Ultimate heart-ache: Michelle dumps on atheists
posted at 1:57 pm on December 18, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
But affectionately. Sort of. Except for her suggestion that believers treat them like “trolls.” Heh.
I think she’s referring specifically to the sort of jackassery going on at the capitol in Washington, of which neither I nor the other conservative atheist/agnostics I read are fans. But just in case not, I take comfort in knowing that I’ll always have Ayaan.
Exit question: Um, what exactly is Gretchen saying here? Christianity’s going to disappear unless we … take away atheists’ First Amendment rights?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 15 Next »
No, it just illustrates the fallacy of that line of reasoning.
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 7:12 PM
Count me as one agnostic libertarian conservative Christian admirer, an admirer for the strength that the religion has given some of my most precious friends and for the strength and moral compass it has given this country. I’ve read and studied religion more than most, but the capacity for faith seems to elude me. My loss, I suspect.
But tell ya what. Christians better start standing up and fighting back for Judeo-Christian culture or it’s going to be Dark Ages deja vu all over again… and sooner than most of us ever imagined.
Goes without saying, I hope, if there’s a fight, I’ll side in a heartbeat with the Christians.
petefrt on December 18, 2008 at 7:12 PM
Your right, but I don’t know where you get the idea that Christians are under any obligation to defend Islam. I’m still not seeing any double standard.
Maxx on December 18, 2008 at 7:13 PM
Can you gives any examples?
aengus on December 18, 2008 at 7:13 PM
Science:- Energy can neither be created, nor destroyed.
OldEnglish on December 18, 2008 at 7:13 PM
“There is nothing quite so strong in human nature as the desire to lay down rules of conduct for other people” – William Howard Taft.
I am old enough to remember Blue Laws where only a few businesses were allowed to be open. I do remember specifically that movie theaters were by law closed on Sunday. Because of these laws I learned to drive in an empty shopping center parking lot on Sundays. The remnants of these laws still exist in the beer and alcohol sales laws. Should I remind everyone of one of the stupidest laws in world history? Prohibition was a law thought up by American Christian zealots; all it did was turn some petty criminals into millionaires.
One problem with Christians, is the habit of making things up. There is no specific prohibitiom in the Bible against alcohol, only drunkeness, and I have not found a prohibition against gambling.
Pelayo on December 18, 2008 at 7:14 PM
Well if your logic tells you it takes god to create something as complex as man an universe , then what created god who has to be even more complex than man ?
the_nile on December 18, 2008 at 7:15 PM
A couple of thoughts:
1) There’s a time for “truth” and there’s a time for grace and tact.
2) Calling someone a ‘whore’ is usually not conducive for them (or others for that matter) to listen to anything else you have to say. If you are here to proclaim ‘truth’, you are failing at your mission because you have not learned that civility goes a long, long ways toward making attentive listeners.
3) If you’re here as a Christian, maybe you should act MORE like a Christian. Christ loved sinners and spoke to them out of love and a hope that they would listen and follow Him.
Religious_Zealot on December 18, 2008 at 7:16 PM
Pissing off Muslims will get you killed.
Pelayo on December 18, 2008 at 7:17 PM
Wellllllll… not entirely true. Different types of Agnostics after all.
I’m open to the idea of a God or some sort of afterlife.
scrubbiedude on December 18, 2008 at 7:18 PM
I take it that you’re agreeing with my assertion.
If matter can’t be created, then how (and from what) did it come into existence in the first place?
Again, this is not an attempt to ‘prove’ anything other than there are questions beyond the ability of science to (currently) answer.
Religious_Zealot on December 18, 2008 at 7:19 PM
I love you guys! You have no explanation for the creation of the universe. It had to start somewhere…unless of course you believe it to be infinitely old which now presents you with a very large problem! How did we navigate ourselves through infinity to today? How do you deal with negative infinity? So…the universe had to be created and considering it’s complexity and “design” do you seriously believe it just “happened”? I also really love the space alien stuff! Anything but a believe in a Divine and loving God who created everything including us! You may deny His existence…but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t exist!
sabbott on December 18, 2008 at 7:20 PM
I can’t imagine infinity either—it just is.
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 7:22 PM
For centuries it was against the law to open betting shops in Britain on Good Friday. The reason for the enactment of this law was that the Roman soldiers cast lots at the foot of the Cross, ignoring the groans of the crucified Jesus and the weeping of his mother, to decide which of them should have Christ’s seamless garment.
aengus on December 18, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Psalm 90:2 says, “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.”
