Monthly Archive for May, 2007

How long before some idiot ruins it?



The atheist revolution is gathering momentum, that is not in doubt.

We have the big names of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens we have groups such as RDF, FFRF, The Rational Response Squad, The Brights and many others employing a variety of strategies to put the atheist agenda forward.

There have been a number of best selling books in the last 12 months and the mass media has taken notice and started giving coverage to atheists.

The atheists are coming out of the closet and we are making progress. There is opposition but we are winning the arguments, we have logic, science and rational thought on our side whereas the opposition only have circular reasoning, ancient mythology and idle threats of eternal damnation to offer.

We have only one thing to fear, only one thing which would reverse the tide and put us back to a worse position than before the atheist movement first took off.

As the supporters of our cause grow in number, it is increasingly likely that an individual or a small group of extremists will emerge. It would just take one nutcase to decide that words and peaceful methods are not enough, one idiot to decide that a bomb or bullet would be quicker.

If just one lunatic decides to shoot an evangelist leader or blow up a church in the name of atheism, all the good work that has been done so far will be wasted. Every religious group and evangelist would sieze this opportunity to condemn the entire atheist movement. They would say that they were right all along and atheists are evil. They would take every chance to tar all atheists with the same brush and condemn all the atheist groups as terrorists.

This is my greatest fear and I really hope that it will never happen but I feel that we must all be ready to condemn any such action in the name of atheism as loudly and to as many people as possible if it ever does.

Anyway, Sorry to start my new blog with such a depressing and downbeat post, it’s just something that’s been on my mind for a while and I feel that I need to get off my chest.

How long before some idiot ruins it?



The atheist revolution is gathering momentum, that is not in doubt.

We have the big names of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens we have groups such as RDF, FFRF, The Rational Response Squad, The Brights and many others employing a variety of strategies to put the atheist agenda forward.

There have been a number of best selling books in the last 12 months and the mass media has taken notice and started giving coverage to atheists.

The atheists are coming out of the closet and we are making progress. There is opposition but we are winning the arguments, we have logic, science and rational thought on our side whereas the opposition only have circular reasoning, ancient mythology and idle threats of eternal damnation to offer.

We have only one thing to fear, only one thing which would reverse the tide and put us back to a worse position than before the atheist movement first took off.

As the supporters of our cause grow in number, it is increasingly likely that an individual or a small group of extremists will emerge. It would just take one nutcase to decide that words and peaceful methods are not enough, one idiot to decide that a bomb or bullet would be quicker.

If just one lunatic decides to shoot an evangelist leader or blow up a church in the name of atheism, all the good work that has been done so far will be wasted. Every religious group and evangelist would sieze this opportunity to condemn the entire atheist movement. They would say that they were right all along and atheists are evil. They would take every chance to tar all atheists with the same brush and condemn all the atheist groups as terrorists.

This is my greatest fear and I really hope that it will never happen but I feel that we must all be ready to condemn any such action in the name of atheism as loudly and to as many people as possible if it ever does.

Anyway, Sorry to start my new blog with such a depressing and downbeat post, it’s just something that’s been on my mind for a while and I feel that I need to get off my chest.

Gloriously Huge Universe

Several years ago I was debating the existance of God in an online forum. The debate was pointless, as my opponent was quick to draw arbitrary "micro-evolution, not macro-evolution" lines and resort to the inerrancy of the bible to 'prove' his point of view. He was a young-earther, too. Even though the debate stagnated after a while, there was one topic I had delivered, about which I was never able to extract a response. I posted one picture, and he put a full stop on all efforts he had been making in that direction. It was a nice moment for me. What was the topic, and what was my response?

As I stated, my opponent was a young-earther. I asked how, then, were we able to see light from stars millions of light years away? Did he not believe in the speed of light? No, he responded, the speed of light was fine. But the methods used to measure the distances to the stars were 'unreliable,' and that they were in fact much closer than we had been led to believe. This was when I struck.

Then how, I asked, do you explain the Hubble Deep Field image? I included a link to the hi-res image, and pointed out that, save for a few foreground stars, every glob of light in that image represented an entire galaxy of stars. And, if they were all within 6000 light years of us, how could the individual stars in these galaxies exist, considering they must be much smaller than a star needs to be in order to maintain nuclear fusion, and how would it have enough gravity to withstand being blown up by the nuclear energy?

