I just ran across this video, as this dude subscribed to my Youtube channel. He makes many excellent points. Just watch:
Yep, all religions are stupid. Can't agree more. His points on the formation of any country is right on.
Part two:
January 8, 2009
January 3, 2009
If Canada Voted In A Party That Had A Goal Of Wiping Out The USA
I would expect to be dead today.
Israel finally decided to do the inevitable. It could be expected to sit there while bombs were being lobbed into civilian areas on a daily basis. Even once a year is unacceptable for that matter.
As far as I'm concerned, Israel had no choice but to do what they are doing right now. By only thought is what took them so long.
Now I will repost my thoughts back from 2005 on this blog when Israel left Gaza. I'm not Nostradamus, but some might think so after reading this:
August 21, 2005
THE GAZAN WITHDRAWAL: ARABS BEING TRICKED
Might as well throw in a post I made after the Palestinians elected Hamas:
January 28, 2006
The Hamas Victory: Thoughts and Predictions
And I'll finish off with an old post called PALESTINIAN STRUGGLE IS BASELESSS, CHILDISH, AND HYPOCRITICAL
Karma Nabulsi is pro-Palestinians and anti-Annapolis. Sounds a lot like Hamas who were democratically elected by the Palestinians. Well, read this. Nabulsi, is a hypocrite. If he believes in Arab lands, what the heck is he doing on Western lands?
Time to repost two articles which show that the Palestinian Struggle, which really means to the Hamas supporters, "don't give in until the Jews are driven into the sea," is baseless, childish, and hypocritical:
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS PALESTINIAN LAND
Land in the 20th and 21st Century doesn't work like land used to work, when all solid land wasn't claimed on this earth.
There is no such thing as Palestinian land, Muslim land, Arab land, Jewish land, Atheist land, Caucasian land, Christian land, etc.
Land is either owned and/or governed. That is it. That is how land works. Land is just dirt, plain and simple.
Yes, the Palestinian region has existed throughout recorded history. Yes, there is a such thing as Arabs who are/were indigenous to the region, as well as Christians and Jews, etc.
But demographics change everywhere. Immigration is not a form of stealing. You can only steal land if it is OWNED.
The percentages of Muslims in the West has climbed in recent years. Nobody is accusing Muslims of stealing Western lands though because they are not.
The region of Palestine was last governed by the British before Israel was created.
Arabs and their mindless supporters tend to forget that it was the Brits who came up with the White Paper which limited Jewish immigration into the British controlled land of Palestine.
The Arabs, with the exception of the very few who owned land in Israel, have absolutely no claim to Israel. In fact, they have no claim to the West Bank, but it is open to negotiations. Just as Israel was when the Jews were successfully lobbying for it.
Over 90% of the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza were born in the West Bank and Gaza, and have no property in Israel proper. Their grandfathers may have lived there, but so what? I used to live in Toronto, I don't anymore. In fact, in Toronto, the Kensington district used to have a Jewish majority until the late 50's. But the Jews moved to Northern Toronto. Nobody is making a claim that Kensington is Jewish land.
My house and property is not Jewish land. It wouldn't matter if everyone on my street were Jews. Land can be sold. And it can as easily be sold to anyone of any ethnicity.
*************************************
ISRAEL AND DEARBORN
Anyone who reads this blog has to know that I like to think, I try to think, and many times my thoughts even make sense. I know I'm no Albert Einstein, but I aint no Ann Coulter either.
Lately, I've been doing more thinking about my argument dealing with land, Israel, and changes in demographics. Something then struck me as I saw a blurb about Michigan having loads and loads of Arabs. I started doing my maniacal internet searches on this topic and found that Dearborn, Michigan is now considered the Arab capital of the United States.
Dearborn? The birthplace of alleged Jew hater Henry Ford has a population of around 100,000 people. 40% are Arabs. Surely, Dearborn didn't have a 40% population of Arabs when Henry was born. Of course not.
