Monthly Archives: May 2017

Notre Dame Graduates Miss Pence’s Freedom Of Speech Lesson By Walking Out – Forbes

Posted: May 23, 2017 at 10:35 pm


Forbes
Notre Dame Graduates Miss Pence's Freedom Of Speech Lesson By Walking Out
Forbes
Vice President Mike Pence returned to Indiana to deliver a commencement address at the University of Notre Dame over the weekend. A small group of graduates walked out when the former Governor of Indiana began speaking. Only about 100 students of ...
Vice President Mike Pence Defended Free Speech at Notre Dame Commencement while 100 Students Walked OutAccuracy in Academia
Mike Pence and Barack Obama's commencement speeches had one point in common: defenses of free expressionWashington Examiner
Pence's Message of 'Civility and Open Debate' Lost on Those Who Most Needed to Hear ItThe Weekly Standard
Canada Free Press -Lifesite
all 93 news articles »

Read more:
Notre Dame Graduates Miss Pence's Freedom Of Speech Lesson By Walking Out - Forbes

Posted in Freedom of Speech | Comments Off on Notre Dame Graduates Miss Pence’s Freedom Of Speech Lesson By Walking Out – Forbes

Stop Using Free Speech As An Excuse To Be Awful – HuffPost

Posted: at 10:35 pm

On Sunday, Vice President Mike Pence got a mixed reception when he delivered a commencement speech at the University of Notre Dame. Before he had even finished his address, dozens of students, some wearing rainbow flags on their graduation caps, stood and walked out.

Undeterred by the silent protest, Pence continued his speech, saying to the graduates: While this institution has maintained an atmosphere of civility and open debate, far too many campuses across America have become characterized by speech codes, safe spaces, tone policing, administration-sanctioned political correctness all of which amounts to the suppression of free speech.

This is a line of reasoning weve heard time and time again, mostly from those on the right. The pristine ideal of free speech is used to dismiss legitimate criticism of language and policies that harm marginalized communities. Figures like Milo Yiannopoulos, Ann Coulter, and Bill Maher have invoked the free speech argument when theyve been called out, criticized, or boycotted for their rhetoric.

None of them, however, have actually had their speech curtailed. They have never been thrown in jail for things like inciting racist and sexist abuse against comedian Leslie Jones, or complaining about Jews in America, or suggesting Muslims are inherently violent. Indeed, it wasnt until Yiannopoulos started speaking positively about pedophilia that he actually faced any tangible repercussions.

Perhaps to Pence, who has come under scrutiny in the past for his history of endorsing and enactinganti-LGBTQpolicies, the students who booed and walked out during his speech were only proving his point: that we live in a society where political correctness (a phrase thats often just coded language for liberal oversensitivity) is leading us to a future where young people balk at anyone who shares an opinion different than their own.

But its not that simple.

Contrary to popular belief, free speech, in the context of the Constitution, actually does have limits. The First Amendment does not protect speech that incites violence, fraud, or child pornography, or certain forms of obscenity. It puts limits and restrictions on slander, and intellectual property.

And while it protects criticism of the government (including the president), and also protects unpopular or potentially offensive political or ideological views, it doesnt mean one can say or do anything they want without social repercussions.

In other words, free speech does not mean that people arent allowed to be offended by or disagree with what you say. Free speech isnotan excuse to say racist, homophobic, sexist things. The Constitution may protect your right to say some of those things, but you are certainly not protected from being called out for doing so.

Beyond a seeming lack of understanding of the basic tenets of free speech, this line of critique also frames any identification of instances of racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamaphobia, ableism and transphobia as threats to free speech itself. And the ultimate effect of this argument can be chilling.

As Ulrich Baer put it in a New York Times essay published in April: Requiring of someone in public debate to defend their human worth conflicts with the communitys obligation to assure all of its members equal access to public speech.

The students who decided to publicly protest Pence for his views, many of whom identify as queer, have as much of a right to exercise free speech as Pence and his supporters. Safe spaces do not suppress anything they level the playing field in a landscape where so many of those who bemoan political correctness do so at the expense of already marginalized communities.

Of course, the conversation surrounding free speech is not a simple one. The difficulty of defining hate speech, for instance, has often come up in this ongoing debate, with some critics arguing that censorship is not the solution to offensive or hateful language that is constitutionally protected.

