In the wake of the Paris attack the words of Sam Harris about the Islamic faith seem more timely than ever.

Now I think you all know that my position on ALL religions is that they are an unnecessary and potentially harmful crutch used by people who do not trust their own critical thinking abilities.

However, like Harris, I also find some religions more concerning than others, based on their basic tenets and also how the teachings are interpreted in this day and age.

As you know I spend a great deal of time criticizing Christianity in this country, and those who profit from and hide behind Christianity in this country, mostly because it is the most prominent and impactful religion in this country.

And yes the horrific things that have been done in the name of Christianity in many ways overshadow the violence done in the name of Islam.

However in today's world one would be foolish not to recognize that there is a singular danger represented by the those who interpret Islamic teachings as a license to kill and destroy.

And ISIS in particular embodies the most dangerous elements of Islam. As noted back in March of this year by The Atlantic: 

Our ignorance of the Islamic State is in some ways understandable: It is a hermit kingdom; few have gone there and returned. Baghdadi has spoken on camera only once. But his address, and the Islamic State’s countless other propaganda videos and encyclicals, are online, and the caliphate’s supporters have toiled mightily to make their project knowable. We can gather that their state rejects peace as a matter of principle; that it hungers for genocide; that its religious views make it constitutionally incapable of certain types of change, even if that change might ensure its survival; and that it considers itself a harbinger of—and headline player in—the imminent end of the world. 

The Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), follows a distinctive variety of Islam whose beliefs about the path to the Day of Judgment matter to its strategy, and can help the West know its enemy and predict its behavior. Its rise to power is less like the triumph of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (a group whose leaders the Islamic State considers apostates) than like the realization of a dystopian alternate reality in which David Koresh or Jim Jones survived to wield absolute power over not just a few hundred people, but some 8 million.

It is almost impossible not to recognize the positions of some of our more radical Christian leaders reflected in the above description. Many of them also believe that we are on the brink of witnessing the End of Times as well.

And in fact I would argue that it was George W. Bush's religious fundamentalism that inspired him to set into motion the events which have resulted in the dangers we are seeing today.

However make no mistake, if there is a terrorist attack in the world right now it is more than likely carried out by an Islamic Jihadist.

And understanding that fact, and the reasons behind it, may be our only hope of eventually putting a stop to all of this violence. 

Study finds that belief is easier on the brain, and therefore favored by many in the population, than disbelief which requires the brain to work harder.

Courtesy of The Daily Beast:

While in an fMRI scanner, participants were asked whether or not they believed in a number of statements. Sentences ranged from the very simple and fact-based (California is larger than Rhode Island), to the abstract and highly subjective (God probably does not exist). The data revealed activation of distinct but sometimes overlapping brain areas during belief versus disbelief conditions. 

Additionally, the scans clearly showed something that was more straightforward. Brain activation, overall, was much greater and persisted longer during states of disbelief. This is important because neuroscience has long shown that greater brain activity requires more mental resources, of which there is a limited supply. A cognitive process that demands little mental resources, such as believing, is less work for the brain and therefore favored. This concept was summed up nicely in a 2015 NewScientist cover story on the science of beliefs, which stated, “Harris’ results were widely interpreted as further confirmation that the default state of the human brain is to accept. Belief comes easily; doubt takes effort.”

Well that makes sense.

I favor cognitive thinking and skepticism because I have an active intellect, while those who simply accept things on faith are intellectually lazy.

Makes pretty good sense actually.

Sam Harris talks about stem cell research and morality.

I think that this is one of the most compelling arguments against the idea of personhood, and the idea that experimentation on fetal tissue is immoral.

Kind of puts this whole anti-Planned Parenthood debate into perspective don't you think?

This needs to stop.

Of course the most famous example of this misdirection is the argument that took place on Real Time between Bill Maher and Sam Harris on one side and an almost hysterical Ben Affleck on the other.

As an Atheist I see ALL religions as equally ridiculous and unnecessary, but when the definition of a religion is co-opted as the definition of a race of people that makes challenging their beliefs an attack on their ethnicity. Which of course it is not.

The most complicated example of this, in my mind, is the Jewish people.

