Friday, December 08, 2006

The Face of Ignorance (and Hypocrisy)

So, the Grand Panjandrum of Ignorance & Buffoonery, otherwise known as Dr John Sentamu, The Archbishop of York, is at it again with his vilification of atheism and atheists.

According to 'The Daily Telegraph' today, Sentamu made his strongest assault yet on attempts to purge Christianity from public life, saying that 'aggressive secularists' were undermining the country's cultural traditions; apparently his comments reflect the growing fury of Church leaders at reports of companies banning Christmas decorations and schools leaving Jesus out of nativity plays. "Aggressive secularists are trying to pretend that it is possible to enter into the true meaning of Christmas by leaving out Jesus Christ," he said.

He also signalled his intention to declare all-out war on secularists, who he claimed were unfairly blaming other faiths to advance their own anti-religious agenda.

Listen here, Mr Stupidity, since none of you mendacious religious twats have ever been able to provide any credible evidence whatsoever that this geezer you call Jesus Christ ever existed, the REAL meaning of the festival you call christmas is complete nonsense per se!

Furthermore, your made-up festival was simply imposed on the ancient pre-xtian practises around the winter solstice when people began to feel thankful that the back of winter had been broken and that their hopes of surviving it for another year were more likely to be achieved.

As for your claim that your moronic religion is being persecuted by anti-theists like me, quite simply that is as valid as the evidence that your imaginary god exists - and since you will be too dumb to understand that point, what it means is that your claims are a complete fabrication!

Of course you are well aware how threadbare your stupid and irrelevant claims are, since the best defence for them that you can put forward is the following ridiculous statement: "Why don't the aggressive secularists and illiberal atheists listen to the great wisdom of Sir John Mortimer, playwright and atheist, who writing in The Daily Telegraph on April 28, 1999, said 'Our whole history and culture in Europe is based on Christianity, whether you believe in it or not. Our culture is Christian; Shakespeare, Mozart – all that makes life worth living is part of the Christian tradition' ."

First, Mortimer never demonstrated what I would consider to be 'great wisdom' in any sphere, but anyone who claimed that "all that makes life worth living is part of the Christian tradition' " is clearly an ignorant and insensitive buffoon, rather like yourself.

Second, what has Mortimer's irrelevant and spurious claim got to do with the real issue - that the silly festival which you call xmas is a totally unreal and fabricated event celebrating a non-existent person, ignorance and superstition, and that those who do not share your stupidity, mendacity or delusional psychosis have a right (some would say duty), to object to it.

Third, anyone who considers Mortimer's statement represents 'great wisdom' has clearly had a very circumscribed education.

In conclusion, your claim that, "This aggressive brand of secularism is trying to undermine the cultural traditions of this country by using flawed arguments about 'multi-faith, multi-culturalism' whilst at the same time trying to negate faith groups all together." - I reject that in it's entirety since I hold that ALL faiths are a completely irrelevant fabrication and that none of them are entitled to ANY respect whatsoever (and neither are their practitioners, per se).

Furthermore, since you object so strongly to changes in the cultural traditions of this country, perhaps you would like us to return to the days when salvery was the norm, not to mention bull-baiting, or sending small-children up chimneys to clean them, or for the 'droits de seigneur' when the likes of you could rape our children without us having any redress?

At best you are a mendacious hypocrite, John Sentamu, but that is the least you are guilty of.

6 comments:

ajs said...

It's great to hear someone telling it like it is for once. For too long, we have had to defer to these idiots, as though the mere fact of them having an Imaginary Friend somehow made them "better" than us.

Let's send these people back to the dark ages where they belong!

Alan Mackenzie said...

"This aggressive brand of secularism is trying to undermine the cultural traditions of this country by using flawed arguments about 'multi-faith, multi-culturalism' whilst at the same time trying to negate faith groups all together."

I think Sentamu's remarks about 'multi-faith', and 'multi-curturalism' indicate a much broader strategy by The Church of England. The growing popularity of other religions, such as Islam, as a whole undermine the status of Christianity in the British Isles.

These religions are not in direct competition with one another, because other religions are already well adapted to their cultural and demographic roots. The problem for the CoE is therefore loss of status as the religious front-runner, because the government can no-longer afford CoE institutions, such as faith schools, the privileged financial resources they once enjoyed, because that would be discriminatory towards other religious groups.

So, the government solution is to not fund religious schools at all. Or is it? We already know that Tony Blair's government has done deals with the Reg Vardy Christian faith schools, where Vardy puts up a couple of million, and the government pays for the rest in order to promote 'diversity'.

The issue of 'secular intolerance' is unwarranted. The real concern for the CoE is something called 'free speech'.