To the skeptical question as to who made God, the only answer that satisfies all the facts of both science and human reason is that God is “from everlasting.” He is the Creator of time as well as space and all things that exist in time and space. This is beyond our mental comprehension, but there is no other rational explanation for our existence, and it is surely compatible with our instincts for a Creator (God satisfies the heart) and the evidences we see for a Design in our world today.
apacalyps on December 18, 2008 at 7:23 PM
Matter is a form of energy , you know fusion and fission and A-bombs. But it doesn’t explain from where and how, science only claim what it for the moment think i can prove.
the_nile on December 18, 2008 at 7:23 PM
That’s mighty Christian of you!
thuja on December 18, 2008 at 7:24 PM
You may insist on His existence, but that doesn’t mean that He exists.
Pelayo on December 18, 2008 at 7:24 PM
You’re an American, I assume. Therefore I would assume you would not be personalizing the “attack” on Christianity by atheists, you’d be calling for the sign to be removed under some law.
Ohhh, that’s right. You’re just playing victim and people here are actually suggesting the first amendment be damned. My mistake. How can you have a double standard when you didn’t respect the constitution to begin with?
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 7:24 PM
There are no currently dead atheist.
Atheists use Christian values all the time to try and prove their point.
A-kon is a Mo-ron.
Mojave Mark on December 18, 2008 at 7:25 PM
Yeah including many prostitutes i.e. actual whores. Well said, RZ.
aengus on December 18, 2008 at 7:26 PM
The lead denomination for prohibition is my own Methodists.
Now, you are absolutely correct in that there are no prohibitions against alcohol, only drunkenness.
However, let’s set aside the “Christian zealot” stuff and look at a couple of things.
During the Second Great Awakening Methodism spread across the western frontier.
Here Methodist preachers, missionaries and churches came across a huge, huge problem – out of control drunkenness.
This was destroying families and stagnating the burgeoning communities.
Much harm and evil was done under the influence of alcohol.
Prohibition was a reaction to this problem.
Now, why all out prohibition and not just rules/laws against getting drunk?
Well, here’s the deal – how many drinks do you limit people to? How much alcohol does it take to get people drunk? How many drinks does it take to turn someone into an alcoholic?
The answer, of course, is that it takes different amounts for different people.
For some, they can drink a six-pack one day and then go months without touching another drink.
For others, one sip is enough to put them on an epic bender.
Thus, it was easier to ban alcohol altogether than to figure out what each person could handle.
Now, while I don’t agree with this I can certainly understand it. It’s better to avoid temptation altogether than to see how much you can take before losing control.
Thus prohibition wasn’t so much an attempt by Christians to assert Christianity upon the folks…
…it was a well-intentioned by ultimately boneheaded attempt to help people and their families.
Religious_Zealot on December 18, 2008 at 7:26 PM
I’m going to say this to you, and then I’m going to give your posts as little attention as I give right4life’s.
Esthier is not a whore, and for you to persist in calling her one makes you a worthless punk. However, if she were, you might remember Jesus befriended Mary Magdalene. Practice the religion you’re preaching, hypocrite.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 7:27 PM
I think that was kind of the point I was trying to make.
Something are simply (currently) beyond all attempts to understand.
And I kind of like it that way – a universe I totally understand is a universe that is only as intelligent as I am.
Yikes!!
Religious_Zealot on December 18, 2008 at 7:28 PM
I think it’s probably infinitely old by our reckoning, though the universe seems to change over time just like everything else. And while the universe may continue on through infinity, is there anything outside of the universe? Is the there only one, or are there an infinite number of universes all of which contain infinite space? Or perhaps there is only one greater-universe that contains what the billions of galaxies that we consider the universe along with other universes that go bang, expand, stop, contract and are reborn, but so far away we can’t detect them. And perhaps these structures of multiple universes form structures of their own and there are other groups of multi-universes elsewhere.
OK, I’ll stop rambling now…
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 7:29 PM
And your original comments were mighty Jewish of YOU!
/roll-eyes
Religious_Zealot on December 18, 2008 at 7:30 PM
At least you’re being honest. Something alot of scoffers here have a problem being.
Even if you can’t find the builder, you know that the building itself is proof of the existence of a builder. And that is my point. Likewise, we know from creation that there was a Creator. It is obvious that there was a Creator because of the absolute insanity of the contrary. The universe is so complex universe.
apacalyps on December 18, 2008 at 7:30 PM
I can visualize infinity; it’s where two parallel lines intersect.
