My 361st favorite band is Fever Ray, the solo project of Knife’s Karin Dreijer-Andersson, which, like Knife, offers creepy, atmospheric electronic songs like this one:
Your Thoughts?
Posted in Indie Music, Music, Music Videos, Videos Tagged: "When I Grow Up", Electronic Music, Fever Ray, Karin Dreijer-Anderrson, Knife, Swedish Music, Women Singers
Mark Twain has always been one of my favorite authors; The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn were among my favorite books when I was a child. Tonight, I want to share some snippets from a work that I read just a couple of months ago, Letters From the Earth.
Satan, who was overheard making fun of the Creator and his projects, has been banished to Earth for a period of time. During his exile, he writes a series of letters to his angelic friends in which he describes his observations of humankind and the atrocious beliefs that they have concocted about God, life, heaven and hell. Twain wrote this book in 1909, but it was not published until 1962. The reason for the delay was Twain’s daughter concern that the book’s iconoclastic nature would damage her father’s reputation. What follows will give you just a small taste of the delightful treat in store if you choose to read the entire book (it’s quite short and can easily be read in one sitting).
This is a strange place, an extraordinary place, and interesting. There is nothing resembling it at home. The people are all insane, the other animals are all insane, the earth is insane, Nature itself is insane. Man is a marvelous curiosity. When he is at his very, very best he is a sort of low grade nickel-plated angel; at his worst he is unspeakable, unimaginable; and first and last and all the time he is a sarcasm. Yet he blandly and in all sincerity calls himself the “noblest work of God.” This is the truth I am telling you. And this is not a new idea with him, he has talked it through all the ages, and believed it. Believed it, and found nobody among all his race to laugh at it.
Moreover — if I may put another strain upon you — he thinks he is the Creator’s pet. He believes the Creator is proud of him; he even believes the Creator loves him; has a passion for him; sits up nights to admire him; yes, and watch over him and keep him out of trouble. He prays to Him, and thinks He listens. Isn’t it a quaint idea? Fills his prayers with crude and bald and florid flatteries of Him, and thinks He sits and purrs over these extravagancies and enjoys them. He prays for help, and favor, and protection, every day; and does it with hopefulness and confidence, too, although no prayer of his has ever been answered. The daily affront, the daily defeat, do not discourage him, he goes on praying just the same….
One of his principle religions is called the Christian. A sketch of it will interest you. It sets forth in detail in a book containing two million words, called the Old and New Testaments. Also it has another name — The Word of God….
It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies.
This Bible is built mainly out of the fragments of older Bibles that had their day and crumbled to ruin. So it noticeably lacks in originality, necessarily. Its three or four most imposing and impressive events all happened in earlier Bibles; all its best precepts and rules of conduct came also from those Bibles….
That innocent Bible tells about the Creation. Of what — the universe? Yes, the universe. In six days!
God did it. He did not call it the universe — that name is modern. His whole attention was upon this world. He constructed it in five days — and then? It took him only one day to make twenty million suns and eighty million planets!
What were they for — according to this idea? To furnish light for this little toy-world. That was his whole purpose; he had no other….
The best minds will tell you that when a man has begotten a child he is morally bound to tenderly care for it, protect it from hurt, shield it from disease, clothe it, feed it, bear with its waywardness, lay no hand upon it save in kindness and for its own good, and never in any case inflict upon it a wanton cruelty. God’s treatment of his earthly children, every day and every night, is the exact opposite of all that, yet those best minds warmly justify these crimes, condone them, excuse them, and indignantly refuse to regard them as crimes at all, when he commits them….
God banished Adam and Eve from the Garden, and eventually assassinated them. All for disobeying a command which he had no right to utter. But he did not stop there, as you will see. He has one code of morals for himself, and quite another for his children. He requires his children to deal justly — and gently — with offenders, and forgive them seventy-and-seven times; whereas he deals neither justly nor gently with anyone, and he did not forgive the ignorant and thoughtless first pair of juveniles even their first small offense and say, “You may go free this time, and I will give you another chance.”
On the contrary! He elected to punish their children, all through the ages to the end of time, for a trifling offense committed by others before they were born. He is punishing them yet….
The rest of the book continues with Twain’s scathing indictment of Christianity and its god. He discusses the Noah’s Ark fable, the biblical basis for misogyny, the Old and New Testament gods (as Twain tells it, the OT god was cruel, but it was the NT’s gentle Jesus, meek and mild who really developed the idea of hell) and various other wonders of Christian belief. If you enjoy religious criticism that hits sharply, and frequently hits the funny bone, you’ll love Letters From the Earth.
– the chaplain
Posted in atheism, atheist inspiration, humor, literature
Retired Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney:
I can’t put my own view any better than David Brooks and Glenn Greenwald already have.
The Constitution is grounded in the premise that there are other values and priorities more important than mere Safety. Even though they knew that doing so would help murderers and other dangerous and vile criminals evade capture, the Framers banned the Government from searching homes without probable cause, prohibited compelled self-incrimination, double jeopardy and convictions based on hearsay, and outlawed cruel and unusual punishment. That’s because certain values — privacy, due process, limiting the potential for abuse of government power — were more important than mere survival and safety. A central calculation of the Constitution was that we insist upon privacy, liberty and restraints on government power even when doing so means we live with less safety and a heightened risk of danger and death. And, of course, the Revolutionary War against the then-greatest empire on earth was waged by people who risked their lives and their fortunes in pursuit of liberty, precisely because there are other values that outweigh mere survival and safety.
These are the calculations that are now virtually impossible to find in our political discourse. It is fear, and only fear, that predominates. No other competing values are recognized. We have Chris Matthews running around shrieking that he’s scared of kung-fu-wielding Terrorists. Michael Chertoff is demanding that we stop listening to “privacy ideologues” – i.e., that there should be no limits on Government’s power to invade and monitor and scrutinize. Republican leaders have spent the decade preaching that only Government-provided Safety, not the Constitution, matters. All in response to this week’s single failed terrorist attack, there are — as always — hysterical calls that we start more wars, initiate racial profiling, imprison innocent people indefinitely, and torture even more indiscriminately. These are the by-products of the weakness and panic and paralyzing fear that Americans have been fed in the name of Terrorism, continuously for a full decade now.
Reducing the citizenry to a frightened puddle of passivity, hysteria and a child-like expectation of Absolute Safety is irrevocable and far more consequential than any specific new laws. Fear is always the enabling force of authoritarianism: the desire to vest unlimited power in political authority in exchange for promises of protection.