This was what I couldn't get a response to. There is just something very compelling about a good visual.

The original Hubble Deep Field image (hires version here) was a snapstop of a tiny piece of the sky, like looking through a tiny keyhole. If you were to look up at the night sky, the little window this was taken from would be about the size of a dime -- held 75 feet away. And it showed more than 1,500 entire galaxies. What is really incredible is that the entire universe is like this, in all directions.

The image at the right is a more recent image, the Hubble Ultra Deep Field image (breathtaking hires version here). This image was taken from a section of the sky about 1/10 the diameter of the moon, over an exposure lasting 1,000,000 seconds. It reveals more than 10,000 galaxies. Aside from the foreground stars, these are all entire galaxies with billions of stars each.

It should again be noted that this is typical throughout the sky. That means that, lurking behind the moon, is at least 1,000,000 entire galaxies. And the full moon only takes up about half of 1/1000th of 1% of the full sky (360 degrees, north and south hemisphere), or 1/200,000th of the sky. Which results in roughly 200,000,000,000 galaxies that would be, barring any obstruction, visible from the Hubble telescope at a similar acuity as the HUFD.

Folks, that's one big universe.

The next step is to try to picture how big a galaxy is. A new image from Hubble shows exactly that. It is the highest detailed image of galaxy M81 (Bode's Galaxy, about 12 million light years away, shown left) ever taken. Fabulous hires version here. Yes, every single little pinpoint of light is a star. In the center they are so dense and the galaxy is so thick that they cannot be distinguished from one another. I don't even have to calculate how many stars that is, you can just see for yourself. (I've heard that 150 billion stars is average for a galaxy)

Another neat demonstration of how big the universe is -- by showing how small we are, is here in a series of image. First, the earth compared to the other rocky planets (and Pluto). Then to the rest of the planets. Then to the sun. Then the sun is compared to other normal stars. And finally, to the very largest stars. Earth grows invisible very quickly.

I don't want to write a complete rehash of my last post on nature -- but doesn't it feel just wonderful seeing how big the universe is? How could anyone possibly believe they are "God's chosen people" after seeing how amazingly tiny we are?

Gloriously Huge Universe

Several years ago I was debating the existance of God in an online forum. The debate was pointless, as my opponent was quick to draw arbitrary "micro-evolution, not macro-evolution" lines and resort to the inerrancy of the bible to 'prove' his point of view. He was a young-earther, too. Even though the debate stagnated after a while, there was one topic I had delivered, about which I was never able to extract a response. I posted one picture, and he put a full stop on all efforts he had been making in that direction. It was a nice moment for me. What was the topic, and what was my response?

As I stated, my opponent was a young-earther. I asked how, then, were we able to see light from stars millions of light years away? Did he not believe in the speed of light? No, he responded, the speed of light was fine. But the methods used to measure the distances to the stars were 'unreliable,' and that they were in fact much closer than we had been led to believe. This was when I struck.

Then how, I asked, do you explain the Hubble Deep Field image? I included a link to the hi-res image, and pointed out that, save for a few foreground stars, every glob of light in that image represented an entire galaxy of stars. And, if they were all within 6000 light years of us, how could the individual stars in these galaxies exist, considering they must be much smaller than a star needs to be in order to maintain nuclear fusion, and how would it have enough gravity to withstand being blown up by the nuclear energy?

This was what I couldn't get a response to. There is just something very compelling about a good visual.

The original Hubble Deep Field image (hires version here) was a snapstop of a tiny piece of the sky, like looking through a tiny keyhole. If you were to look up at the night sky, the little window this was taken from would be about the size of a dime -- held 75 feet away. And it showed more than 1,500 entire galaxies. What is really incredible is that the entire universe is like this, in all directions.

The image at the right is a more recent image, the Hubble Ultra Deep Field image (breathtaking hires version here). This image was taken from a section of the sky about 1/10 the diameter of the moon, over an exposure lasting 1,000,000 seconds. It reveals more than 10,000 galaxies. Aside from the foreground stars, these are all entire galaxies with billions of stars each.