Pelayo on December 18, 2008 at 7:32 PM
Pelayo, I don’t think you are being entirely fair about a gambling prohibition. While it is true that there is no blanket prohibition on gambling, the Torah does urge thrift as a virtue. While kids can play with the driedel all the want, Judaism takes a dim view of casinos. I’d bet the Christians have valid grounds to condemn gambling that exceeds play. (I’m in no way trying to condone the Christian heresy here.)
thuja on December 18, 2008 at 7:32 PM
Whose mental comprehension? How can something like THAT now even more intelligent and complex and awesome than man just exist without being created.
Were back were we started..
the_nile on December 18, 2008 at 7:33 PM
Divide anything by zero.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 7:33 PM
Prohibition was driven mostly by feminist of the day, although the lefty Methodists were also involved. Benjamin Rush, an influential and devout Christian of the day was against prohibition and simply argued for moderation. Albeit, the feminist movement called itself “Christian,” but there is not very much “Christian” about the feminist movement.
Maxx on December 18, 2008 at 7:33 PM
Please answer the question. The person who thinks a Book had no designer is:
___ A. Intelligent
___ B. A fool
___ C. Has an ulterior motive for denying the obvious
apacalyps on December 18, 2008 at 7:34 PM
For clarification about who creates books.
I figure PBSKids should be the proper level for those struggling.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 7:36 PM
Madison, that is the ten dollar definition of an infinite distance. It was in my tenth grade geometry book.
Pelayo on December 18, 2008 at 7:36 PM
Here’s a variation of the, “who created the creator” question: if the universe can’t be infinitely old, thus must have been created, the creator must therefor be infinitely old, else was itself created by something older still.
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 7:38 PM
Your Nutty Aunt Carrie Is Loose Again!
aengus on December 18, 2008 at 7:38 PM
Carry Nation. That crazy old saloon-smashing loon.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 7:40 PM
You really like flying off the handle and I don’t appreciate it much. I’m trying to be civil with you. And you are making zero sense, I honestly have no idea where you are coming from with all of these accusations. So I guess that’s all I need to say to you.
Maxx on December 18, 2008 at 7:41 PM
Gosh, mr. apacalyps, I think David Hume also ridiculed the book analogy over two centuries ago, (though I could be wrong as I was a freshmen when I read Dialog Concerning a Natural Relgion). You may wish to actually read up on the argument from design before presenting us with arguments known to be silly for over two centuries.
thuja on December 18, 2008 at 7:42 PM
Thuja, there is a difference between “taking a dim view” and outright prohibition. I take a dim view of rap music, but I can’t justify banning it.
Pelayo on December 18, 2008 at 7:46 PM
Like Michelle Malkin, I am tired of “affirmative action” for atheists. Clearly, they are receiving preferential treatment. Yes, that’s right — PREFERENTIAL treatment. They are not asked to play by the same rules as Christians. Christmas is a SEASONAL religious observance. Christians celebrate it between the day after Thanksgiving, and December 25th – every year. To my knowledge, Christians have NOT requested a display in Olympia (the Washington state capitol) at other times of year. Similarly, atheists should not ask for displays in the state capitol at arbitrary times of year either. They too should have their displays confined to specific intervals that correspond to their seasonal religious observances — but instead, they insist that ALL times of year belong to them, including winter solstice.
My collie says:
CyberCipher on December 18, 2008 at 7:49 PM
Religious_Zealot on December 18, 2008 at 7:26 PM
RE: the whole ‘drunkeness’ line of thought.
I think maybe it had more implications than just Alcohol, the drink.
What I see is a whole lotta people being DRUNK on their own translations and beliefs and mistranslating the WORD for their own good.
One can be DRUNK on many things besides just drinking a fermented beverage.
This is one of my problems with many “religious” people.
There is no depth of thought when it comes to Scripture.
Just silly judgements.
I’m just sayin’.
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 7:52 PM
Actually that is not true. I think it’s more the limit of 1/x as x approaches 0.
I think mathematically 1/0 is not equal to infinity.
mycowardice on December 18, 2008 at 7:52 PM
I apologize. I thought your questions were sarcastic.
My point is that Christians are throwing a fit over the atheist sign, and claiming the sign should be taken down because it insults Christianity.
Now, I’m saying if the situation involved Muslims rather than Christians, many here would either not care or applaud standing up to that religion. There lies the double standard. It’s not about atheists insulting religion, or a religious issue, but a personal whining session where people are calling for the retraction of the right of atheists to put up something in the same vein as the Christmas tree.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 7:52 PM
Now that’s just brutal lady….I have a fragile ego ;)
Or do you know me?
