One thing that strikes me as somewhat hypocritical is how religious people will pin the atrocities of the 20th century on Charles Darwin or on atheism (despite only tenuous links at best) yet when it's pointed out that religious people - especially Christians - have started wars, committed and assisted in genocides, enslaved people, protected child abusers and tortured people for thought crimes THEN out come the excuses:
They weren't true Christians.
They didn't read the Bible correctly.
They followed their sinful heart instead of listening to Jesus.
One could just as easily reply:
They weren't true atheists.
They didn't read Darwin correctly
They followed bad advice instead of listening to qualified professionals
One of the reasons I am writing about this is because I am writing up a response to the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed...
In this post-Easter episode of The Tall Friendly Atheist Dad Podcast, I respond to the CrossExamined article "10 Reasons To Accept The Resurrection Of Jesus As An Historical Fact".
I must send Frank Turek some royalties for giving me and atheists all over the world so much material to respond to...
In this episode of the TFAD Pod, I have a chat with one of the most forthright and scripturally-knowledgable Bible critics around today, Deborah Grace as we discuss her book, Crucifying The Bible, and the responses she has got.
In this episode of The Tall Friendly Atheist Dad Podcast, I start reading Kent Hovind's famous (or infamous) PhD thesis and give my erudite opinion on its contents.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Music courtesy of Victim Of Illusion from the album “Invisible Light”.
In Episode 63 of The Tall Friendly Atheist Dad Podcast, I chat with long-time sparring partner and degree-qualified Christian, Lewis Ungit, about a number of topics including:
- The possibility of a worldwide flood - Joe Rogan bringing heat on Spotify - Being a positive example of interfaith dialogue. - Why GoFundMe are hypocritical - Racism, and in particular why arguments about the offense regarding the N-word is spurious - Whoopi Goldberg and her clanger.
The political party that forms the current Australian government has managed to get legislation to prevent discrimination on the basis of religion to pass the lower house of federal Parliament
Which leads me to discuss the idea of the Religious Discrimination Bill. The summary of my feeling on the topics is as such:
The idea of protection from discrimination on the basis of YOUR religion is a great idea. But there is no protection from discrimination on the basis of THEIR religion.
Someone shouldn't kick you out of a workplace because you're a Christian. But you shouldn't also be kicked out of a workplace run by Christians because you’re an atheist.
However, one of the biggest battlegrounds is over the right of religious schools to expel students on the basis of sexuality or gender identity. Two vocal groups, the Australian Christian Lobby and Christian School Australia, are quite upset that 5 government MPs have voted to have Section 38-3 of the Sex Discrimination Act, the right of faith-based schools to discriminate on the basis of sexuality, marital status, etc, removed.
But let me put it like this - if you need special legislation to circumvent anti-discrimination laws to allow you the free and unfettered practice of your religion, what does that say about your religion?
I agree that people shouldn't be discriminated against for their religious belief - but we also have to make sure that discrimination isn't practiced in the name of religion. We also shouldn't be providing protection against mere belief.
For example, let's take wedding cakes - there is no religion that explicitly prevents the baking of wedding cakes or other foodstuffs for the celebration of a same-sex marriage. Actually, there is no religion that mandates the baking of cakes for marriages - period. So we can't say that refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage is a religious principle.
Yet, and we have already seen this in other parts of the world, religious belief gets tied in with cultural belief - for example, if a Christian baker feels offended about having to make a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding, it is not entirely unreasonable that under this legislation, the baker can refuse to make the cake.
The other problem I have is that over the last 40 years, we've been trying to reduce the legality of discrimination and the avenues available for people to be discriminated against. Unless the legislation is changed to prevent active discrimination against people, this legislation is a bad idea.
Recently, the famous actress, comedienne and talk show host Whoopi Goldberg dropped what could only be considered a clanger when she said:
The meat of her comments I want to tackle are this:
"Well, this is White people doing it to White people, so y'all gonna fight amongst yourselves," Goldberg said, referring to the Holocaust.