It should again be noted that this is typical throughout the sky. That means that, lurking behind the moon, is at least 1,000,000 entire galaxies. And the full moon only takes up about half of 1/1000th of 1% of the full sky (360 degrees, north and south hemisphere), or 1/200,000th of the sky. Which results in roughly 200,000,000,000 galaxies that would be, barring any obstruction, visible from the Hubble telescope at a similar acuity as the HUFD.

Folks, that's one big universe.

The next step is to try to picture how big a galaxy is. A new image from Hubble shows exactly that. It is the highest detailed image of galaxy M81 (Bode's Galaxy, about 12 million light years away, shown left) ever taken. Fabulous hires version here. Yes, every single little pinpoint of light is a star. In the center they are so dense and the galaxy is so thick that they cannot be distinguished from one another. I don't even have to calculate how many stars that is, you can just see for yourself. (I've heard that 150 billion stars is average for a galaxy)

Another neat demonstration of how big the universe is -- by showing how small we are, is here in a series of image. First, the earth compared to the other rocky planets (and Pluto). Then to the rest of the planets. Then to the sun. Then the sun is compared to other normal stars. And finally, to the very largest stars. Earth grows invisible very quickly.

I don't want to write a complete rehash of my last post on nature -- but doesn't it feel just wonderful seeing how big the universe is? How could anyone possibly believe they are "God's chosen people" after seeing how amazingly tiny we are?

Not in Kansas Anymore

For years it seems like much of the news about Intelligent Design was coming out of Kansas, especially since ID was kicked out of Dover. This is probably because I lived in Kansas at the time, but I've heard it mocked so many times I believe it is safe to say that Kansas had a national, if not international, reputation for being ID-friendly. But now the winds of change have arrived, and Dorothy and her little dog Toto have been picked up and dropped into Kentucky. And as with the travelers to Oz, what they found there was quite a different reality.

Yep, Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis are opening the Creation Museum to the public today. Or, as I've also heard it called, the Fred and Wilma Flintstone Memorial Museum. PZ has collected a good selection of quotes from various newspapers about the opening. Zachary Lynn got a sneap peek and posted his photographs of the museum in a guided online tour that's interesting to look through, if only to see the Robo-Adam and Robo-Eve. (does anyone else think that Eve looks a bit like Alanis Morissette?)

We've probably all heard stories about the museum by now, like images of a Tyrannasaurus Rex grazing in a meadow and eating leafy greens and opening coconuts with six-inch razor sharp teeth, but now there are pictures in the flesh -- and when I say in the 'flesh' I'm talking about the two skinned and bloody goats in a diorama about sacrifice. And Cain standing woefully over the inert Abel, lying bloody on the ground with a bashed in head. I think these gory shock-value images are only peppered here and there to make the 'science' seem more adult and less elementary-school level. In the same way that a producer might insert a few especially brutal or graphic scenes in order to bump a movie into an 'R' rating. Also in the same way that teenagers think that ridiculous amounts of cursing will somehow make them seem more grown up.

Fortunately there is a four-page primer by Lawrence Krauss called "Top 10 Reasons Why the Universe, the Sun, Earth, and Life are NOT 6000 years old". Something I find interesting -- and sad -- is that old-earth people calmly gather facts, data, and arguments that easily blow the young-earth view out of the water. They let the facts choose the truth. But the young-earthers simply make up stories that suit their beliefs, and let the belief choose the truth. I've read Genesis, and there was nothing in there about dinosaurs eating coconuts.

Maybe religious people would be easier to debate with if they actually knew more about their own religion! Stephen Prothero has a book called "Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know -- and Doesn't" (A book that made my wish list on Amazon as soon as I heard about it.) Did you know that less than half of the people polled could identify Genesis as the first book in the bible? More than 10 percent think that Noah's wife as Joan of Arc. And evangelicals don't know a whole lot more about the bible than non-evangelicals. Right or wrong, spreading the word is the important part, eh?

I think that about sums of the Creation Museum, too. All $27 million dollars of it.

Fluidity

One characteristic I've recently come to realize I admire greatly in people is fluidity. Religions, many traditions, and many mentalities adhere to a strict set of laws which are considered "sacred" and "timeless". However, as faults in these laws come under scrutiny, it becomes apparent that one has only three options:

1. Stick to the laws no matter the circumstance.
2. Overlook the faults and pretend they don't exist while making small adjustments to the laws to make them more acceptable.
3. Realize that the laws are man-made, time-dependent, and far from perfect, and discard them completely.