During the middle third of the 20th century, Americans had impressive faith in their own institutions. It was not because these institutions always worked well. The Congress and the Federal Reserve exacerbated the Great Depression. The military made horrific mistakes during World War II, which led to American planes bombing American troops and American torpedoes sinking ships with American prisoners of war.But there was a realistic sense that human institutions are necessarily flawed. History is not knowable or controllable. People should be grateful for whatever assistance that government can provide and had better do what they can to be responsible for their own fates.
That mature attitude seems to have largely vanished. Now we seem to expect perfection from government and then throw temper tantrums when it is not achieved. We seem to be in the position of young adolescents — who believe mommy and daddy can take care of everything, and then grow angry and cynical when it becomes clear they can’t.
Your Thoughts?
Posted in Authoritarianism, Civil Liberties, Islam, Law, Law & Politics, Politics, Religious Rights Tagged: David Brooks, FOX News, Glenn Greenwald, Julie Banderas, Lieutenant General Thomas McInterney, Terrorism
On December 25th I will maintain a tradition I started a few years ago, celebrating Christmas day with nonbelievers via webcam, and you're invited! I'll be joined by longtime RRS moderator and friend Shaunphilly and his girlfriend Seana, who was a Christian before she met Shaun. Christmas can be a depressing day if you're a non-believer, especially if you feel alienated or unwelcome at festivities of a more religious nature. We look forward to bringing together a large group of non-believers who want to hang out, blaspheme, and exchange stories of our religious past. This is a gathering in both live text form and video format. We encourage you to hook up your webcam as we can have up to 6 people on webcam at once. Christians are welcome to visit as well!
You'll need an account with http://www.stickam.com If you don't have one, get it now. It's free!
The party will happen in this room: http://www.rationalresponders.com/rrs_webcam_room
If you have a problem with that page you can also view it here: http://www.stickam.com/sapient
Here is the schedule of events:
1 est: The chatroom will open to members of stickam
2 est: Christmas related youtube video presentation along with text chatting. I'll show a conglomeration of youtube videos dealing with the history of Christmas intertwined with some atheist comedy and blasphemy. I've prepared over 3.5 hours of youtube videos, giving you the chance to comment on these videos live, while exchanging stories. If you have a favorite Christmas video you want me to show, you have to link to it by Tuesday the 22nd as a response to this post!
6 pm est: Shaunphilly and his girlfriend will arrive at my home and we'll all appear on webcam. At that point we will open up the extra camera slots to as many people as possible. We will talk about a variety of issues including but not limited to the origins of Christmas, my purpose of Christmas project, the tree of knowledge, and more. During our broadcast we will order a traditional ChristMyAss Sushi and General Tso's Chicken dinner. We invite you to eat your ChristMyAss dinner with us!
9 pm est: In the past we've shown The God Who Wasn't There Movie but we've never shown the commentary track version, this time we will.
Once again the festivities will be here:
http://www.rationalresponders.com/rrs_webcam_room
FACEBOOK EVENT: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=257573686280&ref=mf
So, the second Nine Lessons and Carols for Godless People show took place last night, minus the previous evening's climate change denial controversy (which has even made it into today's Sun and Daily Mail). Johnny Ball played it safe this time, albeit with a nod to earlier events ("It's cold outside - must be climate change"), while one of the clear highlights has to have been graphic novel legend Alan Moore explaining the rational basis for his worship of a second-century Roman snake god named Glycon. I've nicked this pic of Moore taken by Mr Skeptics in the Pub Sid Rodrigues from the side of the stage (sorry Sid!) - maybe you can just make out his fantastic pink robe/ magical overcoat, which he explained was fashioned from a handmade Indian sari, specially for his daughter's wedding.Am assuming that calling a show with Alan Moore "Godless" is the epitome of irony. (@Mikey_X)
Very much enjoying #godlesschristmas. John Otway was hilarious and Johnny Ball behaved himself. (@melstarrs)
Johnny Ball's reputation redeemed with better judged Galileo routine this eve. Excellent show with so many highlights. (@class_war)
Excellent first half-hard to pick a best bit, though seeing Alan Moore was a privilege. How are they going to follow that? (@sarlitchin)So, as you can see, Alan Moore was the major talking point. Remember - come back this afternoon to see our interview with him backstage.
Regardless of what Johnny Ball said yesterday, I still prefer his optimism to Monbiot's 'fuck humanity' column this week. (@JamesGraham)
#GodlessChristmas an absolute triumph so far. Huge banter in green room. Just heard Alan Moore say "that was when I was on acid... (@njhamer - member of the Mystery Fax Machine Orchestra)
I've got two new posts up tonight, the first is my opening shot at Pastor Rick Warren and The Purpose of Christmas.
The second post is long overdue and is a summation covering the Ray Comfort plagiarism in his Origin of Species bullshit.
My opening post here about The Purpose of Christmas is here.
The RRS thread on Comfort plagiarizing is here.
I turned off commenting for this blog post. If you want to post comments, please do so at The Purpose of Christmas or WOTMwatchdog.
Finally, we have sorted out the Call for Papers for the conference that is the highlight of Dr. Jim’s academic year! Horray!
I started the Research in Religious Studies Conference for R. S. Students at the U of L in 2003, and it has been a glorious success. Some years we can get as many as 40 papers presented by undergraduates and MA students from all across Western Canada, North West U.S.A. and beyond.We have had students from Vanderbilt Divinity School, University of Toronto and even further afield. It all takes place this time over the first Saturday and Sunday in May 2010.
It is an absolutely wonderful experience for the students and a wonder experience for me and my colleagues. Imagine ending the term listening to some of the best undergrad papers of the year presented with an often surprising level of professionalism. The students who come are usually the most engaged and interested, and it shows in their work. It is quite nice to see how good student’s work can be one they take their professors’ comments to heart and rewrite their essays for presentation. It really builds their confidence, especially for the undergrads looking to start graduate study soon.
We will consider any paper from an undergraduate, Masters level or recent graduates that follows a secular academic approach towards understanding any aspect of any religious tradition, practice or belief. What kind of papers we actually get is determined to a large degree by which upper-level seminars are taught by professors willing to advertise the conference that year. We have had a lot of papers on modern Christianity, religion and the arts, Buddhism and many more that have been very hard to classify. I would like to see more on Islam, modern and medieval Judaism, and Hebrew Bible. Anyway, if anyone is interested or wants more information, just contact the organizing committee at rsresearch.conf@uleth.ca.
Accommodations are on campus, and two nights should be booked (last year I think it was about $45 per night). We try to keep the registration fee as low as possible and it includes a continental breakfast for the Saturday and Sunday and lunch Saturday. The last papers is usually around 11:30 or so on Sunday.
This year, our keynote speaker on the Saturday banquet will be Dr. Christine Mitchell of St. Andrew’s College, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon SK.
Please feel free to post, repost, praise and advertise widely.