While none of the co-hosts pushed back after that statement, the conversation then turned to how some are attempting to ban problematic parts of the nation's history, particularly history dealing with race and racism, from being taught in schools.
Goldberg responded: "If you're going to do this, then let's be truthful about it because the Holocaust isn't about race." She added that the Holocaust, which saw an estimated 6 million Jews and 5 million others killed as a result of the Nazis' racist ideology, was about "man's inhumanity to man" and said it involved "two White groups of people."
So, was Ms. Goldberg wrong when she said her now infamous comments? Were the Jews persecuted because of their race, or was race nothing to do with it and it was simply "man's inhumanity to man"?
From my perspective, saying that the Jews were persecuted because of "man's inhumanity to man" rather than race is like saying that "guns don't kill people - people do" - a somewhat correct (though asinine) statement that overlooks so many inconvenient truths.
Yes, the Jews (as well as other people groups) were rounded up by the Nazi forces because man has an ongoing history of treating their fellow men inhumanely - but it's also hard to ignore that race was a part of it. To me, the Holocaust was three-factored: race, religion and finance.
Let me fill in the picture for you:
We first have to consider the backdrop of Post-WW1 Europe. By the time Hitler rose to power around the 1930s, Germany was struggling to pay back the reparations forced on it as part of the Treaty Of Versailles. Inflation had spiralled out of control, the most profitable industrial areas had to be ceded to the French and unemployment was the norm, not an exception. If the Treaty of Versailles was designed to cripple Germany, consider it mission accomplished.
So what do you do when you see things are bad and you want to get to power? You create a scapegoat, and for various reasons, the Jews of Europe became that scapegoat. Hitler first took leadership of the NSDAP, then the NSDAP did well at consecutive elections by making various promises to the people to restore the country to its former glory (sound familiar?) and he eventually took power in Germany, all while maintaining and fuelling the rage of the lower-class and downtrodden - in much the same way that anarcho-communists today use the plight of those trodden over by Capitalism to make their points.
And so we come to the financial reason for what eventually became the Holocaust. The trope being spread (particularly via propaganda) was that Jews were making themselves rich at the expense of the Germans, especially the ones struggling to pay back the reparations.
So by having the Jews arrested and expropriating their property (ostensibly to help build up the war chest), you kill two birds with one stone - you get rid of the Jews, as well as get easy money.
We also need to consider the religious reason for what became The Holocaust. Even before his time, but most famously around the time Martin Luther was a thought leader in Christendom, Jews had suffered persecution in various forms. Luther, in his anger towards the Jews for not converting to Christianity en masse, wrote two books - "On The Jews And Their Lies" and "Of The Unknowable Name And The Generations Of Christ" which essentially set the stage for anti-Semitism in Germany going forward.
There is much debate about how sincere a Christian that Adolf Hitler was, but it's very hard to argue that he didn't have what we may call a cultural form of Christian identity, and it's even harder to argue that he didn't get inspiration from Luther's writings, to the point that Hitler was quoted as saying that Luther was the first "spiritual Fuhrer of Germany".
So now Hitler has a religious reason to persecute the Jews - get rid of the Jews, and allow Germany to become a proper Christian society!
And lastly, we have race, which I will touch on briefly again. Now, we have to acknowledge that race and ethnicity are very hard to both define and distinguish, and while Whoopi Goldberg may be kinda correct that it was "two White groups of people", again, it's not the whole picture. Hitler, but more so his inner-circle, believed that the Aryan race were the supreme race on earth. And what distinguished Aryans? According to Wikipedia:
The purest stock of Aryans according to Nazi ideology was the Nordic people of Germany, England, the Netherlands and Scandinavia. The Nazis defined Nordics as being identified by tall stature (average 175 cm), long faces, prominent chins, narrow and straight noses with a low bridge, lean builds, doliocephalic skulls, straight light hair, light eyes, and fair skin.