You don't criticise religion! Why? Because you don't! Why, though can I not subject religions to the same scrutiny as I do towards political parties? Because you're not allowed to, that's why! Why I am forbidden from criticising religion? Because Christianity, over the last two thousand years, has put forth a plethora of thought terminating clichés about atheism and atheists, which in turn means Christians will attack non-belief using those same thought terminating clichés over and over again. And atheists will refute them to deaf ears!

http://rankatheism.blogspot.com/2006/12/atheism-myths.html

Alan.

Alan Mackenzie said...

I should also mention that Christians fear criticism of their religion, because they know that such critiques are effective.

They have nothing but some ancient scribblings and fallacious arguments to back their claims, so they attempt to reverse charges of violence by saying atheism killed millions under Communism.

It is impossible to kill in the name of atheism, because atheism is not a philosophy, ideology, or belief system: is an absence of belief in God, and makes no claim to knowledge. Hence, saying that someone killed for their atheism is analogous to saying left-handed people kill in the name of left-handedness. You can, for example, kill in then name of communism, because it is a belief system, which can, like other political ideologies be abused, but you can't kill for a negative.

One of the most deplorable remarks about atheism I've seen came from a Christian sophist called Os Guinness, when he asked for "[a] respectful exchange of ideas somewhere between the militant extremes of religious violence and militant atheism."

Is Guinness attempting to conflate those who kill and maim in the name of religion, or those who use religious rhetoric to further economic and political violence, with people like Dawkins, or Sam Harris who criticise, refute, or mock religious claims? If so, Guinness is an intellectually dishonest cheat. In no way can an educated, and articulate scientist and atheist like Dawkins be compared
to those who fly planes into buildings.

People like Os Guinnes want you to think as follows: if we allow 'fundamentalist atheists' to criticise religion, then atheism must be seen as a threat to our freedom and civilisation! Therefore, you must respect our religious beliefs. Don't criticise us for ID, anti-abortion, anti-stem cell research, homophobia, racism, outdated moral and belief systems, or crackpot ideas about 'salvation' trumping the here and now.

And where did Christians get the idea of 'fundamentalist atheism'? Fundamentalist about what? A negative? An extreme absence of belief? This is the kind of oxymoronic sophistry religionists use all the time in order to get people to 'respect' their superstitions; religionists know their claims are vulnerable to critique, so they make distorted claims about their opponents to mask the silliness of religion in general.

Alan.

The Merchant of Menace said...

Guinness is just another mendacious charlatan who interprets the commandment, "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor." as meaning that he can lie about anyone who does not share his so-called religious delusions.

The laugh is that, as an anti-theist, the one thing I am not guilty of is disseminating malicious lies about so-called believers. They ARE simply complete liars or delusionists, since the ancient scribblings they claim to believe in are a complete fabrication, as is the unsubstantiatable nonsense they spout about their particular god's existence.


As you correctly point out, the CofE is becoming increasingly worried about it's lack of power and control over the rest of us. So much so, that it is even trying to form oxymoronically named 'think-tanks' like 'Theos' with its quondam enemy, the Church of Rome, as well as forge links 'for greater understanding' with Islam. As if it were possible to form a 'greater understanding' with people whose so-called 'holy book' exhorts them to murder everyone who does not share their particular ignorant, superstitious and vicious faith.

But in saying this, I'm leaving myself open to the charge of being disrespectful again, as if the ignorant, pernicious and mendacious claims of so-called 'religious believers' are beyond criticism and should be respected per se. Mind you, if our Illustrious Leader, Tony "I'll be judged by God" Blair gets his way, it will soon be a criminal offence to criticise, 'diss', ridicule or mock the so-called religious beliefs of others.

Should Our Blessed Tone get his way, I will immediately claim that I am a worshipper of Teteo Inan, The Mother of The Gods, and that all other religious believers who do not recognise that she is superior to their god(s) should be piled into a heap and set on fire!

Fucking bollocks, all of it!

Alan Mackenzie said...

Well, all of this may be true, but I genuinely worry about the effect this sophistry has on the general population.

In the strictest terms, it's not my problem: it may well be that the CoE will die out, and all the non-thinkers who fall prey to their propaganda will move on to other claptrap, such as conspiracy theories, or some other popular garbage. But I do care about what is true, to borrow Dawkin's phrase. I am genuinely distressed by many people's lack of critical thinking skills: today, at work, I listened to colleagues talking, while I read the National Geographic - and what shallow nonsense about faith healing, and acupuncture. If people lack the skills to recognise their own logical shortcomings, it follows that they will overestimate their ability to 'show up' those who know and understand far more than they do... and with such blind overconfidence.

So, if religion dies out through lack of interest, other sophists will take the place of priests, to imbue the public with replacement nonsense.

People need educating, especially in science, and critical thinking.

Alan.

The Merchant of Menace said...

Alan,

Re your comment: "So, if religion dies out through lack of interest, other sophists will take the place of priests, to imbue the public with replacement nonsense."

We already have them; they're called politicians! The last thing they want is a general public who can think for themselves.