Another Gem Among Stupid Atheist Quotes

History teaches us that no other cause has brought more death than the word of god.

-Giulian Buzila

I guess Mr. Buzila never heard of the Communist Revolutions of the 20th Century, that killed an estimated hundred million people.

However, that isn't too surprising if you were to do an internet search on "Guilian Buzila".

I was expecting to find a college professor or a writer of some reknown in left-wing wine sipping circles. Instead, the only Giulian Buzila I could dig up was a chef somewhere in Los Angeles.

So are Atheist blogs and websites now quoting the observations of a chef as if he were an expert on religion and history?

I doubt it highly.

I'm willing to bet that it's completely bogus, a quote made up by some guy on the internet and credited to the most unusual name he could dig up.

More's the pity.

This quote is on dozens of atheist websites and blogs. Somebody is even festooning hoodies and T-shirts with this. Atheists are supposed to be the smart ones, the "brights". Does it ever occur to them to fact-check what they post on their websites?

The Atheist response will most likely be, "Big deal, the quote is still true".

REALLY? The word of God killed more people then Lenin, Stalin, and Mao? Are we expected to believe that when it would have meant the elimination of the entire population of Europe?

Once again, intellectual dishonesty rules Village Atheism, and a silly, made-up quote stands as evidence.

Another Dumb Atheist Cartoon

What is it with Atheists and their condescending, lame internet pictures? We get to see Zombie Jesus, or the Lord riding a dinosaur... and then this gem:

Sad, truly sad.

Not only was the artist putting forth the same tired Arguments from Silence, but even the Bible verse the artist cited is nothing related to the artists's point. The artist just picked something from the air.

Mark 4:13 cites Jesus telling a parable. Perhaps the atheist who came up with this kind of fluff would do better to at least try and cite GENESIS, which had to do with creation?

Duh.

Keep Your Religion Out Of My Life!

I hear that from atheists again and again.

The latest one I read on a religion forum was "If Christians keep their religion out of my life, I'll keep my scorn out of theirs."

Riiiiiight...

The guy was in a religion forum making condescending attacks on religion. I guess he was 'forced' to go there because somebody mentioned God in his presence?

Atheists on the internet are hypersensitive individuals who go online to vent. For example, a lot of them are angry because currency has the name of God printed on it.

I  like to remind those complainers, "No worries. Nowadays most cash is transferred electronically by debit cards. You don't need to carry around any money. Yay, science!

It always cracks me up when atheists on the internet claim to be on some kind of "crusade", when all they're doing is sitting behind a computer and griping. If they're trying to "deprogram" believers, they're not doing a very good job.

In fact, Atheists, for all their talk about trying to free people from the "mental shackles" of god belief, are some of the most polarizing people you'll ever find on the internet. They rip into Christians for bullying people with threats of hell while being bullies themselves. Not too smart, brainiacs.

Why is it that I have to keep my religion out of someone's life, but they don't have to keep their anti-theism out of mine? Somehow, telling somebody "God bless you" is a huge offense, but I'm expected to shut up when some prime time television show uses my Savior's name in vain? Gee, folks, where's the equality here?

Yet, as I mention this, I wouldn't be surprised if a half dozen of you atheists piped up and told me not be such a whiner.

Get a clue, Village Atheists: You want tolerance? Be the example and show some.

'Nuff said.

Oh Noes! Churches Fed High School Football Players!

It's time for another hissy fit by American Atheists' retarded cousins, the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

This time, it's over meals being provided to a High School football team by a church:

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/school-under-fire-for-allowing-churches-to-feed-football-team.html

The Wisconsin based FFRF got the word from a local whistleblower in Georgia. Atheists are working hard to establish a tattle-tale network across every city in the U.S. It's a lot like the Secret Police systems in Communist regimes, which encourage the citizens to spy on each other for the slightest infraction against the government. It's just thinly-veiled fascism disguised as "constitutional protection".

FFRF claims feeding football players at churches and perhaps metioning Christianity is blatant violation of the First Amendment Establishment Clause. They have failed to explain why giving a benediction before opening a session of Congress isn't, however.

I guess it's easier to pick on some rural high school than Uncle Sam. Funny how that works, huh?

Why is that Atheists always remember the Establishment Clause, yet completely ignore the Freedom of Exercise Clause? I guess that's just archaic old language by a bunch of dead guys, right?

