Observations and inanities by a second-shift assistant supervisor in the Puppy-Grinding division of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy® (our motto: "Sure it's cruel, but think of the jobs!"), your host, Brent Rasmussen.
That's Uncle Joe Driving That Bus
A little gem from the Russian news service Interfax:
Head of the Moscow Patriarchate Sourozh Diocese (Great Britain) Bishop Yelisey expressed his concerns with the London “No God” bus campaign.
“Atheistic propaganda in London is especially painful for us, members of the Russian Orthodox Church. We have a unique experience of life in atheistic state and we can prove that true atheism is not as joyful as they try to present it,” the Bishop told Interfax-Religion on Wednesday.
I love that he thinks he can "prove" how miserable atheism inherently is. I await the data on his report.
More to the point, this is a real overblowing of the atheism=Stalinism canard. He might begin to have a modicum of a case if the bus ads read something like:
"There's probably no God, so stop worrying and submit yourself and your labor to the State and our brave Party chairman."
But they don't.
[Cross-post at Bloc Raisonneur]
Bookmark/Search this post with:
No shirk, shitlock.
. . .[with a certain pain in the ass.]
Would the gentleman care to name one human who never had a unique experience with something that was less than palatable? Or possibly delicious? Something like, "Why are we here," or, "How come people don't seem comfortable with me," or even, "If there is nothing after this life then this life is worthless. Anyone could be anything they wanted to be, making a gockery of our mod."
To be able to avoid such "negative vibes" would require suspiciously extensive knowledge of all kinds of human experience, not to mention an omnipotent view of human relations.
The fact that these protestations are baseless is demonstrated by the inability of the squealers to come to terms with my offense whenever they squeal their crucial appeals into the air.
Not that I demand my sensibilities be held to higher regard than someone who puts all responsibility for their life in the hands of an invisible, supernatural spook. I have other coping mechanisms that don't cost anyone else anything.
What I can't figure out is how come there are churches all over the place in America that are celebrating renewal and revival of the indwelling of the spirit while at the same time claiming that they are being denied their right to worship as they like?
Could it be they are upset because a sizable group isn't moved by their myths and fears? Perhaps some people are moved by something more deeply human and present a threat to ages old hegemony?
Could it be that the fearfully faithful have had their hats handed to them more often and more forcefully of late? Do they smell a change on the wind?
Only one way to find out! Keep speaking up, and out. Enough voices, confirming one another, repeated long enough . . .
E Pluribus Unum, from the two meter board. A forward two-and-a-half-somersault with two twists, finishing in the pike position with a splash less than three inches high. Difficulty--pretty steep.
It's not atheism when it's competition for belief sets.
The problem with his statement is that Communism is not atheism, even though Trotsky advocated atheism "as an inseparable element of the materialist view of life, [and therefore] a necessary condition for the theoretical education of the revolutionist." But that is because Communists see Christians as pacifists, unable to fight for their rights and sheepishly accepting governmental edicts over workers' rights.
Of course, to anybody who believes that Christians are completely pacifistic, I refer Paul's charming observation that "No one ever slaughtered millions in the name of atheism." So true, and has been over many centuries.
Hank, you're correct about Communist areas having a cult-of-personality religion, instead of a diety-authorized one (although some argue that monasteries are a form of religious communism). I think that Communism decries religion because their leaders belive that to be nationalistic the people could not have divided loyalties. They could not follow a seven-day work week if the other leader in their lives mandated one day of seven as a day of rest. They could not fight to overturn the government if the other leader said to turn the other cheek - which was the passive, not just pacifistic, standard of previous generations. The real issue for Communists is that they didn't want the competition - they wanted the people to blindly follow their edicts just as they didn't want them blindly following anybody else's.
At A Loss
I'm uncertain what to say to people who make such remarks.
One of the things I always THINK is "Most of those places you think were atheist were in fact powerfully religious, by state order. It's just that the religion was a personality cult rather than the Christianity you're used to."
But since that wouldn't fit on a bumper sticker, or a chat room one-liner, I never think the point gets across.
Anyone else have suggestions?
A few:
"Yeah, well Stalin thought he was God"
"Yes, Hitler was a Christian, folks."
"No one ever slaughtered millions in the name of atheism"
"Atheists don't even want to talk to you, let alone convert you."
The search for reason goes on.
No one ever slaughtered millions in the name of anything and was the better for it.
My mind goes into a tail spin when I simply try to comprehend the sheer effort in propagandizing an entire population. Why, the logistics alone are uber-whelming.
Even the christian god, laboring for over two thousand years, has fallen short. Not without a nod to its earthbound cheering squad, who have acquitted themselves enthusiastically if not admirably. More's the pity.
Cheerleaders do not win games. They don't even play.