Who has the right to define how you live your life, how you treat people around you, the things you can and cannot do, or even what you can eat or drink? People try to suppress what they cannot understand or accept, their memes fight a losing battle for dominion, hindering progress and destroying generations in the process.

I always find it funny to see some narrow-minded traditionalist, or religious apologist, struggling to keep up with globalization, trying in vain to close all the holes in a sinking boat. A small rubber band, trying to stretch to contain what can no longer be contained until it ruptures. The casualties of the process, however, are children that grow up in a severely contradicting environment, children who are usually not lucky enough to escape the viruses of the mind their environment is infested with....

Fluidity

One characteristic I've recently come to realize I admire greatly in people is fluidity. Religions, many traditions, and many mentalities adhere to a strict set of laws which are considered "sacred" and "timeless". However, as faults in these laws come under scrutiny, it becomes apparent that one has only three options:

1. Stick to the laws no matter the circumstance.
2. Overlook the faults and pretend they don't exist while making small adjustments to the laws to make them more acceptable.
3. Realize that the laws are man-made, time-dependent, and far from perfect, and discard them completely.

Who has the right to define how you live your life, how you treat people around you, the things you can and cannot do, or even what you can eat or drink? People try to suppress what they cannot understand or accept, their memes fight a losing battle for dominion, hindering progress and destroying generations in the process.

I always find it funny to see some narrow-minded traditionalist, or religious apologist, struggling to keep up with globalization, trying in vain to close all the holes in a sinking boat. A small rubber band, trying to stretch to contain what can no longer be contained until it ruptures. The casualties of the process, however, are children that grow up in a severely contradicting environment, children who are usually not lucky enough to escape the viruses of the mind their environment is infested with....

Village Atheist = Village Idiot?

The jobs don't pay a lot, and you take most of your pay in self-esteem, but somebody is always trying out for village idiot or village atheist. Often they're one and the same...

-- Wesley Pruden, Revival time with the village atheist, (Washington Times)

In a classic pot-and-kettle scenario, Wesley Pruden has done disservice to the readers of the Washington Times with an irrational screed mocking atheists for writing "irrational screeds mocking those who have the faith the authors clearly envy."  The saving grace for these unfortunate atheists is that the average Times reader is probably too smart to be taken in by such drivel.

Pruden has nothing constructive to offer in his screed.  He merely calls atheists names and cites examples of atheists saying bad things about people who deserve to have bad things said about them.  This is what his article boils down to:

  • Did you know that there are atheists living among you?
  • Atheists are idiots.
  • Atheists hate people of faith because they don't have faith but desperately want it.
  • Atheists say the darndest things.
  • Atheists are getting more attention than I am and it pisses me off.

Mr. Pruden apparently doesn't concern himself with the facts regarding persons atheists have spoken ill of, or even facts about the atheists themselves.  I mean really, who among us who has actually read The God Delusion would use the word "irrational" to describe it?  I've been struggling with the book myself and have found it incredibly dense, repetitive, and belaboring of points, but irrational?  Rationality is the coin of the atheist realm.  The author has got it backwards... it is faith that is irrational.

The article is clearly calculated to incense the readership, as opposed to communicate any meaningful argument as to why atheists are idiots, or naughty, or whatever else he's trying to say.  He notes Christopher Hitchens' reference to Mother Theresa as "the ghoul of Calcutta", without bothering to say why.  He notes Pulitzer prize winner Paul Greenberg's mention of Reverend Falwell's one "decent" moment on record, without bothering to say why.  Apparently the "why" doesn't concern the unencumbered-by-a-Pulitzer-Prize-Pruden.

A rational person will find little of interest in this yawn-inspiring rant against atheism, except perhaps an appreciation of the irony by which the author reveals himself to be the shrill irrational caricature that he tries to paint atheists as.  Beyond that, there's nothing to see here.

Comments for all

I have now enabled comments for all people, regardless of whether they have a blogger account. A few rules though. Comments should be relevant to the post, and all constructive criticism is welcome. Just sheer hate-mail will be removed and posted elsewhere for mine (and others) amusement. Your comment may be removed at my discretion (though I will try to avoid this). Sorry to sound Orwellian about this, but I want a bit of decorum on this blog. Many thanks.