Lets see what Americancity.org states about the Arab populstion history in Dearborn:
'Dearborn was founded as the first overnight stop on the stagecoach route linking Detroit to Chicago. Its streets are named for the German Catholics who have since given way to Polish and Italian Americans, whom Arab immigrants and their descendants, in turn, are replacing. Southfield Freeway separates the city’s Western and Eastern worlds, roughly demarcating three neighborhoods: Southend is now mostly populated by Yemenis; East Dearborn is a bustling Lebanese community of Arab restaurants, bakeries, and halal butchers; and West Dearborn’s residential streets remain populated by Italian and Polish ethnics.
The Muslim presence in metropolitan Detroit dates to the last decade of the 19th century, when men from the Lebanese Biqa Valley, working as peddlers and traders, followed a larger number of Lebanese Christian emigrees to the U.S. When Henry Ford began to offer generous five-dollar daily wages for workers at his Highland Park assembly line in 1913, Detroit became the predominant destination for Lebanese immigrants. Immigration accelerated when Lebanon’s economy fell apart in the wake of the Ottoman Empire’s collapse at the end of World War I. The restrictive National Origins Act of 1924 reduced Lebanese immigration to a trickle, but over the next twenty years, wives and dependent children, whom the Act still allowed to immigrate, gradually reunited with their husbands and fathers. In 1927, Ford shifted operations to the Rouge River plant in his native Dearborn, and a Muslim neighborhood soon followed.
By the close of World War II, the Dearborn population numbered about 200 families. Most subsequent immigrants–Palestinian, Lebanese, and Iraqi–arrived in Dearborn as political refugees, with only Yemenis coming to Dearborn in this period primarily for economic opportunity. Collectively, the communities in Dearborn represent the second largest concentration of both Arabs and Muslims outside the Middle East, behind only Paris.'
Dearborn almost had an Arab mayor, if it wasn't for bad timing. 9/11 happened the same day as the Dearborn mayoral primary. Well, don't worry. Next time Arabs/Muslims will probably be the majority, and a terrorist attack won't stand in the way.
Isn't it special that Arabs/Muslims can set up in an American region and nobody accuses them (nor should they) of stealing land, like Jews were accused of doing in Palestine prior to the Partition.
Isn't it special that demographics can change over time in a Western city, and nobody is looking to push the Arabs/Muslims into Lake Michigan?
Where is the Western outrage? How come Dearborn isn't thinking about building a fence around it to protect itself from terrorists?
Why would it seem hysterical if the German Catholics, who built the city of Dearborn, demanded "their" land back?
Addition: For some reason, some readers aren't getting this post. So let me try to explain it a little better. Jews went to Palestine for a better life, just like the Arabs did when they migrated from Arabia to Dearborn. Many Jews came to escape anti-semitism, many came for religious reasons, many came because they didn't have many other options, and many came to escape Dhimmitudism, just like the Arabs of Dearborn did.
Palestine was relatively empty prior to Israel's birth. In the late 1800's, 500,000 people lived on land that now comfortably hold over 6 million. Nobody had to leave, nobody had their land stolen.
For those of you weak on history, at the time of the partition, Arabs owned 20% of the land and Jews owned 8%, the rest unowned. Palestine was governed by Britain. The land partitioned off to be the Jewish state had 550,00 Jews and 450,000 Arabs. It was a Jewish majority in 1947 that came about the same way that Dearborn went from 0% Muslims to 40% today. Except, the United States exists now and isn't up for negotiations, so Dearborn can never be an Arab state, unless in the future, the US decides to allow them to have a separate state (Not impossible).
Get it yet?
Just as add on I've decided to throw on a video from a recent anti-Israel invasion rally. Quick, guess what country it is held in. Saudi Arabia? Jordan? Lebanon? Egypt? Iran?
Dearborn Michigan, of course. You see, Arabs are allowed to migrate everywhere in the West and virtually take over sections of towns and in Dearborn's case, a town itself. And I have nothing against it.
What I'm against is the hypocrisy of most of these dudes who have a problem with Jews migrating to Israel prior to 1948, even though most did so legally.
Since a state didn't exist, it was understandable that the Jews would want to create one there. They lobbied for it, and got one. The Arab nations objected through war, and that is why there is a mess there today.
Israel finally decided to do the inevitable. It could be expected to sit there while bombs were being lobbed into civilian areas on a daily basis. Even once a year is unacceptable for that matter.