For a copy of the poster in PDF format, go here:
The conference website still needs some tweaking but it should be pretty much functional in a few days.
GO HERE for the submission forms, etc.
Here is some information on what the RRS meeting is all about:
How is conference organized?
The Research in Religious Studies Conference is modeled on those hosted by the premier professional learned societies in religious studies: the American Academy of Religion, Society of Biblical Literature, and Canadian Society for the Study of Religion, albeit with some important changes.
These conferences are typically organized into a set of “sessions” each featuring three or four presenters. Each presenter is given a specific amount of time to make her or his presentation and to allow for questions and discussions. Our conference follows the general tradition of 30 minutes per presentation, which means about 20 minutes for the actual paper and 10 for comments.
Sometimes, students suggest specific topics for a round table discussion, and we are always willing to hear ideas for those, too!
Each session has a presider, who introduces the speakers and oversees the discussion period. The presider is also the timekeeper, and may well cut a speaker off who goes over the time limit. The presider is also supposed to defuse any emotional showdowns, but having to do this is a very rare occurrence for us.
The sessions are organized on specific topics and 3 or 4 sessions may be going on at once. For most professional conferences, would-be presenters apply for the specific session, and only the 3 or 4 best ones are selected. This is not what we do, however. We referee the paper proposals first, and do the best we can to make relevant sessions out of the papers we have accepted. This means grouping the papers can be a very “creative” enterprise.
What are conference papers?
Academic conferences are not simply about sharing your views, but your hard work.
Conference papers present the results of formal research and generally have a lot of similarities to the kinds of papers you may have written for post-graduate or upper-level undergraduate courses. They differ in some ways as well, but if you’ve ever put together a good term paper, you are well on your way!
We do not expect you to write something new for our conference, but to rework a paper you have written or are writing for a class. In the very least, this involves getting the length right for the time allotted, and tweaking your wording so that the paper is easy to understand orally.
Why bother?
Many scholars use conference paper to “test-fly” the conclusions of their research and to open key elements of a larger project to public scrutiny so they can fix weaknesses in it before submitting their work for publication. The Research in Religious Studies Conference seems to work the other way around, with the conference presentation generally coming after the “real” test of submitting a paper to a professor for a grade. Looks are deceiving, however. Academic work is a process. There is a lot to learn by rewriting a good paper in view of professor’s comments to see just how good it can be. And who knows, you may still get the conference paper published!
What is the conference atmosphere like?
This can vary widely, but it is rather different from that of a class or seminar. On the one hand, our meeting has a certain formality to its organization and scheduling, and so you do not have the intimacy of a familiar class environment. On the other hand, on inter-personal levels, it is very laidback and mutually supportive.
In all likelihood you have never seen many of the folks in the audience before and have not had most of a semester to become familiar with your professor’s expectations. In a conference, it is between you and your peers. Although you are the expert in your particular topic, you are not there simply to teach but to convince others that what you have learned is academically credible while learning from your well-educated audience.
Still, there is ample opportunity for meeting people, making friends and so forth, so don’t be on edge the whole time. Remember, most of the people coming are doing a paper themselves, so they are just as self-conscious as you!
How do I suggest a paper?
Go to the conference website and follow the links there to submit the title and an abstract (short summary) of what your paper is about on the online form. You do NOT have to submit the whole paper!
How will my proposed paper be evaluated?
All of the paper proposals are evaluated for how well they convince the reader of the following:
1) The topic concerns something of interest concerning the academic study of religion, widely conceived. Papers from a wide array of academic disciplines are welcome, but the conference is not a suitable venue for papers expounding confessional or faith perspectives.
2) The author appears familiar with the most important scholarship regarding the subject area.
3) The paper appears to be based on solid and thorough research and follows an academically sound method of approaching its subject.
4) The abstract shows that the author can communicate ideas well.
We will take into account the level of the student proposing a paper. Many students will find we accept the proposal as submitted. Some, however, may be asked to rework the proposal in light of concerns we may have over clarity, approach, etc. typos and the like. Please note: not all papers will be accepted!
Sadly, we do not have the resources to provide financial assistance for travel or accommodations.
HERE for the submission forms, etc.
Amazon just sent me word that of a special deal to pass on to you. As an amazon associate I'm getting a bonus this weekend for your purchases, through the end of shopping on Monday. You're also getting more discounts. Amazon has tons of black friday - cyber monday deals and they're all available here: Black Friday - Cyber Monday Amazon Shopping to support RRS
Monday November 23, 2009
09:00-11:00Symposium III: Theistic Evolution
Chair: Michael Bourgeois
09:00-09:40
Bernard Lightman (York University)
Christian Evolutionists in the U.S., 1860-1900
09:40-10:20
Michael Ruse (Florida State University)
Are Science and Religion Compatible and If So, Why?
10:20-11:00
Denis O. Lamoureux (University of Alberta)
Darwinian Theological Insights: Toward an Intellectually Fulfilled Theism
11:15-12:45
Session 2.i: Acceptances and Denials
Chair: David Smillie
11:15-11:45
Fermin Fulda (University of Toronto)
Against Fodor Against Darwinism
11:45-12:15
Stefaan Blanke (Ghent University)
"A million guesses strung together:" Creationist Denial of the Science Behind Evolutionary Theory
12:15-12:45
Daniel A. Newman (University of Toronto)
The Rhetoric of Probability: How Darwin Overcame the Argument from Design
11:15-12:45
Session 2.ii: Historical Receptions
Chair: Jaipreet Virdi
11:15-11:45
John Court (University of Toronto)
Darwinian Evolution's First Fifty Years of Impact
on Botany at the University of Toronto. 1859 to 1909
11:45-12:15
David M. Steffes (Arizona State University)
Population Ecology and Evolution: Darwin's Origin and the
Modern Synthesis of the 1940s and 50s
12:15-12:45
Kevin Pent (York University)
Julian Huxley's 'Apogee of Species': Darwin's 'Man' Comes of Age
11:15-12:45
Session 2.iii: A Brave New Darwin
Chair: Chris Belanger
11:15-11:45
Peter Fedor (Comenius University)
Advances in Artificial Intelligence in Species Identification
11:45-12:15
Wybo Houkes (Edinhoven University of Technology)
Hypothesis Testing in Artefact Evolution
12:15-12:45
Laura Landen (Queen's University)
Natural Selection, The Intentional Stance, and Mirror Neuron Research
12:45-13:30 Lunch Break
13:40-15:40
Symposium IV: Species
Chair: Ronald de Sousa
13:40-1420
John Beatty (University of British Columbia)
Darwin on Species
14:20-15:00
Kevin de Queiroz (Natural Museum of National History; Smithsonian)
Charles Darwin and the Evolution of the Species Concept
15:00-15:40
Marc Ereshefsky (University of Calgary)
Mystery of Mysteries: Darwin and the Species Problem
15:45-16:45
Keynote Address: Michael Ruse (Florida State University)
Is Darwinism Past its “Sell-By” Date?