Comments for all

I have now enabled comments for all people, regardless of whether they have a blogger account. A few rules though. Comments should be relevant to the post, and all constructive criticism is welcome. Just sheer hate-mail will be removed and posted elsewhere for mine (and others) amusement. Your comment may be removed at my discretion (though I will try to avoid this). Sorry to sound Orwellian about this, but I want a bit of decorum on this blog. Many thanks.

More additions to the PA top Technorati ranks table

The top technorati ranks table for Planet Atheism members has been improved again. :) In addition to showing the Technorati rank, number of incoming links (from Technorati as well), and Google Pagerank, the table now shows Alexa ranks as well.

You can now also click on any of the above column titles to sort the table by that particular value/rank. Incoming links and Pagerank are "the more, the merrier", while Technorati rank and Alexa rank are "the lower, the better", so sorting takes that into account.

A note of warning: I've mentioned before that you shouldn't really take any of these ranks too seriously, and this is especially true for the Alexa ranks. Alexa is a nice idea (it's the only one that measures traffic instead of incoming links), but it has the following problems:
  • it only counts hits if the user has installed either the Alexa toolbar (for Internet Explorer) or the SearchStatus Firefox extension (I recommend the latter, since, as everyone knows, MSIE sucks), and
  • it often lumps all subdomains for a particular domain together (i.e. doesn't distinguish between aaa.domain.com and bbb.domain.com, even though they may be totally unrelated). It apparently has some hard coded exceptions for some (not all) blogspot.com blogs... but the values aren't really reliable. Still, you can use it to measure the changes in traffic for one site.
Incidentally, the application I've coded (and have been improving) to generate this table from a list of blogs is almost ready for public release. :)

More additions to the PA top Technorati ranks table

The top technorati ranks table for Planet Atheism members has been improved again. :) In addition to showing the Technorati rank, number of incoming links (from Technorati as well), and Google Pagerank, the table now shows Alexa ranks as well.

You can now also click on any of the above column titles to sort the table by that particular value/rank. Incoming links and Pagerank are "the more, the merrier", while Technorati rank and Alexa rank are "the lower, the better", so sorting takes that into account.

A note of warning: I've mentioned before that you shouldn't really take any of these ranks too seriously, and this is especially true for the Alexa ranks. Alexa is a nice idea (it's the only one that measures traffic instead of incoming links), but it has the following problems:
  • it only counts hits if the user has installed either the Alexa toolbar (for Internet Explorer) or the SearchStatus Firefox extension (I recommend the latter, since, as everyone knows, MSIE sucks), and
  • it often lumps all subdomains for a particular domain together (i.e. doesn't distinguish between aaa.domain.com and bbb.domain.com, even though they may be totally unrelated). It apparently has some hard coded exceptions for some (not all) blogspot.com blogs... but the values aren't really reliable. Still, you can use it to measure the changes in traffic for one site.
Incidentally, the application I've coded (and have been improving) to generate this table from a list of blogs is almost ready for public release. :)

How creative…

and of course i say this with a hint of sarcasm.... checked my email this morning to find that I had a new comment on one of my older blogs titled "Do you believe" from Victoria. I thought it was kinda funny, and figured I would respond to it here. From her writing and spelling I figure she's probably still in high school.
Listen dude, God is real and if u wanna have a convo about it, i'll straighten all the insucurities u have about the bible.
First let me say, I have no problems having a "convo" about it, but in all fairness I doubt you will "straighten all my "insucurities" about the bible. I have no insecurities about the bible. Calling the bible fiction and worth reading does not seem to me to be an insecurity, it's simply my honest opinion.
It is ashame that u r so stubborn and unsure about the bible as well as urself.
I'm not unsure about myself.. I did not think i was being "stubborn". I'm quite willing to change my views... Given enough proof :)
No matter what u believe, I promise, u will know the truth one day, and God WILL give u a second chance.
Ok? I've noticed this seems to be a common "physiological" game with those of faith. It's an interesting trick... but really does not mean much... It would be like me saying "I promise you... one day you will doubt".
U have alot of knowledge, now use it in a useful and beneficial way.
Thank you for the kind compliment, but everyone has the capability to learn unfortunately many do not want to.
u probly won't listen, but at least u now know SOME truth.
I have listened, but you have not provided me with any truth unless you consider your promise to be a truth. Thanks for your comment, but I won't be contacting you to enlighten me of my "insucurities".....