As far as I'm concerned, Israel had no choice but to do what they are doing right now. By only thought is what took them so long.
Now I will repost my thoughts back from 2005 on this blog when Israel left Gaza. I'm not Nostradamus, but some might think so after reading this:
August 21, 2005
THE GAZAN WITHDRAWAL: ARABS BEING TRICKED
It makes me laugh reading posts on the Yahoo I/P conflict message boards by Palestinian sympathizers (who are either mostly Arabs and/or Muslims and/or Jew haters) claiming victory because the Jews are retreating.
This was a well thought out plan by Israel to show the world that Palestinians do not want a state, can't build a state, and that their focus of wiping out Israel has never gone away.
Arabs have never been known to build. Even with around half the world's oil, Arab nations are backwards. The average IQ of Arab countries is in the low to mid 80's. The typical Arab culture does not focus on education and humanity but seems to focus on hate and death.
Gaza has no oil. Gaza is appealing to every Islamic terrorist organization to set up shop there. Palestinian leaders have a history of corruption. No Arab state has ever supported the Palestinian people other than incite them to attack Israel.
Gaza already is poverty stricken. Getting rid of Jews and possible affluence is not going to help them. They are destined to continue terrorist attacks against Israel and struggle internally to the point of having civil unrest and probably civil war.
Speaking of attacks, without Jews to use as human shields, Gazan Arabs are now unprotected. Terrorist attacks against Israel will cause a retaliation that the Palestinians have never seen before. They won't like it much. But the world will not sympathize with them this time. Muslim bombings in the USA and Britain have created zero tolerance against terrorism by the West.
The Arabs who think that 57 years of terror caused the "liberation" of Gaza are sadly mistaken. Gaza will quickly become a terrorist hell hole and just a couple of attacks against Israel will turn the rest of "The Roadmap" into toilet paper.
I can't see Gaza living peacefully next to Israel which would lead to a massive dismantling of the West Bank. Palestinians can not help themselves, they have to attack Israel, it is their nature. Thus the Gazan withdrawal, which occurred before the Palestinians dismantled terrorist groups, is just a trick being played on the Arabs by the Jews.
If the Palestinians were smart, and they are not, they would have begged the Jews to stay.
Might as well throw in a post I made after the Palestinians elected Hamas:
January 28, 2006
The Hamas Victory: Thoughts and Predictions
No matter what anyone says, there was a distinct difference between the terrorist parties of Fatah and Hamas. Fatah was willing to negotiate with Israel and accept Israel as a permanent nation and most importantly a permanent peace.
Hamas on the other hand represents never ending terror and the ultimate goal of destroying Israel. They are a terrorist organization. To any rational human being on this planet, they were not an alternative to the corrupt Fatah party. By any rational rational human being, they should not have even been considered. But nobody has ever made the mistake of thinking that the Palestinian Arabs were rational human beings.
They voted Hamas. And I'm not buying that their victory resulted in the people making a statement about corruption. Gaza isn't Canada, and Hamas isn't the Progressive Conservatives. How could this be about corruption? Corruption is about money. A vote for Hamas most likely meant no money from the USA and no money from the EU. If Hamas gets it's funding now from Iran, another country bent on Israel's destruction, how long do you think it will take Israel to figure it out and make Iran's donations meaningless?
If terrorist attacks or rocket attacks occurred with a Fatah leadership, Israel would have been morally forced to give Fatah time before they completely spanked them. Now with Hamas running the show, any terrorist attack or rocket attack will be dealt with severely, more severely than ever before. Did the Palestinian voters not realize this? I've always said that Arabs in the Middle East can not think one step ahead. This is further proof of it.
As far as the future goes. The peace plan is dead as long as Hamas is in power. This will become more and more evident in the coming weeks. I expect a terror attack sooner than later, and I expect a severe Israeli response this time. Hamas won't be able to keep themselves from being what they are: TERRORISTS, nothing more and nothing less.
If Hamas isn't taken out soon, I think the Palestinians will become extinct, and it won't be pretty. I also expect to see a devastating bomb hit Iran very shortly, if their leader isn't taken out soon. Even Europe is scared of Iran.