How many Jews do you know with light straight hair, light eyes, fair skin and tall stature? Not many. The Jews are essentially Middle-Eastern peoples who have a more olive complexion and darker features, not Nordics who are pale in comparison.
Goldberg may have been trying to infer that it was white people against not-quite-so-white people, but this is somewhat racist in itself because it assumes that all white people are all part of the same tribe who would normally get along, if it wasn't for that pesky inhumanity that keeps getting in the way.
Need I remind readers of the Troubles in Ireland (British Whites vs Irish Whites), the Civil War (Northern Whites vs Southern Whites), the 30-Years War (Catholic Whites vs Protestant Whites), as well as the ongoing tensions between Serbians (not-quite-so-whites) and Croatians (also not-quite-so-white).
So in essence, Hitler launched a persecution campaign against the Jews because they (apparently) had wealth, were causing problems for Christians, and were not like the European heroes of old - and who better to scapegoat when you want to make Europe a strong, prosperous and racially-superior society?
On a personal note, I don't think she should be cancelled. However, I think the suspension kinda had to be handed out to help the heat die down.
I also want to say that this episode highlights the dangers of live discussion on live TV about hot-button subjects - as a podcaster who has taken part in many live discussions and sometimes without proper preparation, I get that it's easy to be caught on the hop. It happens.
Anyway, let's live, love and learn, and til next time, stay safe.
This post is a little off-topic as it doesn't revolve around religion.
Buzzfeed, some years ago, posted a video titled "36 Questions For Men", in which various women ask questions of men in a somewhat accusatory manner.
I've always wanted to make a response, so here it is.
-----
1. How does it feel to be the same sex as Donald Trump?
It doesn't bother me one bit.
Firstly, I am also the same gender as people both famous and infamous such as Albert Einstein, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Milo Yiannopoulos, Justin Trudeau, Samuel L. Jackson and many others.
Secondly, people can be as brash and abrasive and foolhardy as they want to be, gender not being a barrier.
Thirdly, one could easily reply, "How does it feel the be the same gender as Elizabeth Bathory, one of history's first serial killers, or Elizabeth Holmes, convicted of one of the largest instances of wire fraud in US legal history?", but these kind of snide questions do nothing to improve understanding and dialogue.
---
2. Why do you hate rom-coms?
I don't hate rom-coms per se. I just hate the unrealistic expectations displayed in them, especially ones such as the handsome guy who has a stable job, no mental health issues and barely any body fat (though 'As Good As It Gets' did help turn the tide).
No, I'm not romantic. I'm a realist. Couldn't you tell.
---
3. Or do you just feel like you need to hate them?
I agree that a pinch of masculine pride gets in the way, but one could also easily question why women don't get excited about sports documentaries.
The young and foolhardy version of me instantly hated rom-coms. The current version of me just doesn't care.
---
4. Why do you make women sit around talk about men in movies, when y'all easily just sit around and talk about boobs for hours?
I have never made a movie, so I can't give a qualified answer either way. If it grieves you so much, why don't you make a movie that has women talking about men's cocks?
I can honestly say I've never sat around with a bunch of the boys for hours talking about boobs.
Also, the fact is that women are just as hard on other women - especially with regards to physical appearance - as men are accused of being.
A woman can wear the same outfit to work all week, the men wouldn't care, but I can guarantee you that it would be the other women who would be making judgemental and make catty remarks.
Just check out this below clip and tell me that men are the problem:
---
5. Why do you automatically assume that you won’t like TV or movies that star a female lead?
A TV show or movie with a female lead doesn't bother me, and I don't know anyone who is prejudiced against a TV show or movie simply because of the gender of the lead actor.
Just to prove my feminist credentials, I recommend you stream "What Keeps You Alive" and "No-One Gets Out Alive" - two awesome horror films with female leads.
---
6. Why are you surprised when women are funny?
I'm not surprised. Women can be funny and I personally know very funny women. Joan Rivers is a goddess. The whole world mourned when we lost the universally-loved Betty White.