How creative…

and of course i say this with a hint of sarcasm.... checked my email this morning to find that I had a new comment on one of my older blogs titled "Do you believe" from Victoria. I thought it was kinda funny, and figured I would respond to it here. From her writing and spelling I figure she's probably still in high school.
Listen dude, God is real and if u wanna have a convo about it, i'll straighten all the insucurities u have about the bible.
First let me say, I have no problems having a "convo" about it, but in all fairness I doubt you will "straighten all my "insucurities" about the bible. I have no insecurities about the bible. Calling the bible fiction and worth reading does not seem to me to be an insecurity, it's simply my honest opinion.
It is ashame that u r so stubborn and unsure about the bible as well as urself.
I'm not unsure about myself.. I did not think i was being "stubborn". I'm quite willing to change my views... Given enough proof :)
No matter what u believe, I promise, u will know the truth one day, and God WILL give u a second chance.
Ok? I've noticed this seems to be a common "physiological" game with those of faith. It's an interesting trick... but really does not mean much... It would be like me saying "I promise you... one day you will doubt".
U have alot of knowledge, now use it in a useful and beneficial way.
Thank you for the kind compliment, but everyone has the capability to learn unfortunately many do not want to.
u probly won't listen, but at least u now know SOME truth.
I have listened, but you have not provided me with any truth unless you consider your promise to be a truth. Thanks for your comment, but I won't be contacting you to enlighten me of my "insucurities".....

Paring Down The Prepuce II / Fred Phelps Sings!

Astute readers may note that today is Friday. More astute readers may note that today's post is thus two days late on the every-Wednesday schedule that this blog has followed for most of its existence. This is by design, because I have decided to downshift Holy Prepuce! from a weekly to a whenever-I-damn-well-feel-like-it-and-no-whining-because-it's-free schedule.

This change will, of course, inconvenience those among you who visit the blog on the web each Wednesday for your weekly toke. Your dedication makes me happy with each mid-week spike on the usage stats, and I apologize. But I can promise that if you sign up for the email service, or subscribe to the site feed, updates will be yours as they happen.

Two factors have influenced this decision. First, I am starting a new job and so will have different demands on my time and the predictability thereof. Second, I have come to realize that arbitrary self-discipline is overrated; and it is sometimes OK to peel off the gimp mask and whisper the safeword.

Now then:

The mad, mad world of virulent anti-gay Christianism got a little more fun Wednesday, when a student at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University was arrested for cooking up a batch of homemade napalm in preparation for Falwell's funeral. Mark David Uhl allegedly planned to use the explosives against the Rev. Fred Phelps and his congregants from the Westboro Baptist Church.

Westboro Baptist, you may remember, is the organization that attends gay funerals toting banners with such charming slogans as "AIDS cures fags," and "Fags die, God laughs." The group also protests at productions of The Laramie Project, and maintains an online clock ticking off the days that Matthew Sheppard, the young gay man on whose murder the play is based, has been in Hell.

More recently, the church has taken to protesting at the funerals of U.S. service members killed in Iraq, on the theory that God smites soldiers out of hatred for America's tolerance of homosexuality. Of course, there can be little doubt that Phelps' vitriol stems from his own repressed homosexuality, since no human being in history outside of a Queer Studies department has spent as much time obsessing on the subject of gayness.

In any event, Westboro Baptist announced that it would protest at the funeral of Jerry Falwell. Now, you might think that Phelps would be a fan of Falwell, fellow travelers as they were on the anti-gay hate-mongering circuit. But there you would be wrong. According to Phelps, Falwell "split Hell wide open the instant he died" because he espoused "false doctrines like 'God loves everyone,'" and believed in free will. (Phelps is an old-school Calvinist and as such believes in strict predestination.) So, Westboro planned a protest, Falwell supporters planned a counter-protest, and Mark David Uhl planned to napalm the whole thing.

But all of this is old news for finger-on-the-pulse information mavens such as Holy Prepuce! readers. What may interest you more is something I discovered while browsing through Westboro Baptist's website, GodHatesAmerica.com. (Lest you think the church insular, it also maintains GodHatesCanada.com, and GodHatesSweden.com.) No, it's not their list of the recently-damned-to-Hell; although that is certainly informative, including as it does Coretta Scott King, Gerald Ford, and all 31 Virginia Tech shooting victims.