There is no legal definition of hate speech that will withstand constitutional scrutiny, Will Creeley, Senior Vice President of Legal and Public Advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, told Think Progress in January 2016. The Supreme Court has been clear on this for decades. And that is because of the inherently fluid, subjective boundaries of what would or would not constitute hate speech. One persons hate speech is another persons manifesto.

So, OK, both sides of the aisle must contend with how to express themselves and have vigorous debates about difficult without being awful. But research has shown that those who defend their right to use racial slurs and racist hate speech often use free speech to do so. A 2017 studyfound that out of hundreds of participants, those with high levels of racial prejudice were much more concerned with upholding freedom of speech, but were also less likely to defend free speech in non-racial scenarios.

Its certainly savvy to deflect the argument that what you are saying is offensive by zeroing in on a political ideal, free speech, that everyone can get behind. Its ultimately just a rhetorical ploy to normalize ideas that oppress others. And complaining when those who are oppressed call out these ideas, as is their right, is another petty ploy.

What Pence and Yiannopoulos and Coulter and other right-wing provacateurs are really doing when they weaponize free speech against marginalized people is perverting the idea of free speech itself.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story indicated that the First Amendment never protects hate speech. It does.

Read more:
Stop Using Free Speech As An Excuse To Be Awful - HuffPost

Posted in Freedom of Speech | Comments Off on Stop Using Free Speech As An Excuse To Be Awful – HuffPost

Responsibility and free speech – OneNewsNow

Posted: at 10:35 pm

An organization continues to call for Texas A&M to fire its president and a professor, and a private university in Pennsylvania is reportedly investigating one of its professors for publicly promoting violence.

Support Aggies, an independent group of former Texas A&M students, says it has audio from a classroom lecture given by philosophy Professor Tommy Curry.

"That's how the situation came about," says 'Tony' from Support Aggies. "When I found out that the professor was promoting violence against white people, I decided to sign the petition at SupportAggies.com and to pledge to withhold any donations to the university."

Professor Curry also made comments about white people on a radio program in 2012, saying, "Today I want to talk about killing white people in context."

He went on to say the Second Amendment was used to arm white people to put down slave revolts and uprisings from indigenous natives.

Professor Curry did not respond to OneNewsNow's email seeking comment. Neither did Texas A&M, although the university's president, Michael K. Young, did issue a statement this month:

"As you may know, a podcast interview by one of our professors that took place approximately four and a half years ago resurfaced this week on social media, seen for the first time by many of us. The interview features disturbing comments about race and violence that stand in stark contrast to Aggie core values most notably those of respect, excellence, leadership and integrity values that we hold true toward all of humanity.

As we know, the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects the rights of others to offer their personal views, no matter how reprehensible those views may be. It also protects our right to freedom of speech, which I am exercising now."

According to The Eagle, a Texas-based newspaper, Professor Curry claims his remarks in 2012 regarding race have been taken out of context and mischaracterized by the university's president -- who never identified the professor in his statement.

"The professor has acknowledged that it was him on the audio clips, so there is no dispute about that," comments 'Tony' from Support Aggies. "He has claimed that his comments have been edited in such a way that they've been taken out of context, but we have the full transcript and full audio that provides the context, and what people think he's saying on the audio is what he's really saying."

Meanwhile, Professor George Ciccariello-Mahers notorious tweets have finally caught up with him, as Drexel University, where he teaches politics and global studies, is now investigating him.

Last December, Professor Ciccariello-Maher tweeted, "All I want for Christmas is white genocide." And Horace Cooper of Project 21, The National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives, tells OneNewsNow the professor more recently tweeted that he wanted to vomit when he saw a passenger give up a first-class seat to a soldier.

"It is good that, in fact, some accountability is happening," Cooper comments regarding the investigation. "It is not good that universities aren't taking the lead to self-police this kind of behavior instead of having to let it build to such a degree that people realize how unacceptable the behavior is."

Cooper adds that when these situations erupt it is not always clear whether the school supports or condemns this kind of behavior.

"50 years ago, if the Faculty Senate had heard about it, they would have taken action, and an apology would have been immediately issued," the Project 21 spokesman submits. "We would have assumed that the university did not condone this behavior."