If men were really as sexist as what the question implies, the follow-up should be "Why are you surprised when men aren't funny?".
---
7. Why do you think that we’re obsessed with you when we hook up?
I have no answer either way. I'm not the hook-up kind.
However I think in some cases, sometimes the woman is obsessed, and sometimes men misread interpersonal cues.
And just on that - there seems to be this unspoken line where men are though to be desperate if they're too quick to make contact, or distant or evasive if they hold off. Talk about prejudicial expectations...
---
8. Why can’t I sleep with as many people as I want to without being judged?
In many cases, it's actually women judging other women for sexual activity. So don't just ask this question of men - ask this question of your mothers, your sisters and your grandmothers, especially of those in conservative ethnic groups.
--
9. Why do you consider a woman a tease if she doesn't sleep with you three dates, but a slut if she sleeps with you on the first date?
Again, I don't.
I actually avoided this problem because I met my wife when I spent my younger years in a Protestant evangelical cult.
I dodged one bullet...and got hit by another.
---
10. In what world does no mean yes?
In a world where men have a brain and a penis, but only enough blood to run one of them at a time - which is this world.
I'll agree that men do need to do better in this regard.
---
11. Why do you say that women are too emotional to be leaders, then justify catcalling by saying men just can’t control themselves?
Part 1 - Again, I don't. I can honestly say that I don't remember ever criticising a female in a position of power for being "too emotional", and I can't ever remember being with anyone who has catcalled.
And on the converse, I've worked with and for numerous men who couldn't keep their emotions in check.
Part 2 - Again, I don't. A man who admits he can't control himself is not worth being around, in any context.
---
12. Why do you think that just because you’re nice to me, I owe you my body?
Again, I don't.
Some men do, and those men aren't worth the time of day, so I suggest learn how to avoid that type, and to combat bad attitudes.
And this goes for everyone - the more we learned how to avoid jerks and starve them of oxygen, the better society would be.
---
13. Why would you ever send an unsolicited **** pic?
Don't know. Not something I've ever felt the need to do.
---
14. Why do you feel like it’s OK to harass women or make offensive comments about women but when somebody does it to your sister it’s not OK?
Again, I don't harass women.
Maybe Buzzfeed's video should have instead been called "36 Questions For Our Feminist Caricature Of Men"
---
15. How does it feel to interrupt me when I’m in the middle of making a point during a meeting?
I've never interrupted you during a meeting. Even better, I try avoid meetings. You should be thanking me :-)
---
16. Why do you have to sit with your legs so wide open?
Because men have testicles, and despite what misconceptions you may have, testicles are an interactive part of our body, just like feet and ears.
Imagine you had two ping-pong balls between your breasts, but these were magical ping-pong balls that were heat and contact-sensitive - you would only be able to enclose them and squish them for so long before you needed to give them space. Therefore, a mild amount of space is required, and men give their nads breathing space by moving the only limb available to do so - the legs.s
True, any man who negligently or crudely takes an unnecessary amount of space is a d*ck. But they're going to be d*cks anyway.
---
17. Why are women perceived as the weaker sex even though we literally birth you?
Well, men do hold all of the weightlifting records...
But pain tolerance is not an indication of physical strength or emotional maturity, and even during childbirth, the number one thing women ask for are drugs, epidurals or caesarians.
---
18. Why is it so bad to show your emotions?
It isn't. My only expectation is that whatever emotion you display, keep it in proportion to the situation at hand.
I cringe as much at the road rager as I do at the Karen as I do at the person complaining the paper tray on the printer that they didn't buy doesn't hold enough paper.
---
19. Why are you always trying to prove your masculinity to me?
Any man who feels they do need to prove their masculinity would likely do so because they're deep-down insecure.
---
20. Why the **** isn’t it ladylike to cuss?
Don't know about you, but I love it when women swear.