*PARANOIA*
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 7:53 PM
CyberCipher on December 18, 2008 at 7:49 PM
bravo! I like the way you think!
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 7:53 PM
But Pelayo, the Christian moralists rightly observed that gambling can be destructive to some people’s lives. Of course, they wrongly observed the same thing about homosexuality as has Judaism in the past.
I suppose we are in an area where we need to make rational judgments based on facts and the values from our traditions–the basic premise of conservatism. I would argue that the very least that the Christian moralists should be given the benefit of the doubt in their desires to prohibit gambling. Keep in mind that the prohibition or legalization of gambling is a totally different issue than our judgments of groups based on their ideas about gambling.
thuja on December 18, 2008 at 7:53 PM
CyberCipher on December 18, 2008 at 7:49 PM
Second. Give him a doggy treat CC.
Maxx on December 18, 2008 at 7:53 PM
Actually, all we need is the creation (or arrangement) of a microscopic speck of space with a high (but still microscopic) energy density, plus the simple laws of physics (and a few scalar fields), and we can get our universe.
How do we get that? Don’t know. Would you like to put your god there? You can if you want, but I’m not sure what you accomplish by it.
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 7:53 PM
Any non-null value divided by a null value cannot be calculated. There is an endless amount of nothing in something. Add nothing to nothing till the end of your days, and you will not come up with something.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 7:54 PM
1/0 = 1
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 7:54 PM
I’m gonna paint my todger gold, stand in the capitol rotunda, and you will bow before its majesty.
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 7:56 PM
The number one law of ‘Christianity’ is Love thy neighbor.
Not a whole lotta love coming from so many of these ‘christian’ groups. Calm down people! You can’t HATE someone into seeing the light…..oh, but you can love ‘em into it. Now, if these people who put the sign up against ‘religion’ were LOVED by religious people…I bet they wouldn’t feel like they do towards RELIGION.
But, I sure can’t fault them for their feelings. I understand how they feel, totally. It’s so sad…on so many levels.
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 7:59 PM
Personally, I don’t want ‘an answer’ to the ‘ultimate question. I’m quite happy being in awe at the wonder of it all.
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 8:00 PM
1/1 = 1
1/0 = ∞
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 8:00 PM
When you put General Relativity together with Quantum mechanics, one of the few solid conclusions you come to is that, eventually, time stops meaning anything recognizable.
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:01 PM
Yeah. I posted that to start another religious war ;)
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 8:01 PM
PI = 3
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 8:02 PM
x/x = x/0
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 8:02 PM
…
aengus on December 18, 2008 at 8:03 PM
LimeyGeek is funny.
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 8:03 PM
Actually, no.
1/0 is not a defined operation under the mathematical concept of division. To be exact, the as x approaches 0, 1/x is unbounded.
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:04 PM
Shatner was better than Picard.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 8:04 PM
Fuck you ;)
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 8:05 PM
Well, yes, the value is undefined because infinity is not an actual defined value.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 8:06 PM
PWNED.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 8:07 PM
That’s nice. But what if the “the answer” ends up giving us the insight to solve all of our energy problems, or do any number of things we haven’t even imagined? (commenter makes not guarantee that any such miraculous technologies will actually result from said answer)
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:08 PM
………..as Yahweh (God) looks down on us and laughs..or cries.. ?
:)
Oh, Ye of little faith…
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 8:10 PM
Apology accepted.
Now I understand your point but I don’t agree. In my opinion what the atheist are doing falls under the category of trouble making. Their gripe is not legitimate in my opinion and I have free speech too. The left is alway spouting off about tolerance, where is their tolerance for Christian beliefs?
But I think you are correct that Christians wouldn’t generally come to the defense of Muslims if the atheist were disrespecting their religion, fact is, Christians seldom defend their own religion.
Maxx on December 18, 2008 at 8:11 PM
Keep avoiding it? I am not afraid of that question. I’ve answered that question probably a dozen times now on variuos threads the best I know how. Avoiding it.. I don’t think so… lol .. scoffers like you who are ignorant of the Creation. You do not want to admit God created the world because that means God owns it. There might be some rules, and there are, and He does! You are afraid of a truth so great, you are forced to deny it.
apacalyps on December 18, 2008 at 8:11 PM
Is this a good time to bring up Mrs. Yahweh? (She was mentioned earlier in the thread)
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:12 PM
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:12 PM
Same difference.
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 8:13 PM
OBAMA DID IT!!! LOL oh, I couldn’t resist.