In a letter to Ciccariello-Maher, a school official wrote that while tweets are protected speech, professors have a "special obligation to act responsibly."

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved.

Continue reading here:
Responsibility and free speech - OneNewsNow

Posted in Freedom of Speech | Comments Off on Responsibility and free speech – OneNewsNow

Rishe Groner – Tablet Magazine

Posted: at 10:34 pm

Recently I fell into the same old discussion with a close girlfriend. As we talked about work, dating, and all the day-to-day trials of New York City women in 2017, she told me that if I stopped assuming that everything would just repeat as it always had, I might actually be able to break the cycle. Then, when she expressed anxiety over peoples criticism of her, I reminded her that her critics might just have problems with how they see themselves. Sounds New Agey, right? For her, it was, sort of: She was speaking the language of mindfulness, meditation, and Buddhist retreats. But me? I was parroting the text Ive spent most of my life studying: the Tanya. And once again, our conversation reached that point of discussion: Can we please start studying the Tanya together?

The original Hasidic self-help book, known as the Tanya, is a compendium of talks and teachings. Its first section, Likkutei Amarim, was apparently written in the late 1790s in Lithuania by Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, one of the first leaders of the Hasidic movement of ultra-Orthodox Judaism. (The original edition was said to be lost, and we now work from an 1814 edition.) At a time when practice was defined by intellectualism, not mysticism, Hasidic Judaism was about ecstasy, prayer, divine service, and connection to a rebbe, or master and teacher. Schneur Zalman originated the Chabad branch, which capitalized on the intellectualism of the Jewish scholarly world, bringing its intellectualism to the Hasidic emphasis on experience. Filled with references to Torah, Talmud, and of course, Kabbalah, the Tanya offered an approach to spiritual transformation that was designed to arouse even the headiest, heart-numbed scholar into a genuine love and awe of the divine.

Chabad-Lubavitch is now known more for its ubiquitous Chabad House outreach centers; meanwhile, the movements central text, the Tanya, remains obscure even to many who are touched by the Lubavitchers outreach. And to be fair, its not an immediately accessible read. Tefillin and Shabbat candles are, indeed, easier on-ramps to Jewish practice. So, mere days after my conversation with my friend, I was elated to find, in a Brooklyn bookstore laden with Jewish ritual items and leather-bound tomes, a Tanya for the uninitiated. With a distinct dark green cover and typeface that looked more appropriate for a Williamsburg cafs chalkboard, I pulled off the counter display The Practical Tanya, a new edition adapted by London-born, Brooklyn-based Rabbi Chaim Miller.

With a new translation and explanation of the text, Millers pathbreaking Tanya aims to funnel the teachings into practical steps that embody mystical principles for living ones best life. Schneur Zalman, known in Chabad circles as the Alter Rebbe, meant to write a self-help volume for his Hasidic seekers, to replace interpersonal advisory sessions. It was real advice to real people, Miller told me. He penetrated something about the psyche that was universal, and thats why it hit home. Written in a cerebral, structured way that was unique to Hasidic publications at the time, the Tanya sought to explain the mystical dimensions to an audience of traditional yeshiva students and scholars who otherwise viewed the Hasidic tendency toward Kabbalistic mystical themes as heresy. Through deep grounding in scholarly work, coupled with mystical teachings received from his teachers, the Baal Shem Tov (founder of the Hasidic movement) and Mezericher Maggid (his successor), the Tanyas author created a framework for divine service that reconciled the underlying existential concerns of the average human, no matter his level of scholarshipby normalizing the experience of body and soul through Kabbalistic cosmology and practical self-help.

The Tanya comprises five sections, and so far Miller has adapted only the first, Likkutei Amarim, A Collection of Talks. Also called The Book for In-Betweeners, this section reintroduces a concept, briefly mentioned in the Talmud, of a person who is neither righteous nor wicked yet undergoes the daily struggle, the essential duality inherent within the human psyche. Millers goal is not simply to translate this text but to create the kind of text I can share with people like my friendslovers of self-help books, meditation podcasts, and Facebook posts that remind us to take a deep breath.