Unfortunately sometimes major devastation and dead civilians is the only way to change things for the better. See WW2 Japan.
Back to Israel: the free world is shaking their heads in disbelief. Could Israel be right? The Palestinians really don't want a peaceful state? The voters have spoken.
One more thought: Now Israel can focus on putting down real borders and thanks to the Hamas victory, they are not under any obligation to negotiate where the borders go. Israel will now have defensible borders finally, and if Hamas attacks, which they will.....bye bye Palestinians.
And I'll finish off with an old post called PALESTINIAN STRUGGLE IS BASELESSS, CHILDISH, AND HYPOCRITICAL
Karma Nabulsi is pro-Palestinians and anti-Annapolis. Sounds a lot like Hamas who were democratically elected by the Palestinians. Well, read this. Nabulsi, is a hypocrite. If he believes in Arab lands, what the heck is he doing on Western lands?
Time to repost two articles which show that the Palestinian Struggle, which really means to the Hamas supporters, "don't give in until the Jews are driven into the sea," is baseless, childish, and hypocritical:
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS PALESTINIAN LAND
Land in the 20th and 21st Century doesn't work like land used to work, when all solid land wasn't claimed on this earth.
There is no such thing as Palestinian land, Muslim land, Arab land, Jewish land, Atheist land, Caucasian land, Christian land, etc.
Land is either owned and/or governed. That is it. That is how land works. Land is just dirt, plain and simple.
Yes, the Palestinian region has existed throughout recorded history. Yes, there is a such thing as Arabs who are/were indigenous to the region, as well as Christians and Jews, etc.
But demographics change everywhere. Immigration is not a form of stealing. You can only steal land if it is OWNED.
The percentages of Muslims in the West has climbed in recent years. Nobody is accusing Muslims of stealing Western lands though because they are not.
The region of Palestine was last governed by the British before Israel was created.
Arabs and their mindless supporters tend to forget that it was the Brits who came up with the White Paper which limited Jewish immigration into the British controlled land of Palestine.
The Arabs, with the exception of the very few who owned land in Israel, have absolutely no claim to Israel. In fact, they have no claim to the West Bank, but it is open to negotiations. Just as Israel was when the Jews were successfully lobbying for it.
Over 90% of the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza were born in the West Bank and Gaza, and have no property in Israel proper. Their grandfathers may have lived there, but so what? I used to live in Toronto, I don't anymore. In fact, in Toronto, the Kensington district used to have a Jewish majority until the late 50's. But the Jews moved to Northern Toronto. Nobody is making a claim that Kensington is Jewish land.
My house and property is not Jewish land. It wouldn't matter if everyone on my street were Jews. Land can be sold. And it can as easily be sold to anyone of any ethnicity.
*************************************
ISRAEL AND DEARBORN
Anyone who reads this blog has to know that I like to think, I try to think, and many times my thoughts even make sense. I know I'm no Albert Einstein, but I aint no Ann Coulter either.
Lately, I've been doing more thinking about my argument dealing with land, Israel, and changes in demographics. Something then struck me as I saw a blurb about Michigan having loads and loads of Arabs. I started doing my maniacal internet searches on this topic and found that Dearborn, Michigan is now considered the Arab capital of the United States.
Dearborn? The birthplace of alleged Jew hater Henry Ford has a population of around 100,000 people. 40% are Arabs. Surely, Dearborn didn't have a 40% population of Arabs when Henry was born. Of course not.
Lets see what Americancity.org states about the Arab populstion history in Dearborn:
'Dearborn was founded as the first overnight stop on the stagecoach route linking Detroit to Chicago. Its streets are named for the German Catholics who have since given way to Polish and Italian Americans, whom Arab immigrants and their descendants, in turn, are replacing. Southfield Freeway separates the city’s Western and Eastern worlds, roughly demarcating three neighborhoods: Southend is now mostly populated by Yemenis; East Dearborn is a bustling Lebanese community of Arab restaurants, bakeries, and halal butchers; and West Dearborn’s residential streets remain populated by Italian and Polish ethnics.