16:45-18:15
Session 3.i: Naturalism
Chair: Curtis Forbes
16:45-17:15
Jason Marsh (University of Western Ontario)
Darwinism and Divine Hiddenness
17:15-17:45
Khaldoun Sweis (Olive-Harvey College)
Philosophical Paradoxs of Darwin Evolutionary Naturalism
17:45-18:15
Maarten Boudry (Ghent University)
Methodological Naturalism as an Intrinsic Property of Science:
A Grist to the Mill of Intelligent Design Theory
16:45-18:15
Session 3.ii: Reconstructing Darwinism
Chair: Erich Weidenhammer
16:45-17:15
Peter Gildenhuys (Lafayette College)
Putting the Struggle for Existence to Work
17:15-17:45
Katharine Browne (University of Toronto)
A Darwinian theory of Games
17:45-18:15
Sarah Winter (University of Connecticut Storrs)
Species as Value: Biosemiotics in Darwin's Origin and Saussurian Linguistics
16:45-18:15
Session 3.iii: Applying Darwinism
Chair: Mike Stuart
16:45-17:15
Marion Blute (University of Toronto at Mississauga)
Darwinism in the Social Sciences Today
17:15-17:45
Howard M. Huynh (Acadia University)
In the Footsteps of Darwin: The Value of Scientific Collecting in
Biodiversity Research and Conservation
17:45-18:15
Joel Velasco (Stanford University)
The Tree of Life: From Darwin to Today
18:15-19:15
Keynote Address: Evelyn Fox Keller
(Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Darwin as the Newton of a Blade of Grass
Malcolm Trosclair said...
Thanks so much for spelling my name right and linking to my blog post
"A New Short Bus Rider Malcolm Trosclair"
http://lastdaysrevival.blogspot.com/2009/11/new-short-bus-rider-malcolm-trosclair.html
The funny thing is that your linking to the video "Dual Citizens - Domestic Enemies?" is probably one of the most important pieces of hardcore truth you have ever published. Perhaps one day, one of your visitors will wake up to the truth because of it.
I'll be praying for your salvation and for you to come to the knowledge of the truth in these other areas.
Sincerely,
Malcolm Trosclair
November 18, 2009 9:39:00 PM CST
Malcolm Trosclair said...
Thanks for asking!
If you watch these three videos you will have many of your questions answered. If on the other hand you aren't interested in learning anything, because you think you already know it all, then our conversation will be a short one.
Forbidden Knowledge: Jack Otto Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66zOgVAnIgE
"The Other Israel" Ted Pike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuR1yntPBss&feature=related
Terror Storm (2 hours 14 minutes)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3372070486365630700&q=terror+storm&total=397&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=9%3Cbr%20/%3E%3Cbr%20/%3E#
Malcolm Trosclair said...
You said I was a “nobody”, so why do you want my opinion when you can have real evidence at the click of a mouse. What are you afraid of?
Larry "Silversteen" admits on a PBS Special on 9/11 that they decided to "pull" building 7. Pull is one of several terms used in the demolition industry for destroying a building by controlled demolition explosives.
Controlled Demolition of Building 7 Admitted On PBS (10 min)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9b4D-aO3zY
The controlled demolition was done using a high tech explosive known as nanothermite, which has been recently found by a number of scientist around the world who have examined the dust from ground zero.
A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust ( english subtitles )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o
9/11 Inside Job - The Most Damning Evidence Yet!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezIU6ZxYU3A&feature=related
The man who was the head of all American Military Intelligence says 9/11 was a fraud.
General of all American Intelligence: 911 was a fraud!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daNr_TrBw6E&feature=related
After you have watched these clips, feel free to express your opinion about them, or ask specific questions relating to what you watched. Until you do that, I will not devote any more of my time to this conversation, but I will pray for you, like it or not.
Malcolm
You said I was a “nobody”, so why do you want my opinion when you can have real evidence at the click of a mouse. What are you afraid of?
This is a true story. It is the summer of 1983. Major General Albert Stubblebine III is sitting behind his desk in Arlington, Virginia, and he is staring at his wall, upon which hang his numerous military awards. They detail a long and distinguished career. He is the United States Army's chief of intelligence, with sixteen thousand soldiers under his command. He controls the army's signals intelligence, their photographic and technical intelligence, their numerous covert counterintelligence units, and their secret military spying units, which are scattered throughout the world. He would be in charge of the prisoner-of-war interrogations too, except this is 1983, and the war is cold, not hot.Reply?
He looks past his awards to the wall itself. There is something he feels he needs to do even though the thought of it frightens him. He thinks about the choice he has to make. He can stay in his office or he can go into the next office. That is his choice. And he has made it.
He is going into the next office.
General Stubblebine looks a lot like Lee Marvin. In fact, it is widely rumored throughout military intelligence that he is Lee Marvin's identical twin. His face is craggy and unusually still, like an aerial photograph of some mountainous terrain taken from one of his spy planes. His eyes, forever darting around and full of kindness, seem to do the work for his whole face.
In fact he is not related to Lee Marvin at all. He likes the rumor because mystique can be beneficial to a career in intelligence. His job is to assess the intelligence gathered by his soldiers and pass his evaluations on to the deputy director of the CIA and the chief of staff for the army, who in turn pass it up to the White House. He commands soldiers in Panama, Japan, Hawaii, and across Europe. His responsibilities being what they are, he knows he ought to have his own man at his side in case anything goes wrong during his journey into the next office.
Even so, he doesn't call for his assistant, Command Sergeant George Howell. This is something he feels he must do alone.
Am I ready? he thinks. Yes, I am ready.
He stands up, moves out from behind his desk, and begins to walk.
I mean, he thinks, what is the atom mostly made up of anyway? Space!
He quickens his pace.
What am I mostly made up of? he thinks. Atoms!
He is almost at a jog now.
What is the wall mostly made up of? he thinks. Atoms! All I have to do is merge the spaces. The wall is an illusion. What is destiny? Am I destined to stay in this room? Ha, no!
Then General Stubblebine bangs his nose hard on the wall of his office.
Damn, he thinks.
General Stubblebine is confounded by his continual failure to walk through his wall.
Your superstar thinks he can walk through fucking walls, Malcolm. Yes, I know everything.
Malcolm Trosclair said...
When you stand before God on Judgment Day, you will be without excuse. Humble yourself before your Creator, or you will regret it for all eternity.
I'm still praying that God will reveal Himself to you and that you will repent of your rebellion.
Malcolm Trosclair
Malcolm Trosclair said...