I called it The Practical Tanya because I wanted it to hit you, Miller said. How is it relatable? I ask that question on every line. The author of the Tanya provides a system for understanding that you are constantly operating on two levels of consciousness, divine and animal, likened to two souls within one body. What you choose to highlight, to embody, is what manifests, and helps you live a higher life Each daily struggle depends on the two levels, the balance of good and evil, and how a person identifies with their actions on each level. It provides day-to-day reference points, reminding readers that you are not your thoughts or your actions, and change is possible in every minute. Truly, it is the essence of being in the moment.

Validating the struggle helps readers of the Tanya to understand core concerns like laziness, apathy, guilt, depression, and sexual thoughtsmajor concerns, at the time, for traditional Jews and great scholars who couldnt imagine how their commitment to Torah study wouldnt change them from being essentially human. The Tanya describes all of this as essential humanity. Miller, who appreciates contemporary self-help writers like Eckhart Tolle, understands Tanya to be attractive to seekers by allowing them to be irredeemably imperfect at the core. In other sections, the Tanya details more of the cosmology of Kabbalah and how that relates to creation, including the manifestation of the universe based on Gods divine word. This concept helps one see the ultimate importance and significance of their existence and every action because they are all emanations of the divine.

***

At the time Hasidism began, it was considered heretical to believe that God, or the Divine Presence, is manifest everywhere, not just in the synagogue. In Hasidism, the Masters teach there is little that is wholly sacred or profane; most is simply that which is yet to be revealed, elevated, and transformed. Today, these ideas are not unfamiliar to those who explore other spiritual frameworks such as yoga, meditation, Buddhism, or Sufismthis kind of pantheism is, of course, New Age, or Eastern Wisdom Traditions 101.

Miller expressed regret that, while referring to the importance of a contemplative meditation practice, todays rabbis often skimp on the explanation. The history and richness of Chabad contemplative practices, passed from teacher to student, were lost as the community was decimated by Stalin and Hitler. In a Jewish world where many consider themselves a bad Jew for not connecting with traditional Judaism taught by institutions, it is it an ideal time to reclaim the Tanya, in a more user-friendly format. It is the optimum time to bring the pathways of the Tanya into the United States urban jungle, as mindfulness, meditation, and spiritual traditions popularize and arrive at the forefront of Western consciousness.

Miller, who is in his early 40s, is the founder of the Brooklyn Holistic Synagogue. But he is best known for his adaptions of Hasidic teachings in translated editions of Torah, Megillat Esther, Tehillim (Psalms), Haftarot, a Friday night prayer book, and a Passover Haggadah, as well as Turning Judaism Outward, a biography of the seventh Lubavitcher rebbe. But he has an unusual history in observant Judaism, which gives him an edge in adapting ancient wisdom to a new audience. He had a typical British Jewish upbringing, in which Judaism was a club where you drank Kiddush wine and judged each other for not being religious enough. The synagogue experience involved reading texts that were incomprehensible, in English, while wearing top hats, and saying a prayer for the queen. I thought I was smart, but I couldnt understand the prayers, he said. Judaism was secretly shameful, something you felt connected to but couldnt understand why, since experientially it was so horrible.

While studying medicine at Leeds College, Miller encountered his first experience with Jewish wisdom. His search for meaning took him to a philosophy bookstore, where he encountered Maimonides. That was an a-ha moment for me, he said. It never dawned on me that there was any intellectual content in Judaism. I never imagined there was any nourishment of the soul or the mind. The search took him to a yeshiva in upstate New York, where the Tanya came his way. I was obsessed, he said. Using an older translation, he became a Tanya junkie, filling it with notes and diagrams. Tanya was about validating struggle. It was relatable. It also introduced this whole Kabbalistic system of symbolism that appealed to me very much. It changed my whole worldview.

Coming from a secular background, with little exposure to Jewish thought, Miller felt frustrated that others might be exposed to Tanya but not given the tools to fully understand it. I wanted to get it out of the book and nourish ourselves with it, he said. I have to revisit the Tanya to bring out its nourishing qualities. As an outsider, I see that as a blessing. It gives the opportunity to reinvigorate our engagement by learning from someone with that energetic enthusiasm.