The Muslim presence in metropolitan Detroit dates to the last decade of the 19th century, when men from the Lebanese Biqa Valley, working as peddlers and traders, followed a larger number of Lebanese Christian emigrees to the U.S. When Henry Ford began to offer generous five-dollar daily wages for workers at his Highland Park assembly line in 1913, Detroit became the predominant destination for Lebanese immigrants. Immigration accelerated when Lebanon’s economy fell apart in the wake of the Ottoman Empire’s collapse at the end of World War I. The restrictive National Origins Act of 1924 reduced Lebanese immigration to a trickle, but over the next twenty years, wives and dependent children, whom the Act still allowed to immigrate, gradually reunited with their husbands and fathers. In 1927, Ford shifted operations to the Rouge River plant in his native Dearborn, and a Muslim neighborhood soon followed.
By the close of World War II, the Dearborn population numbered about 200 families. Most subsequent immigrants–Palestinian, Lebanese, and Iraqi–arrived in Dearborn as political refugees, with only Yemenis coming to Dearborn in this period primarily for economic opportunity. Collectively, the communities in Dearborn represent the second largest concentration of both Arabs and Muslims outside the Middle East, behind only Paris.'
Dearborn almost had an Arab mayor, if it wasn't for bad timing. 9/11 happened the same day as the Dearborn mayoral primary. Well, don't worry. Next time Arabs/Muslims will probably be the majority, and a terrorist attack won't stand in the way.
Isn't it special that Arabs/Muslims can set up in an American region and nobody accuses them (nor should they) of stealing land, like Jews were accused of doing in Palestine prior to the Partition.
Isn't it special that demographics can change over time in a Western city, and nobody is looking to push the Arabs/Muslims into Lake Michigan?
Where is the Western outrage? How come Dearborn isn't thinking about building a fence around it to protect itself from terrorists?
Why would it seem hysterical if the German Catholics, who built the city of Dearborn, demanded "their" land back?
Addition: For some reason, some readers aren't getting this post. So let me try to explain it a little better. Jews went to Palestine for a better life, just like the Arabs did when they migrated from Arabia to Dearborn. Many Jews came to escape anti-semitism, many came for religious reasons, many came because they didn't have many other options, and many came to escape Dhimmitudism, just like the Arabs of Dearborn did.
Palestine was relatively empty prior to Israel's birth. In the late 1800's, 500,000 people lived on land that now comfortably hold over 6 million. Nobody had to leave, nobody had their land stolen.
For those of you weak on history, at the time of the partition, Arabs owned 20% of the land and Jews owned 8%, the rest unowned. Palestine was governed by Britain. The land partitioned off to be the Jewish state had 550,00 Jews and 450,000 Arabs. It was a Jewish majority in 1947 that came about the same way that Dearborn went from 0% Muslims to 40% today. Except, the United States exists now and isn't up for negotiations, so Dearborn can never be an Arab state, unless in the future, the US decides to allow them to have a separate state (Not impossible).
Get it yet?
Just as add on I've decided to throw on a video from a recent anti-Israel invasion rally. Quick, guess what country it is held in. Saudi Arabia? Jordan? Lebanon? Egypt? Iran?
Dearborn Michigan, of course. You see, Arabs are allowed to migrate everywhere in the West and virtually take over sections of towns and in Dearborn's case, a town itself. And I have nothing against it.
What I'm against is the hypocrisy of most of these dudes who have a problem with Jews migrating to Israel prior to 1948, even though most did so legally.
Since a state didn't exist, it was understandable that the Jews would want to create one there. They lobbied for it, and got one. The Arab nations objected through war, and that is why there is a mess there today.
January 1, 2009
What Happens At Death And After Death And Pascal's Wager
Edward Current's videos are great. I know I've stated it here before many times, but just in case you are new here, I suggest checking them out. Funny, and of course, full of irony and sarcasm.
Most of the time he pretends to be a Christian. He has coined the phrase "Checkmate atheists" when making a feeble or nonsensical point on why God exists and why atheists are wrong.