Guess what, Atheists? Jesus said, "Feed the hungry", and that's what churches are doing, as part of their FREEDOM TO EXERCISE THEIR FAITH guaranteed under the same Constitution you guys claim to protect.

When are you going to step up to the plate, and use some of your resources to show the churches up by actually helping the needy?

I guess those lawyers you're always running to are the only needy people you care about.

Update On the American Atheists Lawsuit

Today on Fox News' O'Reilly Factor, guest host Laura Ingraham interviewed former Methodist pastor, now turned Atheist, Teresa McBain, who is now the Public Relations Director for American Atheists.

Ms. McBain was invited to speak about the recent lawsuit by American Atheists against the metal cross that has been placed in the World trade Center Memorial (see my blog post here on that).

It seems Ms. McBain was trying to "clear up" the reasons that AA filed the suit. It wasn't because their representatives find the cross a horrible symbol of death (I guess that was just baloney, right?), it's now because not all denominations and faiths are equally represented in the memorial.

Backpeddle, anyone?

Ms. McBain cited that one of the plaintiffs in the suit was upset to the point of severe mental trauma because a Lutheran Cross is not featured in the memorial. Severe mental trauma?

The cross that was chosen is PLAIN and non-denominational. That's just not good and general enough for American Atheists, who have already demonstrated their hatred for this symbol of Christianity, regardless.

Ms. McBain also cited a lack of Jewish symbols, which in fact, is wrong: there are Jewish artifacts from victims that will be displayed. Perhaps she didn't have time to properly prepare for her walk-back appearance on Fox.

This appearance by Teresa McBain is just more proof of the intellectual dishonesty that makes up the core of the American Atheists organization.

Next time, their people should do better show-prep before they make themselves and AA look silly on the news.

American Atheists: Purveyors of Inolerance

Once again, American Atheists made the news. This time they're filling a stupid lawsuit againt the creators of the World Trade Center Memorial over its inclusion of religious artifacts, most notably a support beam that is shaped like a Christian cross.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/atheists-sue-cross-world-trade-center-museum/story?id=14169830

According to Dave Silverman, a spokesperson for American Atheists:

"The Christian community found a piece of rubble that looked like an icon and they deified it. But really 9/11 had nothing to do with Christianity,....They want a monopoly and we don't want that to happen."

Monopoly on what, Mr. Silverman? Are you sore because there were no atomic symbols found in the wreckage? Or is American Atheists jealous because they produce nothing that offers reassurance or hope to hurting people?

The real reason for this tomfoolery by this very vocal, hatemongering group:

 Jane Everhart, who is part of the atheist's suit, derided the cross as nothing more than "ugly piece of wreckage" that "does not represent anything … but horror and death."

Gee Ms. Everheart, I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. How do you think the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, who the U.S. nuked to end WWII, would feel about having your little atom splayed all over their city? You guys don't hold any higher moral ground just because your logo is found on the helmet of cartoon superhero Atom Ant.

The story mentioned:

The atheist group said that they have contacted the 9/11 Memorial and Museum requesting to display their own atheistic memorial next to the steel-shaped cross, possibly in the form of an atom or an American flag, to represent the "500 non-religious Americans" who were "among the victims of the 9/11 attack."


NEWS FLASH: non-religious doesn't atheistic. Not being church or synagogue members didn't make these people non-believers. Who are American Atheists to decide that an atom is a more suitable symbol to honor them, when they didn't personally know these people?
Here's an idea, atheists: take that money you waste filing these stupid lawsuits and give it to charity. That will make a greater impact on society and improve your public image.

Surprise us, Atheists. It would do everybody some good.

Another Angry Atheist Sounds Off

Every once in a while, I bounce around to some of the more frequented atheist blogs and find a gem to opine on. This time around, it's the Atheist Oasis blog, formerly known as God Is For Suckers!


The poster was a guy called Ray G., and his post about the recent theater shooting in Colorado is pretty typical. He is unhappy that survivors of the incident give God credit for their survival. Ray here hates the idea that survivors of a truly horrible act would give credit to the idea of a god that Ray detests. Ray is truly offended when others don't kow-tow to the notion that our lives, in fact, our very existence, are just products of pure dumb luck.


