no place in a secular society for a religious bias in government that favours one religious leaning over others...so ya if there's room for christian prayer time then the same needs to extended to jews, muslims, hindu's, hari krishna's sihks, buddhists, animists etc, it quickly becomes ridiculous....

[kimmy]

What an awful human being eh?

What an Awful Atheist!

http://life.nationalpost.com/2012/07/31/ontario-man-suing-county-for-5000-in-damages-over-lords-prayer-at-council/

And also thank you for providing a link that didn't come from "The Blaze". Aside from being as slanted as any site out there, "The Blaze" is Glen Beck's site and I don't like to click on any link that puts another penny in that psychopath's pocket.

he needs a reason to sue regardless if it's real or not, attaching a monetary figure gets the attention of the council if it were not for that they would just ignore it.

I understand that to file the suit, he needed a complaint.

Personally, it's not a fight I would pick, but I understand why others do.

-k

[msj]

And also thank you for providing a link that didn't come from "The Blaze". Aside from being as slanted as any site out there, "The Blaze" is Glen Beck's site and I don't like to click on any link that puts another penny in that psychopath's pocket.

-k

Yes, I find it interesting that AW gets her talking points from that site.

[Guest American Woman]

What an awful human being eh?

More like whiny, pathetic, and persecuted. He needs to get a life if a prayer before a city council meeting has taken away his enjoyment of life.

[Guest American Woman]

...thank you for providing a link that didn't come from "The Blaze". Aside from being as slanted as any site out there, "The Blaze" is Glen Beck's site and I don't like to click on any link that puts another penny in that psychopath's pocket.

So Sorry, but that "link that didn't come from 'The Blaze'" was included in the article in The Blaze, so I made the mistake of thinking you'd be able to click on it and read the article from the National Post the way I did. Again. My apologies for not posting every link from the article. Good for you standing up for your principles, though, as I'm sure Glen Beck will go to bed hungry tonight because you didn't click on his link. (Next time, just ask - and I'll be more than happy to provide another link for you if you are unable to do a search with all of the information provided and come up with one on your own.)

Edited September 3, 2012 by American Woman

[kimmy]

[

This is possibly the most controversial thing you have ever said.

-k

[kimmy]

If that's sincerely important and meaningful to the people in attendance, so be it. But if it's not, and they are just requesting it because of their feelings of 'persecution' regarding Christian prayer, I say let them grow a thicker skin.

The post, in case you missed it, was about the 'persecuted Atheist." You seem to have no problem focusing on "persecuted Christians."

More like whiny, pathetic, and persecuted. He needs to get a life if a prayer before a city council meeting has taken away his enjoyment of life.

A claim of damage is part of the process of taking this to court.

So while I do not for a moment believe that he has suffered $5000 worth of emotional distress, I do feel the request to drop prayers as an official part of council meetings is entirely reasonable, and I think that taking the matter to court is (while not something I would personally engage in) a matter of principle.

Do you feel the request that prayer be dropped from council meetings is reasonable?

-k

[msj]

More like whiny, pathetic, and persecuted. He needs to get a life if a prayer before a city council meeting has taken away his enjoyment of life.

Yes, I'm sure he's all that and more too!

As for getting a life, well, I'm sure you yearn for the good old days when the good church did not have to deal with people asking for equal rights.

It's simple: put up equal time for all religions to have the chance for a prayer, or a drum, or whatever, or don't do any of that and conduct the business in a professional and secular manner.

I hardly think this qualifies the guy as being an awful atheist as compared to, say, Sam Harris.

In fact, all he is doing is trying to get his town council to follow the law of the land as already determined in an Ontario appeal court ruling.

To secularists it is important to not only have a secular government but also for that government to actually do things like, gasp!, follow the law.

[Guest American Woman]

Yes, I'm sure he's all that and more too!

Yep.

As for getting a life, well, I'm sure you yearn for the good old days when the good church did not have to deal with people asking for equal rights.

And I'm sure you're incredibly ignorant of what I "yearn for" or believe.

I hardly think this qualifies the guy as being an awful atheist as compared to, say, Sam Harris.

I think it qualifies him for being an idiot. Someone who is suffering the way he is due to a prayer really needs to learn to be a little more tolerant of things he doesn't necessarily believe in- for the good of his mental health. But of course he's seeking monetary damages, which will likely put some of the spring back in his joyless step.

In fact, all he is doing is trying to get his town council to follow the law of the land as already determined in an Ontario appeal court ruling.

And he's coming across as a big baby in the process. He could have sued on those grounds, but instead he's been victimized and feels left out by a religion he doesn't believe in. "Persecuted," some might say.

To secularists it is important to not only have a secular government but also for that government to actually do things like, gasp!, follow the law.

Yes, I'm sure his life becomes joyless and not worth living every time someone doesn't follow the law to a "T."

But I'm not surprised the posters who criticize Christians' over-reations would overlook the idiocy of his ridiculous claims - "loss of enjoyment of life" indeed.

Edited September 4, 2012 by American Woman

[kimmy]

(more on city council prayers here.)

Spoiler alert: Christians aren't as excited about them when they're not Christian prayers.

-k