His most current "creation" is an animation called A Christian Meets A The Invisible Pink Unicorn:
Not only does he get in a lot about what science knows about the creation of life, the universe, and consciousness, but he also throws in Pascal's Wager For Atheism. Without stating Pascal's Wager, Current's dying man, knowing the end is near and that there is nothing afterward, has major regrets that he lived a life that restricted him from doing things that he would have liked to experience (none harmful by the way), and implying he did things he didn't want to do because of his beliefs.
I know the cartoon was an extreme example of restrictions due to religion, as most people do what they want when it comes to important decisions, that may include having to tell white lies, or not full disclosing things, and most people do much of what they want when it comes to sex (and I do stress "most people").
Of course, things like guilt (not religious guilt but innate guilt which we evolved) and empathy prevents many of us from say cheating on our spouses, murder, rape, and theft.
My question to believers is do you think that your belief in God and/or your religion ever restrict what you really want to do, and do you think you would act differently if you realized God was made up by man and life after death isn't a very high possibility?
I made a video asking the same type of question in a more sarcastic way previously:
For Edward Current's Youtube Channel, click here.
Most of the time he pretends to be a Christian. He has coined the phrase "Checkmate atheists" when making a feeble or nonsensical point on why God exists and why atheists are wrong.
His most current "creation" is an animation called A Christian Meets A The Invisible Pink Unicorn:
Not only does he get in a lot about what science knows about the creation of life, the universe, and consciousness, but he also throws in Pascal's Wager For Atheism. Without stating Pascal's Wager, Current's dying man, knowing the end is near and that there is nothing afterward, has major regrets that he lived a life that restricted him from doing things that he would have liked to experience (none harmful by the way), and implying he did things he didn't want to do because of his beliefs.
I know the cartoon was an extreme example of restrictions due to religion, as most people do what they want when it comes to important decisions, that may include having to tell white lies, or not full disclosing things, and most people do much of what they want when it comes to sex (and I do stress "most people").
Of course, things like guilt (not religious guilt but innate guilt which we evolved) and empathy prevents many of us from say cheating on our spouses, murder, rape, and theft.
My question to believers is do you think that your belief in God and/or your religion ever restrict what you really want to do, and do you think you would act differently if you realized God was made up by man and life after death isn't a very high possibility?
I made a video asking the same type of question in a more sarcastic way previously:
For Edward Current's Youtube Channel, click here.
December 24, 2008
Dear Tom
I just read another misinformed Op-ed piece about atheists that was linked by Internet Infidels News Wire. Since the piece doesn't allow for online comments, I decided to go the email route.
I'll update if I get a return email. The title of my reply was "Atheism Is Not A Choice." Though it was not the main issue of the piece, it was the thing that the author inferred that pushed me to the edge of emailing him.
UPDATE: Tom emailed me back
My prompt reply:
I'll update if I get a return email. The title of my reply was "Atheism Is Not A Choice." Though it was not the main issue of the piece, it was the thing that the author inferred that pushed me to the edge of emailing him.
Dear Tom:
I just read your post "What are the atheists afraid of?," and wanted to educate you a bit.
First off, many atheists know more about the bible than many believers. I suggest you visit http://exchristian.net/
Atheism is not a choice out of laziness. Most become atheists through a lengthy process of asking questions, seeking answers, and examination of evidence.
It usually takes years. And most atheists will say instead of "there is no God", "there is no evidence for God or any other supernatural being."
I say there is no evidence for God, but I can't disprove God, just like I can't disprove Leprechauns or a giant invisible monster who lives under my bed and does nothing.
Being an ethnic Jew myself (my blog: http://www.baconeatingatheistjew.blogspot.com/ ), I know full well why religious signs and scenes have no place in the public square, the government, or schools. I felt very uncomfortable growing up (in Canada) in public school when we had to do the Christian prayer. I felt like an outcast. We've since removed Christians prayers from public schools. But more to the point, there is a huge problem favoring one religion or belief over another. The worst example was Nazi Germany, where Hitler played on the fact that most Germans were Catholics, and at the time stressed how the Jews killed Jesus (in public well attended Passion Plays). It made Hitler's propaganda against Jews more easy to swallow by the masses.