What caught my eye--and ear--is that Westboro Baptist has a choir. And you will be pleased to know that this august ensemble has made its recordings available on the Internet! So as a public service and for your listening enjoyment, I present Westboro Baptist's adaptations of several patriotic standards. (Clicking on a title will launch the corresponding .mp3 recording.)

OriginalWestboro Baptist Version
God Bless AmericaGod Hates America
Proud to Be an AmericanAshamed to be an American
This Land is Our LandThis Land is Fag Land
America the BeautifulWicked Land of Sodomites
The United States Marine Corps AnthemSemper Fi Semper Fags

Classic!

Paring Down The Prepuce II / Fred Phelps Sings!

Astute readers may note that today is Friday. More astute readers may note that today's post is thus two days late on the every-Wednesday schedule that this blog has followed for most of its existence. This is by design, because I have decided to downshift Holy Prepuce! from a weekly to a whenever-I-damn-well-feel-like-it-and-no-whining-because-it's-free schedule.

This change will, of course, inconvenience those among you who visit the blog on the web each Wednesday for your weekly toke. Your dedication makes me happy with each mid-week spike on the usage stats, and I apologize. But I can promise that if you sign up for the email service, or subscribe to the site feed, updates will be yours as they happen.

Two factors have influenced this decision. First, I am starting a new job and so will have different demands on my time and the predictability thereof. Second, I have come to realize that arbitrary self-discipline is overrated; and it is sometimes OK to peel off the gimp mask and whisper the safeword.

Now then:

The mad, mad world of virulent anti-gay Christianism got a little more fun Wednesday, when a student at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University was arrested for cooking up a batch of homemade napalm in preparation for Falwell's funeral. Mark David Uhl allegedly planned to use the explosives against the Rev. Fred Phelps and his congregants from the Westboro Baptist Church.

Westboro Baptist, you may remember, is the organization that attends gay funerals toting banners with such charming slogans as "AIDS cures fags," and "Fags die, God laughs." The group also protests at productions of The Laramie Project, and maintains an online clock ticking off the days that Matthew Sheppard, the young gay man on whose murder the play is based, has been in Hell.

More recently, the church has taken to protesting at the funerals of U.S. service members killed in Iraq, on the theory that God smites soldiers out of hatred for America's tolerance of homosexuality. Of course, there can be little doubt that Phelps' vitriol stems from his own repressed homosexuality, since no human being in history outside of a Queer Studies department has spent as much time obsessing on the subject of gayness.

In any event, Westboro Baptist announced that it would protest at the funeral of Jerry Falwell. Now, you might think that Phelps would be a fan of Falwell, fellow travelers as they were on the anti-gay hate-mongering circuit. But there you would be wrong. According to Phelps, Falwell "split Hell wide open the instant he died" because he espoused "false doctrines like 'God loves everyone,'" and believed in free will. (Phelps is an old-school Calvinist and as such believes in strict predestination.) So, Westboro planned a protest, Falwell supporters planned a counter-protest, and Mark David Uhl planned to napalm the whole thing.

But all of this is old news for finger-on-the-pulse information mavens such as Holy Prepuce! readers. What may interest you more is something I discovered while browsing through Westboro Baptist's website, GodHatesAmerica.com. (Lest you think the church insular, it also maintains GodHatesCanada.com, and GodHatesSweden.com.) No, it's not their list of the recently-damned-to-Hell; although that is certainly informative, including as it does Coretta Scott King, Gerald Ford, and all 31 Virginia Tech shooting victims.

What caught my eye--and ear--is that Westboro Baptist has a choir. And you will be pleased to know that this august ensemble has made its recordings available on the Internet! So as a public service and for your listening enjoyment, I present Westboro Baptist's adaptations of several patriotic standards. (Clicking on a title will launch the corresponding .mp3 recording.)

OriginalWestboro Baptist Version
God Bless AmericaGod Hates America
Proud to Be an AmericanAshamed to be an American
This Land is Our LandThis Land is Fag Land
America the BeautifulWicked Land of Sodomites
The United States Marine Corps AnthemSemper Fi Semper Fags

Classic!