---
21. When did words get genders?
Probably at about the same time that they were created.
But I find it ironic that Buzzfeed have a problem with western culture using English that has some words that are colloquially gendered (particularly in nautical circles) without realising the irony that:
One, the word 'bitch' was appropriated from the field of zoology to mean something it was never meant to, and;
Two, languages like German, Spanish and Indonesian are actually structurally gendered. For example, in German, when you learn a word, you have to learn not only the word, not only the gender, but also the case, otherwise you end up saying something completely different (and possibly offensive).
---
22. Why is it your first instinct to doubt women who have been sexually violated or raped?
One of the founding principles of our justice system is the presumption of innocence, and publicly spreading rumours of alleged sexual assault prior to a trial actually contributes to a miscarriage of justice - ensuring that the alleged perpetrator won't face justice for their crimes!
This isn't to say we shouldn't give every available assistance to those who have been violated and traumatised. My point, though, would be that to accuse someone of sexual assault is very serious, and there is a difference between believing and encouraging a victim, and propagating unfounded allegations.
Plus, on numerous occasions, false rape claims have been made that have damaged people's careers and lives - so we need to strike that balance.
So it's not that I doubt women, I just reserve judgement until the facts of the matter are established.
---
23. Why do you assume a woman’s angry because she’s on her period?
Because it's statistically more likely than other explanations.
---
24. Why do you think women that wear makeup are false advertising?
Isn't that what makeup is supposed to do - cover over blemishes and variations to present a veneer?
---
25. We could say the same thing about your **** size.
OK. But then that's playing in to the very same sexism that you are rallying against.
---
26. Why isn’t it weird that there’s a bunch of old white men sitting in a room making legislation about what I can and can’t do with my body?
One. Those same unspecified old white men make decisions about my body as well, especially when it comes to pharmaceuticals and mental health treatment, so you're not the only victim.
Two. If you don't like the fact that there's a bunch of old white men, then don't vote for old white men, or even better, get people to vote for the non-old non-white non-men so you can be part of the momentum behind the change the change you want to see in the law.
But Buzzfeed are exposing their hypocrisy - by complaining about old white men, they're using ageist, racist and sexist terms to rally against ageism, racism and sexism.
---
27. Why are straight guys so obsessed with lesbians?
Not all straight guys are obsessed with lesbians. I can tell you I'm not.
I think the team at Buzzfeed need to go past the stereotypes and have a proper, constructive conversation with someone who has views opposing to theirs.
But then this is the problem with modern journalism - Outrage generates clicks. People who need to make money from their content wouldn't interview mild-mannered old me - they'll find a hardcore Men's Rights Activist or Anti-Vaxxer or someone else of an extreme position, interview them and then act as if that extreme person is representative of all people who share the same opinion.
---
28. How does it feel to get kicked in the balls?
It fucking hurts.
Go on to YouTube and look at MMA fights ended by groin shots. If a guy whose living is made by being beaten up and having his body twisted has to stop a fight because of a well-placed nut shot, that should give you an indication of how painful it is.
---
29. Do you ever get tired of trying to be manly all the time?
This is such a vapid and pointless question.
---
30. Why are you so afraid of gender equality?
I'm not. I'm more scared of those who push a socially-acceptable form of sexism to pretend that they're fighting sexism, and then those people pretend they aren't being sexist because their sexism is the good sexism, or that their sexism falls outside of a hyper-narrow definition of sexism that somehow only white men fit in to (in the same vein as reverse racism).
--
31. Why do I deserve to be paid less than you?
You don't. I would expect a person with my experience and my skills and my business acumen to earn at least as much as I do.
--
32. In what world does 77 cents equal a dollar?
I don't disagree that a gender pay gap exists, but it doesn't exist because of the reasons feminists say it exists.
Firstly, it is against all discrimination law that is out there to pay salary inequitably due to gender. If there was a company that was paying women less than men for the same job, they would be liable under the multitude of enforcement procedures out there.