Most of the teachings you attribute to Jesus (I'm fairy certain Jesus never existed btw) are fine and dandy. They are just innate morals that are put on paper and attributed to a magic man. That is why the notion of Judeo-Christian morality is pretty laughable. Jews and Christians were practicing Judeo-Christian morality long before Judaism and Christianity were invented, in fact, one could say that Australian Bushmen practice Judeo-Christian morality, and have been ever since they evolved into human beings (which predates Christianity by over 100,000 years).
However, some of Jesus teachings (and especially the interpretations of his teachings) go against scientific fact, and/or are outright bigoted. That is why they have no place to be on display outside of homes or places of worship. I'm all for freedom of religion, but in order to have true freedom of religion, the government needs to have freedom from religion. This is what makes the West better than theocracies found in many Muslim countries, some where churches are not even allowed.
I think your 3% number when it comes to atheists in America is on the very low side. In Canada, a recent study stated that 23% of Canadians are now Godless. And we watch the same TV and read the same books as you guys.
Merry Christmas ( I have no problem with the term, it is like Happy Halloween to me),
The Atheist Jew
PS, for some eye opening info on the theory that Jesus never existed go to http://www.bidstrup.com/bible.htm
UPDATE: Tom emailed me back
Sorry but their (sic) is no possible way that a person like you can "educate" me . You are a lost soul. Just like many of your ilk and their diatribes, you lack the courage to even sign your name. That shows a serious lack of belief and committment (sic).
My prompt reply:
Atheism is a lack of belief (no commitment is needed). As for not signing my name, I don't sign my name because I deal with many crazies, so it is more for my protection, though one day I think I will go ahead and put my name out there. Many atheists have absolutely no problem putting their name out there. Because I'm a Jewish one, I sometimes get threats from Muslims and Judeophobic freaks.
Don't sell yourself short. Even the most wilfully ignorant person on the planet can be educated.
Sincerely,
The Atheist Jew
December 21, 2008
The Atheist Jew's Christmas
I didn't buy any presents.
I won't be getting any presents.
And I like it like that.
I did go my wife's company Christmas party last Saturday (my wife doesn't own the company, she just works there). They do grace every year, and have the audacity to mention JC by name during grace.
I stood when told to stand for grace, but when told to bow my head down, I looked around the room as I always do when religion is being forced on the masses. I only saw one other dude looking at everyone too. The good thing about looking around is that if you are caught by a believer, the believer can't do anything about it, can't even mention it, because the obvious question would be "why did the believer see me not closing my eyes to pray to the invisible sky monkey when they should have been praying?"
I did notice the company general manager though. He had his head bowed down, but he was looking at the speech he was about to deliver. Is he an atheist or did he just push Jesus aside for something he felt was more important at the time?
I'm assuming there were no other Jews there. I'm just extrapolating from the fact that I never recognize any Jewish names when my wife talks about her work mates, and the fact that in my town, I am probably the house in a 10 mile radius that doesn't have Christmas lights.
Something I do find interesting is that the Jehovah Witnesses who work at the company diss Christmas parties for religious reasons. I'm too lazy right now to look up the exact reason why.
I won't be getting any presents.
And I like it like that.
I did go my wife's company Christmas party last Saturday (my wife doesn't own the company, she just works there). They do grace every year, and have the audacity to mention JC by name during grace.
I stood when told to stand for grace, but when told to bow my head down, I looked around the room as I always do when religion is being forced on the masses. I only saw one other dude looking at everyone too. The good thing about looking around is that if you are caught by a believer, the believer can't do anything about it, can't even mention it, because the obvious question would be "why did the believer see me not closing my eyes to pray to the invisible sky monkey when they should have been praying?"
I did notice the company general manager though. He had his head bowed down, but he was looking at the speech he was about to deliver. Is he an atheist or did he just push Jesus aside for something he felt was more important at the time?
I'm assuming there were no other Jews there. I'm just extrapolating from the fact that I never recognize any Jewish names when my wife talks about her work mates, and the fact that in my town, I am probably the house in a 10 mile radius that doesn't have Christmas lights.
Something I do find interesting is that the Jehovah Witnesses who work at the company diss Christmas parties for religious reasons. I'm too lazy right now to look up the exact reason why.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)