They self identify as Jewish, and of course they usually embrace Judaism. So where the religious identity ends and the racial identity takes over is almost imperceptible.

Even non-practicing Jews often cannot separate their identity and heritage from the religion of their parents and grandparents.

But the problem with this is that in reality no child is born a Christian, or Muslim, or Jew, or Buddhist, and if they were taken out of the hospital to live in a non-religious household they would have no concept of the yoke of religion that their ancestors labored under for centuries.  They would in effect be free.

Personally I think the blurred line between ethnicity and religion is purposeful and designed to keep people from criticizing religion, and Islam in particular.

And that is really fucked up, because currently there are probably few religions that desperately need to be challenged as forcefully as Islam right now. I mean the Saudi Arabian religious leader just recently refused to condemn the idea of adult men marrying girls younger than fifteen years of age for fuck's sake.

So yes that needs to be challenged not just in the United States, where we have the right to mock any religion or set of beliefs that we choose, but also in other countries many of who are still able to murder such critics in the name of apostasy.

When liberals clash. Last night Bill Maher and Sam Harris tried to discuss the liberal reticence to talk about how Islamic beliefs foster oppression and violence. Things did not go well.

Courtesy of Raw Story:  

Bill Maher and author and neuroscientist Sam Harris battled actor/director Ben Affleck on Real Time on Friday concerning Maher’s recent remarks criticizing Islam. 

“Why are you so hostile about this?” Maher asked Affleck. 

“It’s gross, it’s racist,” Affleck replied. 

“It’s so not,” Maher insisted, though Affleck compared it to using the term, “Shifty Jew.” 

“You’re not listening to what we are saying,” Maher insisted. 

“You guys are saying, if you want to be liberal, believe in liberal principles,” Affleck said, referencing Maher’s monologue last week. “Like, we are endowed by our forefathers with inalienable rights, all men are created equal.” 

Harris, who had complained about criticism of the Muslim religion being dismissed as Islamophobic, countered that liberals should be allowed to criticize bad ideas. 

“Islam is the motherload of bad ideas,” Harris argued.

 “Jesus,” Affleck said in frustration. 

“That’s just a fact,” Maher said, backing Harris up.

I sort of watched this whole exchange with the same discomfort that a child feels while watching his parents fight. In this case I really empathized with both points of view, but also felt that Harris and Maher were trying to make a nuanced point but could not get past Affleck's hyperbolic responses.

Ultimately I have to side with Harris and Maher in recognizing that simply because somebody COULD be labeled an Islamophobe for daring to criticize a religion that is often under attack by bigots,does not mean that one should not continue to make critical observations and ask probing questions about the tenets of that religion, or the actions of those that follow it.

In some ways it is similar to being labeled a "Trig Truther" for making reasonable and obvious observations about Palin's last pregnancy, or a "9-11 Truther" for suggesting that the 9-11 Commission's report is unsatisfying and still leaves many questions unanswered.

Here at IM I have often been criticized for not talking about the atrocities that occur in Islamic states and instead focusing on the scandals that plague Christians in this country as well as their attempts to hijack our secular government. 

Of course the reason for that is because it is always better to deal with garbage rotting in your own backyard before complaining about the smell coming from your neighbor's.

To be honest I am almost completely repulsed by virtually every story I hear coming out of many Islamic countries. Yet on the other hand I, of course, have met a few Muslims who were extremely pleasant people.

My over under on all of this is that a number of  religions left unfettered represent great danger to those not in a position of power.


While I would more aggressively condemn fundamentalist Muslims for supporting murder in the case of apostasy, female genital mutilation, and barbaric practices in response to sex acts not sanctioned by the Koran,  I am quite confident that if fundamental Christians, and yes even Jews, lived in an environment where nobody dared to challenge them, they would gladly indulge in similar oppressive activities themselves. (And in some places that is happening as we speak.)

There are currently so many atrocities committed by those hiding behind the Koran, that I almost would not know where to start. However that does not mean that I believe the extremists overseas present a more imminent danger to this country than our homegrown extremists here, because I don't.

Perhaps my favorite quote by Sam Harris.

