This Is Just Sad And More Seth

In the video, at least they spelled AthEIst correctly:

Isn't it maddening when cretards spew out the same stuff: The no "atheists in foxholes" garbage. The fact that some how accepting evolution and The Big Bang means that you can't believe in God. It is laughable stuff.

How many converts does God make when planes actually crash?

In the real world, we have a perfect example of how I would imagine most atheist react to close calls in the sky. None other than Seth MacFarlane. He was booked on one of the fateful flights on 9/11. Lucky for the world (I really mean that, Family Guy etc. is priceless stuff), he was a good atheist, and got drank like a heathen the night before. He woke up late with a hang over and missed the flight. His lack of faith wasn't shaken by the event. He was an atheist before, and is an atheist still:

Principal Tim England: Douchebag Of The Month

I'm sure that by now many of you have heard about a student, Tyler Frost 17, who was threatened with suspension from a Christian Fundie school if he went to his girlfriend's prom at another school.

It turns out that he did go. And he has been suspended.

In case you didn't know, Christian Fundie school is located in Saudi Arabia Ohio, part of the Roadkill Belt.

I really find the principal's facial expressions in the following news report to be very disturbing. It is kind of looking into the eyes of a "soulless" shark:



What is really missed here is that Tyler has a GIRLFRIEND. Temptation has already beaten Tyler. I'm almost certain he has kissed her, and I'm willing to bet that he has held her hand, and even danced with her....and perhaps a lot more.

What does Principal Douchebag think of TV or the internet or beaches? Does he think that teenagers walk around beaches with boners? Ok, maybe not all the time, but would he ban a kid from the school for going to a beach or surfing the internet, or watching The Man Show?

We are human beings. We are driven through evolution (which I'm sure English doesn't accept, or for that matter, either does the brainwashed students of his school) to get aroused by others sexually. That is what motivates us mostly to keep our species going. What this Douche wants to do is prevent his students from being human.

So far in my readings, I have yet to see anyone agree with Principal English's stance. And I mean nobody. Sure, he can have school rules that violate every human right if he wants. It is the parents that choose the school, and parents are free to take their kids out of the school if they don't like the rules. But what happens outside the school, is not this principal's business, unless it has to do with BREAKING THE LAW. Sorry, but thankfully in the West, there are no laws against dancing, wearing low cut dresses, holding hands, kissing, or proms.

Principal Douchebag asks: "Should Christians place themselves at an event where young ladies will have low-cut dresses and be dancing in them?"

He is talking male Christians, right? Or is he worried about female Christians too, who might be "expected" to think about experimenting after seeing breast cracks. Or is this just about protecting male Christians from becoming potential rapists and/or heathens in general?

Hey, I might add that there are some Ultra Orthodox Jews that have this outlook. And of course, many Muslims that too have this outlook (ahem, the Burqa). Christians and the Western world in general, don't usually go out of their way when it comes to low cut dresses and such. In fact, Christians will turn a blind eye to exposed nipples as long as the beauty contestant hates is intolerant enough to gays.

See also Open Letter To Tyler Frost

Who Is An Atheist 101: There Really Is Just One Definition

I'm so fed up with all the definitions of "atheist" that are out there. Let me give everyone the ultimate definition, and you can reword it all you want:

An atheist is someone who answers the question "DO YOU BELIEVE IN GOD?" with a NO!

Edit: Thanks to a comment I received, I'll ask the same question in slightly different words: Do you believe that an all knowing eternal supernatural being exists? If the answer is NO, you are an atheist.

That is it. That answer doesn't require dogma or a religion or any foundation whatsoever.

OK, so what is an agnostic?, you might ask. We are all really freakin agnostics. An agnostic is someone who isn't 100% sure that God exists. Nobody can be 100% sure that God doesn't exist, and those who say they are 100% sure God exists, are liars.

You know what, let me re-examine my last statement. There are those who are 100% sure that God exists because they are extremely brainwashed, and/or they have totally convinced themselves. If they were given a lie detector test, they would answer they are 100% sure that God exists, and the reading of the test would confirm in many cases that they were not lying.

Now I know there are atheists who say they know 100% for sure God doesn't exist (I'm only 99.99999% because I know it is impossible to know for sure). I'm not sure how a lie detector test would come out for these 100% atheists.

Now back to my main point. The question "do you believe in God?" What if you answer the question "sometimes" ? Well, that would make an atheist sometimes and a theist sometimes. What if you answer "I don't know." I think it is a fair answer, and that would put in the pure agnostic category.

Why is the answer fair? If someone asks you if your spouse has ever cheated on you (assuming they never admitted it), you might answer "I don't know." You may feel stronger about a yes or no, but you sincerely may believe "I don't know."

Atheists like myself like to explain myself as to what it means to me to be an atheist, though it is not required by my universal definition.

For instance, I will qualify my answer. I see absolutely no evidence that any God exists. To me, the world and universe makes perfect sense without a God. But I can't say God doesn't exist for sure, just like I can't say Leprechauns don't exist. The same evidence exists for both Leprechauns and God, though.

And The Winner Of Youtube's Pwnage Olympics Is...

In case you didn't know, there has been a Youtube contest going on for the last month or so where contestants were to destroy the "arguments" of creationists or just plain theists. The winner is a Canadian chick (FactVsReligion). Unfortunately for Canadians, the person she went after the most, is one of the most ridiculous Canadians ever (VenomFangX). Here is the winning video:

We, As Individual Humans, Really Are Flukes

I really hate the creationist argument that uses the idea of odds when it comes to their rejection of evolution. From the chances that life would arise from non life (which of course isn't evolution) to the chances that a series of flukes would lead to an earth dominated by man, creationists continue to show a complete misunderstanding of probability.
My simplest retort to those who use these type of arguments is the big jackpot lottery winner. Prior to winning the pot, the player had a mathematical chance of maybe 1 in 15 million, but when the numbers were drawn, his odds went up to 100%.
In other words, if we turn back the clock 4.6 billion years, or even 17 billion years, and then made odds for what life would be like on earth in the year of the fictitious lord 2009, there would be an infinite amount of possible outcomes. The odds that the world would be populated by exactly those who populate it today, with our exact ages, and with our exact lineage (I'm talking plants, all animals) would be as close to zero as it gets.
Just look at us as individual humans.

The first thing is something I can't answer because I aint no biologist, but I can guess until maybe one of my readers sets me straight. It has to do with what exactly makes me me and you you. What exactly makes a fraternal twin different than his or her sibling, for example? Is it the egg that gives us an individual consciousness or is it the sperm, or a combination. And does it depend on which sperm and what exact time that sperm makes it into the egg?
What I mean is that did my parents have to mate at the exact time they did in order to create me? Was there any leeway? Did it have to be that certain sperm at that certain time? Would I be here if another sperm made it to the egg first or if my parents did it 15 seconds sooner or 15 seconds later than they did it? Are chemical reactions in the womb the only difference between me and my siblings? I highly doubt it.

Ok, this is what I'm getting at. I'm going to assume that I wouldn't be here if my parents didn't do it exactly when they did give or take an hour each way. Now lets go back only 300 years. What are the odds that all my ancestors would have met and mated exactly the times they did? From here, it is 100%. But 300 years ago, with wars and disease, and since I'm of Jewish ancestry (and even though I'm 3rd or 4th generation Canadian my ancestors came from all over the place) and we know what Jews had to go through up until very recently, what would be the odds that I would be sitting here writing this blog piece today? What are the chances I would even have the wife I have? It is as close to zero as can be.

We are real flukes whether we like it or not. And we should consider ourselves lucky that we exist, at least for now. Make the most of your win fall.