Secondly, men typically earn more than women over a lifetime because men typically work in more hazardous professions that also happen to be higher paying in line with the shortened shelf-life of the people in those professions. Construction, mining, logging, for example - these are all hazardous professions that also just happen to be done willingly by men.
Thirdly, even between men, there is a pay gap. I, as an IT technician, get paid a lot less than the aforementioned construction, mining or logging workers.
--
33. Why are you intimidated by a woman who makes more money than you?
I'm not. I'm more peeved off by people - both men and women - who use their salary/job title/profession/bank balance as reason to look down on people and act like jerks.
I've met numerous women who make more money than me. Not an issue.
--
34. Why are opinionated women seen as *****es?
For much the same reason that opinionated men are seen as wankers and assholes.
--
35. Why aren’t you speaking up when you hear your male friends behind closed doors make jokes that are offensive to women?
For much the same reason women don't speak up when they hear someone make an offensive joke about men - because they're too busy laughing behind closed doors to be worried about someone distant's feelings.
It's when the offense is brought to the intended victim in order to inflict psychological/emotional harm that we need to worry about. But jokes behind closed doors are just that - jokes, and behind closed doors.
What feminists also forget is that for decades, womens magazines such as New Idea ran a column called Mere Male where women wrote in with stories of men doing dumb things with the idea that women are intellectually superior, hence mere male.
--
36. Why are you so afraid of recognizing your own privilege?
Two reasons:
One: I don't see what actual gender-based privilege exists. We in Australia have very few provisions for favouring one gender over another. Anything that engenders sexism is actually illegal (unless it's affirmative action, which is, in reality, government-sanctioned sexism).
Two: What privilege do men get? The privilege of public toilets that smell like cocks?
The privilege of having a shorter average life span?
The privilege of being more likely to die from cancer?
The privilege of being more like to be arrested and incarcerated?
The privilege of losing custody of children?
The privilege of being more likely to die in a road accident, in a workplace accident, or by being murdered?
The privilege of having to pay more for vehicle insurance?
The privilege of being ridiculed for sex work?
Please, tell me what privilege you think I have that you want.
This episode is Part 3 of a 4-episode response series from an atheistic perspective to Off The Kirb Ministries’ video titled “Dear Christian, This Is Why You Never Mess With Pornography”, a Christian polemic about the apparent evils of pornography and how to cope with pornography addiction.
Be warned: my responses are light-hearted and sometimes crass, and there are times I break out in uncontrollable laughter.
This episode is Part 2 of a 4-episode response series from an atheistic perspective to Off The Kirb Ministries’ video titled “Dear Christian, This Is Why You Never Mess With Pornography”, a Christian polemic about the apparent evils of pornography and how to cope with pornography addiction.
Be warned: my responses are light-hearted and sometimes crass, and there are times I break out in uncontrollable laughter.
In this piece of award-winning journalism, I have a conversation with the Coronavirus where it was speaking from what seemed to be a crowded restaurant...the Coronavirus LOVES crowded places after all!
This episode is Part 1 of a 4-episode response series from an atheistic perspective to Off The Kirb Ministries’ video titled “Dear Christian, This Is Why You Never Mess With Pornography”, a Christian polemic about the supposed evils of pornography and how to cope with pornography addiction.
Be warned: some of my responses are light-hearted and/or crass, there are times I break out in uncontrollable laughter, and the topic at hand is - of course - of a sexual nature.
In this episode, Jax and I have a chat about abortion. It was impromptu and unplanned, hence why the conversation may sound disjointed at times (and my son was being hyperactive in the background).
Verses discussed:
Numbers 5:11-29
Psalm 137:9
Hosea 13:16
Music in the background:
Victim Of Illusion and their album, "Invisible Light"
Find Jax here: https://www.tiktok.com/@that_one26 Find the S.L.E.D PDF Here: https://www.scribd.com/document/528224430/S-L-E-D-a-Pro-life-Defense