Bing,
Your hatred for God has caused you to believe lies, in every area of your life. Therefore there is nothing that anyone could say on these subjects that you would be able to receive, except of course more lies. In fact, every time I read something you have written I am reminded of this passage.
Romans Chapter 1:18-32
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,[c] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,[d] unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
Bing, please humble yourself while there is yet time. The Bible says;
"It is appointed for a man, once to die and then the judgment."
There is no reincarnation and no soul sleep, only an eternity of remembering that Malcolm guy pleading with you to get right with God. I don't want to see you burn, but God can't let you into heaven without repentance toward God and faith in Jesus Christ, because Jesus is the only one who has paid the penalty for your sin.
It doesn't matter that you say you don't believe in God. God knows otherwise and you are, as this passage states, "without excuse".
If you said that you didn't believe in the law of gravity and took a flying leap off a tall building, your not believing in gravity wouldn't keep you from making quite an impression on the pedestrians below, not to mention the side walk.
Malcolm Trosclair said...
Bing,
It appears that you may be right about Stubblebine. Yesterday I saw this on G. Edward Griffin's website "Unfiltered News". Thank you for giving me a heads up on the possibility that Stubblebine and his wife may not be on the up and up.
CONTROVERSY CONTINUES OVER STUBBLEBINE AND LAIBOW AS SUSPECTED FALSE LEADERS IN THE NATURAL HEALTH MOVEMENT
http://www.thenhf.com/press_releases/pr_09_jul_2009.html
However, even if Stubblebine is everything you say he is, that doesn't mean that 9/11 was not an inside job.
Last summer I was asked by the founder of this organization to make phone calls to get more building design and construction professionals to sign their petition.
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth
http://www.ae911truth.org/
These are the guys who design and oversee the construction of high rise buildings. To date, 969 architects and engineers have signed the petition, because in their opinion only controlled demolition could have destroyed the buildings.
I too have studied the 9/11 question and have spent aproximately $10,000 of my own money to host a conference here in Pensacola.
Pensacola 9/11 Truth Symposium 2008
http://lastdaysrevival.blogspot.com/2008/10/pensacola-911-truth-symposium-2008.html
Unfortunately I can't imagine having a real give and take discussion of the evidence on 9/11, because of your closed mind and offensive manner and for this reason I will not be replying to any more of your comments. However if you want to be rude and offensive on my blog, please do so. I always appreciate the opportunity to show my readers how the other side thinks and acts. Go easy on the profanity though or I won't be able to post your comments.
Still Praying For You,
Malcolm
A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust ( english subtitles )OK. I watched the whole thing. Beginning to end, and I immensely enjoyed the amusing novelty language, Danish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o
This is just daft. First, because he suggests that there is a type of science that could be fudged and still be considered science. Presumably that is the type of science he believes that other side practices. He seems damned sure that he is right for someone who admits at the time that his article has been out for less than a week. The statement, "we cannot be wrong" is not in the toolbox of a real scientist. Adam Savage said it best: "Failure is always an option." Now, I don't know if he means "fake data" or "make mistakes," but that really doesn't matter. You are naive if you think neither can be done. For example, say that you find that something falls to earth at 9.8 m/s/s. It stops being useful science when you say that angels are pushing down on falling objects at a steady rate so that the objects accelerate. Science can be botched at every level of interpretation. This is why peer-review is merciless--editors are trying to eliminate as much potential error as possible, and their reputation is on the line if they miss something glaring.
I don't know the provenance of his samples (and archeologist or geologist, for instance, would demand to know when and where something came from). I don't see any evidence in this interview one way or the other that he has ever had a sample under his microscope. And neither do you, I would point out. He is only making claims here. Don't give credence to someone because someone is on TV. Lots of idiots make it onto TV. Look at Oprah's show!
The "47-storey" building, of course, is WTC7. The image below is the best angle that I have seen of the shot, and even though retarded guinea pigs from Pluto can see that frames have been cut out to make it look (badly) like it fell faster, I could give a dingo's kidneys about the image. More interesting to me is what the people filming say.
Nobody charged? What about the Zacarias Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker? Not wanted? I have an APB out on a guy in a bathrobe and a beard named Osama "Peter" bin Laden. This guy's on the fracking moon, Malcolm, and demonstrably so. I just demonstrated it.Bentham Science Publishers, as it watches editors quit in protest of lax peer-review standards, is contending that it agreed to publish a specious research report by a Cornell University graduate student because it was trying to trap the perpetrator.What about New Scientist? What do they have to say about these publishers? They...joyless scientists...actually call it "crap." They call it CRAP because the purported submitting lab of the hoax was "Center for Research in Applied Phrenology" (phrenology is studying the bumps on your head). It could not be a less credible publication. This paper fails peer-review muster. I would appreciate a couple of sciencey types who read to discuss the importance of peer-review. One of the tools in my bullcrap detection kit is if "new and earth-shattering science" is promoted primarily in the popular media and not in the journals. This reeks of such a rotten publication.
Controlled Demolition of Building 7 Admitted On PBS (10 min)"Pull it?" He's talking to the fire department at that point. There has been terrible loss of life, he said. He was saying pull the firefighters out of there. And when you let a building burn, it falls. This was an insult to my intelligence, Malcolm. Are you saying the fire department, which lost an assload of people that day, now moonlights as a professional demolition service, one that uses nano-thermite, which has never been shown to have been used in a single demolition in the history of ever? Really? Is that what you are contending? This is feeble. You have some bozo jumping around saying, "Silverstein says they blew it up!" And your evidence is the word "pull"? Feeble, Malcolm. Really, really weak. And how is a real estate developer going to use the word "pull" when talking about a fire crews? "Pull them out." Sure, he could be speaking in "demolition vernacular," but it seems unlikely since he is not a demolitions expert. In fact, even if you were right, the not-NYFD crew responsible for demolishing the last building uses the term in a very specific way, 'pulling' is clearly guiding the direction of the fall, not just "destroying" it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9b4D-aO3zY
I too have studied the 9/11 question and have spent aproximately $10,000 of my own money to host a conference here in Pensacola.Who did you have as your speakers?
Bing,
I thought I made myself clear.
"so I sent messengers to them with this reply: "I am carrying on a great project and cannot go down. Why should the work stop while I leave it and go down to you?"
After a while however the fear went away and helping others to find salvation in Jesus Christ became the most rewarding thing I've ever done. As you might imagine, ridicule, insults, intimidation and the occasional beer were thrown in my direction, but to the open air preacher, these things only serve to draw a bigger crowd.It's not. It's in fact about as clear a sign that you are doing something really radically wrong as is humanly possible. But then again, look at all the other shit he believes. I'm sorry, but please just leave the thinking to the adults, Mal.