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 8:13 PM
…And if God was created by an older god, then that means either that there is more than one god or that gods can die.
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 8:14 PM
Now that we’re finished playing with ourselves, let’s get back to the culture wars.
A 23-year-old girl was acting in a Christmas pageant in a Cincinnati church and was, for some reason, suspended 25 feet above a concrete floor. Her rigging failed and she suffered a fatal fall.
The Associated Press has reported this under the heading “Political News.”
warbaby on December 18, 2008 at 8:14 PM
oops, I screwed that up….I meant to say…
OBAMA DID IT…..damn, hate it when that happens!
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 8:14 PM
Is that True? That’s SICK.
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 8:15 PM
Old creators have younger creators that they create,
and the younger creators have still younger creators that they create, and so on.
And the old creators themselves, in turn, had still older creators that created them, while these again had older still, and so ad infinitum.
MB4 on December 18, 2008 at 8:16 PM
No, no, I don’t mean some retroactive gender reassignment. I’m talking about his wife.
She’s been missing for over 2000 years.
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:17 PM
Thuja, yes some people should not gamble and some people should not drink. (Some people should not eat Twinkies.) I do not accept the idea that because something is harmful to some people, it must be banned for all. I love peanut butter, and to some people who are allergic, peanuts can be fatal. Should p-nut butter be banned?
I am 62 years old, and I am very cynical when it comes to people’s motives, especially if it involves contolling the minutiae of everyone’s lives.
I do not know who said or wrote this but it is a good quote “Prohibition was an idea of the high minded; enacted by the feeble minded.”
Pelayo on December 18, 2008 at 8:18 PM
“It’s turtles all the way down.”
-I don’t remember who said that.
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:18 PM
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:17 PM
Whose wife? Nobody’s missing.
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 8:18 PM
How sad. (um, 23-year-old girl</strong>?)
“Political News”?!
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:20 PM
Ok , now that explains the mess we’re in.
the_nile on December 18, 2008 at 8:22 PM
Yahweh had a wife some time before the writing of the Torah, but no one has seen her since.
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:22 PM
E-
Thank you for that information. More to think about.
JiangxiDad on December 18, 2008 at 8:22 PM
You made my day. If you say you voted for McCain, I will put you in the dreaded “uninformed voter” category!
mycowardice on December 18, 2008 at 8:23 PM
This might be hard to understand. But, since the world is here, there are only two choices. Somebody made it, or it made itself. Most people reject God because of their lifestyle. Not because they don’t believe He exists. And the Bible warned us that was going to happen. In 2 Peter chapter 3 it says, “Knowing this first, there shall come in the last days scoffers,” and then it says they are going to, “walk after their own lusts.” There is no scientific reason to reject the Bible. They reject it because the Bible chaps their hide.
apacalyps on December 18, 2008 at 8:24 PM
Why only two choices? Something could have made the world. Multiple people could have made the world.
mycowardice on December 18, 2008 at 8:25 PM
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:22 PM
I suggest http://www.yadayahweh.com
It explains it. It’s not for the closed minded. It’s not for the easily offended, but it’s WELL DONE.
bridgetown on December 18, 2008 at 8:25 PM
No need to thing about it as all of you Hotair dissidents will be experiencing it first hand soon enough.
DasObamaReich on December 18, 2008 at 8:27 PM
I don’t know, it seems more to me that they try to bend it to their lifestyle rather than reject it.
Count to 10 on December 18, 2008 at 8:29 PM
I voted for Jesus.
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 8:29 PM
Yeah, that’s interesting too. Keep me posted.
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 8:32 PM
So, you are one of them, who assigns the same motives to everyone. You would not like it if I assumed that because you were a Christian that you believed the same things as do the denizens of Westboro Baptist Church. Perhaps you are a member of Westboro Baptist Church?
Pelayo on December 18, 2008 at 8:33 PM
I’ve never heard an answer to that question from anybody.
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 8:35 PM
I’m the high priest of the church of the golden tallywhacker
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 8:35 PM
Hardly. All she’s saying is show some respect, some common decency. Some some respect for the integrity of individuals. Would seem her word would ring true especially for us conservative individualists.
I’m not a huge fan, but I agree with her on this one. Show some tolerance. Show some respect, especially during the Chistmas/Hanukkah season.
The relentless ‘progressive’ militancy on this matter is moving from tedious to incendiary..
petefrt on December 18, 2008 at 8:36 PM
Yay….beers kickin’ in
LimeyGeek on December 18, 2008 at 8:36 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 15 Next »