That's nothing new, but I'd like to take on a couple of his points as examples of flawed atheist logic.


Ray posted this about Jennifer Seeger, one of the survivors:

“I have no idea why he didn’t shoot me,” she said.  Fortunately, Seeger got out of the theater safely.

Later, she told her mother, “Mom, god saved me.  God still loves me.”

Ray commented:

"When I read that quote, my heart broke.  It’s made up of only eight words, but they tell a sad story."

"For some reason, Jennifer Seeger doubted that god still loved her. It seems at one time, she was confident that he loved her, but not anymore. We don’t know why, but that’s not important.  Perhaps she’d even reached the conclusion, for whatever reason, that god had stopped loving her."

That's the point, Ray... you don't know what was going on in that girl's life. Maybe she was rebelling against her parents, or getting into trouble. God allows the world He made to be run by the people to whom He gave dominion over it, and like any good parent, He seeks opportunities to pull some good out of all the evil we throw into it. I wouldn't expect an unbeliever to understand this.

Ray says later:

"I was raised to worship and fear the same god worshiped and feared by these people.  Hardly a day goes by when I am not told or in some way made aware of the claim that I should still be worshiping this god, and that I am somehow morally deficient because I don’t.  To those of us who do not believe in gods, or perhaps worship other deities, this story of human slaughter is supposed to be an example of Yahweh’s love and mercy.  We’re supposed to see in this what a great and powerful god he really is."

Or perhaps this is supposed to be an example of how imperfect we humans really are, and what a farcical notion moral relativity is.

In his harsh criticism of survivor Pierce O'Farrill, Ray G. tries a walk-back by pointing out:

"I’m not criticizing O’Farrill personally.  I’m criticizing his interpretation of events..."

But later, Ray made this judgemental comment:

"That is perverse. It’s especially perverse coming from a religion that claims to be all about those other things — you know, love and peace and humility. There is no humility there. It is, whether James O’Farrill and Brad Strait and Jennifer Seeger are aware of it or not, an expression of breathtaking arrogance. I would go so far as to call it a kind of narcissism."

So, Ray, Pierce O'Farrill, along with Brad Strait and Jennifer Seeger are just arrogant narcissists? Is that the compassion and understanding we can expect from atheists?

I'm afraid the answer is a huge "yes".

Ray G. began his conclusion by posting:

"Silent and invisible looks a whole lot like … nothing.  And this extremely malleable god, who can be whatever you need him to be at any given moment, looks a whole lot like wishful thinking.  A god who can be whatever you need him to be is really nothing at all."

Yet one of the biggest arguments that atheists have against the existence of God is the idea that God ISN'T what atheists want Him to be: an eternal cosmic Santa Claus. How's that for irony?

By the way, Ray, the physical forces that govern our universe are for the most part silent and invisible. Their existence has been discovered and measured by those who chose to believe in those forces when others called them crazy. There's a big hint for you.

And Ray finished with this:

Below are the names of the people some Christians believe were not good enough for the Judeo-Christian god to save (Or at least, Ray assumes this much).  The ripples of pain and devastation sent out by each of these losses are immeasurable.  As far as I’m concerned, any god who could have prevented their deaths but did not is a monster."  (List of names followed)

So, Ray, is God a bigger monster than James Holmes? Who was it that actually walked into a theater with an AK-47?

Are the people who elected Hitler into power bigger monsters than Der Fuerher himself?

Nobody heard James Holmes quoting scripture as he was shooting. By all appearances, Mr. Holmes may not have any god belief. Is God a monster for letting an atheist kill 12 innocent people?

Is God a monster for letting atheist Mao Zedong send 40 million people to die growing bad crops?

God said there were grave consequences for not following a few simple commandments. Is God a monster for not behaving like a Universal Gepetto and just playing with us like mindless puppets? Ray, are you suggesting God is evil for allowing the existence of free will?

You think God enjoys when innocents suffer?

We have the moral imperative to seek out opportunities and prevent disasters like the theater shooting. If we're going to sit on our butts and expect God to fix every problem BEFORE it happens, like the premise behind the movie "Minority Report", we're nothing but perpetual babies. We wouldn't need rules at all, because God would always be there to fix the bad before it happened.

THAT is the God atheists like Ray G. would believe in.