A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust ( english subtitles )OK. I watched the whole thing. Beginning to end, and I immensely enjoyed the amusing novelty language, Danish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o
This is just daft. First, because he suggests that there is a type of science that could be fudged and still be considered science. Presumably that is the type of science he believes that other side practices. He seems damned sure that he is right for someone who admits at the time that his article has been out for less than a week. The statement, "we cannot be wrong" is not in the toolbox of a real scientist. Adam Savage said it best: "Failure is always an option." Now, I don't know if he means "fake data" or "make mistakes," but that really doesn't matter. You are naive if you think neither can be done. For example, say that you find that something falls to earth at 9.8 m/s/s. It stops being useful science when you say that angels are pushing down on falling objects at a steady rate so that the objects accelerate. Science can be botched at every level of interpretation. This is why peer-review is merciless--editors are trying to eliminate as much potential error as possible, and their reputation is on the line if they miss something glaring.I don't know the provenance of his samples (and archeologist or geologist, for instance, would demand to know when and where something came from). I don't see any evidence in this interview one way or the other that he has ever had a sample under his microscope. And neither do you, I would point out. He is only making claims here. Don't give credence to someone because someone is on TV. Lots of idiots make it onto TV. Look at Oprah's show!The "47-storey" building, of course, is WTC7. The image below is the best angle that I have seen of the shot, and even though retarded guinea pigs from Pluto can see that frames have been cut out to make it look (badly) like it fell faster, I could give a dingo's kidneys about the image. More interesting to me is what the people filming say.Nobody charged? What about the Zacarias Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker? Not wanted? I have an APB out on a guy in a bathrobe and a beard named Osama "Peter" bin Laden. This guy's on the fracking moon, Malcolm, and demonstrably so. I just demonstrated it.Bentham Science Publishers, as it watches editors quit in protest of lax peer-review standards, is contending that it agreed to publish a specious research report by a Cornell University graduate student because it was trying to trap the perpetrator.What about New Scientist? What do they have to say about these publishers? They...joyless scientists...actually call it "crap." They call it CRAP because the purported submitting lab of the hoax was "Center for Research in Applied Phrenology" (phrenology is studying the bumps on your head). It could not be a less credible publication. This paper fails peer-review muster. I would appreciate a couple of sciencey types who read to discuss the importance of peer-review. One of the tools in my bullcrap detection kit is if "new and earth-shattering science" is promoted primarily in the popular media and not in the journals. This reeks of such a rotten publication.
Controlled Demolition of Building 7 Admitted On PBS (10 min)"Pull it?" He's talking to the fire department at that point. There has been terrible loss of life, he said. He was saying pull the firefighters out of there. And when you let a building burn, it falls. This was an insult to my intelligence, Malcolm. Are you saying the fire department, which lost an assload of people that day, now moonlights as a professional demolition service, one that uses nano-thermite, which has never been shown to have been used in a single demolition in the history of ever? Really? Is that what you are contending? This is feeble. You have some bozo jumping around saying, "Silverstein says they blew it up!" And your evidence is the word "pull"? Feeble, Malcolm. Really, really weak. And how is a real estate developer going to use the word "pull" when talking about a fire crews? "Pull them out." Sure, he could be speaking in "demolition vernacular," but it seems unlikely since he is not a demolitions expert. In fact, even if you were right, the not-NYFD crew responsible for demolishing the last building uses the term in a very specific way, 'pulling' is clearly guiding the direction of the fall, not just "destroying" it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9b4D-aO3zY
I too have studied the 9/11 question and have spent aproximately $10,000 of my own money to host a conference here in Pensacola.Who did you have as your speakers?
So how many atheists out there embrace faith? The more I learn, the more I realize faith permeates everything... way too many atheists utilize it. Question everything, and when the source is available, ask it.
Rumor 1: Sam Harris gave the RRS $500,000 for a house. They proceeded to do nothing but play video games and smoke pot.
Status: False. Sam Harris isn't our anonymous investor. The video game and pot rumor likely stems from the times we hung out and partied with other atheists. If I'm correct, it's sad they left thinking that a night of partying is what happens every night. I would think our body of work spoke for itself.
Rumor 2: They got a free house from an anonymous investor.
Status: False. I purchased a large house with the help of an investor who owns 60% of the house. When we sell, we each get our share. I consider it a huge gift but technically we weren't given anything, all the money the investor spends on the mortgage will be returned upon sale of the home.
Rumor 3: Brian Sapient decided to leave Rational Response Squad but not tell anyone because he was still making money on it.
Status: False. I informed subscribers that I was working a real life job about the same time I started working one. I started working the job to preserve the ability of RRS to function, to stay afloat. I spent 80% of my life savings in the 3 years I worked RRS full time to cover the difference between income from RRS and expenditures. Additionally I was dealing with a batch of personal issues that are personal. I never left RRS. I consistently spent time as I could addressing issues related to upkeep and maintenance. I was $50,000 in the hole for the three years that I ran RRS without a real job, sorry for making a few hundred of it back while I worked a real job and didn't dedicate 100 hours a week to RRS.
Rumor 4: Brian Sapient has only returned to make money.
Status: False. This isn't a comeback... I never left, I never will. Try living your life for the rest of your life working 100 hours a week on the same thing, see if you can do it. Need a break from time to time? I worked a real life job, recharged my batteries, waited out the recession a little, and got right back to it. I decided to get a job because I had used up so much of my savings and at the start of the recession got quite a few warnings from subscribers that they had to pull back donations as a result of the downturn.
I'm not going anywhere, this site isn't going anywhere. It will exist after my death as well. The RRS has not made a profit.
RRS HAS NOT MADE A PROFIT.
I left a good career to do this, this is my love, this is my legacy, my effort to make the world a better place. If I was in it for the money, I would be a little smarter than to work for 80 cents an hour. If I was in it for the money there would be no RRS. Maybe I'd be the President of a big Atheist org... you know the people that make $60,000-$100,000 a year.
Rumor 5: RRS is Atheist Nexus
Status: False. I didn't even have an atheist nexus account until yesterday. The Rational Response Squad page on atheist nexus was started by a friend of mine.
Rumor 6: Brian Sapient and Kelly started a rumor that Richard Dawkins cheated on his wife to get back at him.
Status: False. We didn't start a rumor. This one is rather easy to pick apart, can you find anywhere that Kelly or I posted that in a public place at the time when it supposedly happened? This is what it looks like when I "get back" at someone. It looks a little different than "he said it, just not on the internet anywhere." I wouldn't want the world to know a story like that, imagine what the Christians would do with that info.
Rumor 7: Kelly was spending RRS money on illegal drugs.