"To not believe in God is to know that it falls to us to make the world a better place."

Just think about that for a minute.

Imagine living in a world where people did not hate each other based on religious differences, everybody recognized that new and dangerous weather patterns were the result of man made pollutants and NOT gay marriage, and where each day was treasured as a precious moment in a finite existence and not simply time spent attempting to earn acceptance into some glorious afterlife.

Just imagine.

Why it often does not pay to have conversations with Fundamentalists.

I think that this point was made incredibly obvious during that recent "debate" between Ken Ham and Bill Nye.

The smoke and mirrors that Ham threw up to obfuscate the weak points in his argument were stunning.  And it served him well in throwing up an intellectually dishonest force field that repelled the logic of Bill Nye's rebuttals.

Sam Harris presents the Witchcraft argument.

The danger of blaming natural things on the supernatural, and of living our lives with our logic clouded by superstitious nonsense, cannot be overstated.

Early morning thought of the day.

You know that's what it really comes down to, who is, and who is not reasonable.

However the unfortunate truth is that those who are the most unreasonable absolutely believe that it is EVERYBODY ELSE who is being unreasonable instead of they themselves.

A little food for thought this early Sunday morning.

If image does not enlarge click here

Here is a video of Harris saying what is quoted above, and more.

How Christianity appears to nonbelievers.

I occasionally get asked how I could be so arrogant as to be an Atheist.

And my response is "The same way you can arrogantly be an Atheist."

This unerringly elicits an angry denial and a declaration that they are a Bible believing, God fearing Christian.

"So in which god do you believe?" I ask.

"What do you mean which god?"

"Well do you believe in Ganesha, Neptune, Osiris, or Jupiter?"

"No! None of those! I believe in the one true God. The Christian God!"

"Oh so you believe in the Christian god, Yahweh, but not any of those others. Did I hear that right?"

"Yes."

"So would you say that you are not absolutely certain that those other gods don't exist? Or are you still open to the possibility that someday you might believe in one or more of them?"

"What kind of a stupid question is that? I KNOW they don't exist, they are only myths. Nobody in their right mind would believe in something so ridiculous."

"I see. So let me ask you, how can you be so arrogant, so filled with certainty that you would dismiss the beliefs of people who died in battle with a prayer to these gods on their lips, who dedicated their lives to proselytizing on their behalf, in other words to be an atheist when it comes to so many gods, who have been worshiped by so many millions of people?"

That is pretty much the end of the discussion.

Oh there is some sputtering, occasionally some name calling, but all in all the actual conversation is finished.

Before there was a universe, there was glue?

People always get mad at me for ridiculing creationists and fundamentalists, but how can I not?

If you are going to say totally crazy things, with no basis in reality, you should expect exactly that reaction.

I would happily ignore them if they were not working so hard to undermine education, science, and American politics.

Final thought of the day from the brilliant Sam Harris.

Sam Harris of course is a famous freethinker and the author of one of my favorite books, The End of Faith.

Wait, it comes in a spray? Why didn't anybody tell me?

You do realize that if this were real that Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens would have had this sprayed in their direction so often that they would have been in a constant state of minty freshness.

Probably me too, for that matter.

And then there were three.

You can almost feel the emptiness of the void can't you?

I had thought just to leave this image up and allow all of you to do the Googling as to who these gentleman are, and why what they have written is of such value to free thinking people everywhere.

However I thought better of it, and decided to provide a starting off point.

So to learn more about Richard Dawkins, just click here.

For the inside scoop on Sam Harris, this is where you want to go.

And for information on Daniel C. Dennet you can visit his home page here.

If you are not already overwhelmed by the incredible wealth of information that you will be exposed to, and wish to learn more about the fourth horseman who so recently shuffled off this mortal coil, you can watch the brilliant Christoper Hitchens take on former Prime Minister Tony Blair concerning the question of whether or not religion is a force for good in the world by clicking here.

I will warn you ahead of time that these are VERY intelligent men, making VERY intelligent arguments. So if you wish to continue forward with your religious beliefs, and with your certainty firmly in place, you might wish to avoid these men, and their arguments which challenge religion, like the plague.