Status: False. Kelly was on prescription medication, if she had an issue with substance abuse it was more in the alcohol department, she made her drinking public during a few broadcasts. Those concerned about Kelly should know she's doing better now, and she's on a better track. We spoke yesterday for the first time in about 80 days. We have a mutual admiration for each other and hope the best for each other. She's currently working on bettering herself in a number of areas, details of which are personal.
Rumor 8: Sam Harris wanted to give us $500,000 to work on a non-profit but decided against it to do The Reason Project instead.
Status: False. However, may I note that "The Reason Project" is not working... we can't even get atheists to embrace reason. This rumor might've stemmed from my interest in helping Sam Harris get the project started, and the fact that at one point he explained that groups like RRS would be the beneficiaries of funds... however we'd have to be a non-profit.
I'm not a 501-C-3 so that we don't have to limit what we talk about. If I wanted to limit what we were going to talk about we could be a non-profit and I'd likely make over $60,000 a year. I'm just trying to get by and I'm frugal about it. Every penny is stretched to the limit.
Spread this post around, help faithful atheists everywhere. 
______
I just read this quote from Natural posted on our Atheist Nexus group page and found it to be one of the best summations of the "I hate you RRS" effect that I've seen over the years...
Just a warning to anyone reading this who's not familiar with the RRS forums: A lot of people have the wrong impression about RRS, based on rumors and haters, but if you go in with an open mind -- instead of assuming you know what it's all about -- then we are very welcoming of anyone willing to discuss anything with intellectual honesty. Some of our long-time members are people we strongly disagree with, but get along with just fine because they are honest to us and themselves. On the other hand, if you start making claims and accusations with nothing to back it up, we will challenge you unrelentingly. A lot of people can't handle this, and hence we get a lot of haters spreading rumors.
Oh, ironically the reason I noticed the quote was because I was going to look at the new group Natural formed. Here is the information on his wonderism group. I didn't have an account on nexus, and I still don't. So if you're looking for me there, you'll be looking for a while.
____
Hey folks, as you know the core leadership of RRS was rather inactive for the first half of 2009, this was due to various factors including several that are personal, however the recession took it's toll as early as the beginning of 2008. A bunch of folks who were donors and subscribers wrote to us with apologies after they lost their job, or their wives lost their jobs, or something recessionary in nature happened to them presenting a situation in which they had to withdraw their funding of our efforts. This story was echoed by the SSA who was on the verge of disappearing this year as a result of the hard times, and has raised over $90,000 in two months. I've been working as many hours as possible in the real world for over a year now to reduce the fundraising burden in order to keep this site afloat. While I seemed absent on an activist level my time away from the limelight was designed to preserve RRS.
Since I've been able to alter my schedule to get back to the typical 50+ hour RRS workload, the donations are at an all time low. This is to be expected of course, there is no current radio show, there was a hiatus, and we're still in a recession... but we're recovering on multiple levels. I'm gonna manage to work in the 70 hour range on activist activities here, while holding down a job and caring for a son, this week. Signs of a recession ending are upon us. However, due to the intense workload already on my plate, the show is far from my mind. Doing the show takes preparation time, editing time, and more... while I currently have 60 hours of unedited material that still needs to be addressed. Work that needed to be addressed for a very long time now, my sincerest apologies to those who were waiting for that content.
Since I've returned I've been bombarded with countless positive comments, many of which are encouraging me to get the show back up and running, here's your chance to get me one step closer to that. Yeah... I'm begging for money. Pick up that phone and call us now to keep the congregation going. I hate feeling like this, hate having to ask for it, I thought maybe donations would just start coming back organically, but they're not. So I'm asking.
Let me give you some insight as to some of the things I'm working on that require funds...
1. I'm going to Salt Lake City next month and will be speaking in front of a large atheist group. I will take some footage engaging Mormons as well. On my dime. About $500 for the trip, I'll be staying with a friend.
2. I finally managed to get ALL the footage from the documentary team that failed to produce the RRS movie, due to their own lack of funds. This includes our in person interviews with Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Dennett, Ellen Johnson, Margaret Downey, and at home conversations and interviews that have never been released. $3,500 is needed for an apple capable of editing this footage in HD with this $1,000 piece of software. If you are willing to lend suitable computer or sell one at a discount, let me know. I can now edit the video in non-hd however I have 30 hours of footage to dig through, which will take quite a bit of time to work on. The plan is currently a free internet movie.
3. You know those atheist billboards that have been popping up everywhere? I want to put them all over the web via google ads. This project is limited only by how much money we have, one could invest $10,000 per day easily in google ads.
4. I'd like to not have to ask for more hours at work every week, and instead ask for less, spending more time working RRS would get me back on track, I'm so backlogged, it feels like I'm 3 years behind.
5. I'd like to plan trips to speak at both California and Florida atheist events in the next 9 months. I have friends/family I can stay with at both to keep costs down. Groups in Florida and California have been trying to get me to come speak for a while. Video projects will be made on both trips.
6. Darth Josh will be coming to visit the RRS house at the end of January to record a show (and scheme), I'd like to help with his travel expenses.
7. I need a laptop to take on these trips, so I can stay connected. I'm looking at the least expensive model that would do the trick. $350
There's obviously a ton of other activist reasons more money could be put to good use, but I think I've added enough transparency and at least a few thousands dollars worth of expenses to give you an idea of how your donation will be put to good use.
So here's your chance... all those folks that sent me words of support in the last three months, telling me how happy you are to see me back full time, help me keep it up! Show me you really mean it. I need to see your love in the form of dollars or I need to look into restoring my career aspirations and pull back the amount of time I spend on activism. Keep in mind, the RRS network of sites will be here for at least as long as I'm alive, and likely well after. While I might have lost some teammates along the way, I promise you're never losing me. This has always been my baby. I'm not going anywhere, don't call it a comeback, I've been here for years.
There are two big ways to help financially:
2. Donate any amount, any size, consider $15-25.
3. If you have to do any holiday shopping, start doing it now, and do it through this link. Amazon.com sells just about everything in the world, you can get your groceries and clothing there as well. Purchase items you'd normally buy at the store through our amazon link and we'll make a small commission. Thanks to the few folks who do this year round.
Please consider as large of a one time donation as you can make, this is a crucial time, now is the time to donate. Do all you can, please.
/begging
Darth Josh told me last night how the radio disclaimer is one of his favorite sound bites in RRS history, and I'm inclined to agree with him. For those that don't know the technicals on it... it's my voice sped up 1.5 times.
So here's a little slice of RRS history, a download for the disclaimer that was played on our show. Enjoy!
You can still hear a bunch of free archived material here.
_____
I feel the need to highlight the recent trials and tribulations of Sunsara Taylor with the Ethical Society of Chicago as she is a friend of mine, and this issue is of obvious importance to her. Sunsara has given me the fuel to give brief mention to a past issue I feel that the Ethical Society of Philadelphia helped hinder the advancement of non-believer unity in Philadelphia. If you can believe it Sunsara is even more of a rabble rouser than I am, while she staged a scene, I quietly backed away and just pretended it never happened. Today I speak up, because of Sunsara.
About two years ago a group was formed called PhillyCor, I'm close with quite a few people involved in the forming of the group. The group was formed to connect local freethought and humanist groups, and RRS is based out of Philadelphia. Being that we had the largest global presence of any of the groups in Philadelphia it made sense for us to be involved, and we would've embraced the role. We would've adapted to fit within the groups model, we would've helped raise money, and most importantly spread the word on a much larger scale than the group was capable of. In fact this is the first time I ever link to the group, because when the opportunity arose for RRS to be in the group, the Ethical Society essentially stated it's us or them.
If you're from the Philadelphia area you'd know well that the Ethical Society of Philly owns a gorgeous building in the center of town that is frequently used for freethought gatherings by the groups currently in PhillyCor, and this was considered to be an important piece of the puzzle. In fairness, this wasn't the only issue, there were also some rumors that muddied that waters, the point is I didn't find their ethics to be those I'd share. While it may seem understandable to exclude a confrontational group, it's not understandable that they never asked us to address their concerns which I believe were based on lies and misrepresentations made about us. Their action spits in the face of the inclusive nature that the group was designed for. It's hard to have a coalition when you exclude the largest and most recognized group from your target area. Today I'm actually glad I'm not part of the COR considering the recent acceptance of money and connection to Greg Epstein that is permeating COR groups. If you don't know about Greg see here: Humanist chaplain Greg Epstein wants you to join him, asshole - Greg Epstein ≠ humanism - Greg Epstein seeking further embarrassment?
Now with that little story out of the way, I bring you Sunsara's most recent blog on her issues with the Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago.
On Sunday, November 1st, plainclothes and uniformed police who had been called in earlier by officials of the Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago (EHSC) dragged out, maced and arrested a man for videotaping Sunsara Taylor as she stood near her seat and made a statement before the start of that morning’s program about the shameful cancellation of her long planned talk to EHSC that day on the topic “Morality without Gods.”
The shocking incident took place at the insistence of the president of EHSC. About 40 people witnessed the videographer being brutalized by the police in the foyer of the facility. An attorney demanded that the police stop brutalizing him when five officers piled on him as he lay face down on the floor. 6 police cars arrived within minutes.
The day before, during a workshop on the same premises which the president and other board members of the EHS were at, Sunsara explained very clearly that she would be attending the opening of the EHS's Sunday gathering and giving the EHS the opportunity to do the right thing and allow her talk to go forward, up until the last minute. If the EHS still refused to let her give her talk, she explained that she would leave and give her talk in “exile” at the nearby home of one of the EHS members.
The statement can be viewed here.
Also see Sunsara Taylor undeterred
In her brief statement at the EHS on Sunday morning, Sunsara Taylor challenged the very wrong decision to cancel her speaking engagement and pointed out how this is contributing to a chilling atmosphere in society as a whole and has happened all too frequently to people who challenge the dominant narrative (like Ward Churchill, Noman Finkelstein and the director of Milk who was recently “disinvited” from Hope College, etc.). Taylor stated that while the group had the “bureaucratic right” to disinvite her, it didn’t make it any more “right” than the voters in California passing Prop 8. She also invited those who wanted to hear her speak to come to her “talk in exile” at the home of a member of the EHSC.
At no point during her brief statement was Sunsara asked to stop speaking or to leave the premises. And at no point was anyone who was there to support her, including the photographer, asked to leave. It is telling that the only person singled out by the police, at the request of the president of the Society, was the man documenting what Sunsara was saying.
The videographer was simply trying to document and guard the truth of what Sunsara was saying in her brief statement. Sunsara’s words had been grossly distorted and taken out of context by some members of the EHSC who were the driving forces behind canceling her speech.
What kind of ethics and morals is the EHSC upholding and modeling through the great lengths it has gone to in suppressing Sunsara Taylor’s talk on Morality without Gods? A number of their own members expressed disagreement with the cancellation and a number of prominent people from around the country wrote statements in support of Sunsara’s speaking and called on EHSC to rectify its wrong-headed decision. Instead, the board fortified and increasingly defended its decision and created an atmosphere of anti-communist hysteria, fear and rumor-mongering that had no relationship to reality.
The EHS had no legitimate basis to feel the police needed to be there in the first place, except for the rumors and hysteria that they themselves had created. Then, by choosing to set the police upon the person filming they went after the one person who was documenting the truth of Sunsara's words and the fact that Sunsara and others there to support her were acting in no way to disrupt the replacement talk the EHS had planned.
What kind of Ethical Humanist group would create a situation that led directly to the brutal arrest of someone simply for filming Sunsara giving a statement at that point with simply a cell phone? In their zeal to suppress Taylor they went repeatedly against the stated purpose of the Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago which includes “the supreme aim of human life is working to create a more humane society...Our commitment is to the worth and dignity of the individual and to treating each human being so as to bring out the best in her or him.”
This attack was in stark contrast to the day before at the EHSC where Sunsara led a well-attended and lively discussion with much audience participation on "Women’s Liberation and the Emancipation of Humanity." This whole program was videotaped by the same volunteer photographer.
To call upon the EHSC to drop charges against the photographer and to continue to express their disagreement with their decision to dis-invite Sunsara Taylor contact: 847-677-3334
To find out how to make contributions to the legal defense, contact:
We've restored the content on both the old Way of the Master watchdog site, and Ask The Atheist.
I'm currently looking for people that are writing articles, have written articles, or are willing to write articles exposing Kirk Cameron, Ray Comfort, Todd Friehl and any of the other loons that work with the Way of the Master organization. That site had been taken down quite some time ago, and is now available here: Way of the Master Watchdog
The OLD Ask The Atheist site is now in archive format only attached to our site as a subdomain: http://asktheatheist.rationalresponders.com
You can log in to both of the above sites to post a comment with your RRS login and password.
If you're interested in being a thorn in the side of the WOTM team (seriously it's easy, it just takes a little time and energy) please let me know. The best way to let me know is to read a few of the posts on the Way of the Master Watchdog and get a vibe of what we were trying to achieve, and to submit a story to me that you think is worthy of posting. I'm currently in need of a few good stories involving Ray Comforts destruction of "The Origin of Species." So if you're interested in coming up with a post or two per month about the current whereabouts of the con-men at Way of the Master, let me know.
Oh... and if you want to check out the current form of Ask the Atheist it's available here.
Planet Atheism buttons
FAQ (includes joining info)
RSS feed
Email subscription