When he was a boy, Ysoscher Katz, a former Satmar Hasid who now teaches at Yeshivat Chovevei Torah, the Open Orthodoxy seminary in the Bronx, was expelled from his Satmar yeshiva for studying the Tanya. The book was that revolutionary, and certainly viewed as such by mainstream Orthodoxy and Hasidism. Currently a teacher of the next generation of Modern Orthodox rabbis, Katz recently taught a unit on Hasidism with sections from the Tanya, exploring the dichotomy of living between two worlds, one of intellectual frameworks and traditional study overlaid with mystical experiences and practices of prayer and meditation.

While some view general mysticism as somewhat superficial or lightweight, said Katz, the Tanya is the opposite of that. It is, he said, a cerebral work, but the ideas are embodied and inspiring: Tanya is a prism through which one can come to the world, a method in which one can grapple the complexity of life. It could happen a person isnt looking to change anything in day-to-day practice, but life will change when you start seeing things differently.

Charles Roth studied at the Lubavitcher Yeshiva in Crown Heights in the 1940s, when he was a child. After leaving Orthodoxy, he moved into humanistic psychology, and became a veteran of many encounter groups. But he still thinks of himself as a student of the Tanya. I have several volumes of Tanya in Hebrew and English translation, and I often encounter many references to Tanya in other things that I study, I often pick it up to check it in the source, Roth said. The purpose of life is to lead a life free of the dominance of ego And, thats a lifetime struggle. Im 91, and I am still in that struggle, but I feel its less of a struggle now than it was 10 years ago. And I attribute that to my studies of Hasidism in general, and the Tanya in particular.

***

Like this article? Sign up for our Daily Digest to get Tablet Magazines new content in your inbox each morning.

Rishe Groner, a writer and strategist living in Brooklyn, is the founder of The Genesis.

View original post here:
Rishe Groner - Tablet Magazine

Posted in Pantheism | Comments Off on Rishe Groner – Tablet Magazine

Why a Psychic Reading Shouldn’t Make You Question Your Atheism – Patheos (blog)

Posted: at 10:34 pm

In an article published by Elite Daily, writer Alexandra Strickler explained how a reading from a psychic medium named MaryAnn DiMarco made her question her years of atheism. And whenever someone makes a claim like that, its worth looking at the story with a skeptical eye

First, let me clarify that Strickler (presumably) still identifies as an atheist. In fact, it doesnt even seem like she believes in psychics. She writes in her conclusion:

So, coming out on the other side of my reading with DiMarco, I dont suddenly believe in the all-knowing power of all psychics, nor do I suddenly believe deceased loved ones are guiding me through life.

But, I do believe some people are more intuitive than others, and with the right dedication to that craft, you can harness it to help other people navigate this world, which is exactly what DiMarco is doing.

Lets get the obvious question out of the way: Can you be an atheist who also believes in psychics? Sure. Its not out of the question to dismiss God while believing in other supernatural ideas, including ghosts, Heaven, and karma. Thats not to say those beliefs are rational, but that its possible. The only requirement for atheism is that you dont believe in deities.

Strickler appears to be in that group of atheists who believes in psychics from the start. She writes in the beginning of her article that she believes in a general concept of energies out there in the universe. Whatever that means. (It sounds like a kind of pseudoscience related to the misnamed Law of Attraction.)

I believe that, as human beings, our thoughts and our vibes, if you will, play some part in the overall workings of the universe. They make shit happen, even if Im not entirely sure how they make shit happen.

Despite my skepticism about DiMarcos line of work, I still went into the reading feeling utterly terrified. I may not believe in this stuff, but like most people, I am afraid of the unknown.

So Strickler was already primed to believe; she was ready for someone to fill in the blanks in her beliefs and make them make more sense.

Ultimately, Strickler didnt become a believer, but she said that she was was speechless and seriously freaked out by her reading with DiMarco.

Heres why she shouldnt have been, and why you shouldnt be either should you decide to undergo a psychic reading.

A conversation with DiMarco feels eerily like speaking to someone youve known for a really long time. It felt like I was reconnecting with an old friend or a long-lost family member. She was warm, she was passionate, and she knew way more about me than I ever expected her to.

DiMarco was beyond accurate about this. I tend to feel extremely overwhelmed in a crowded room, and then subsequently drained after most social interactions. However, Ive always personally chalked it up to social anxiety, or me being an introverted person.

But, its interesting to reexamine my introverted personality under the psychic mediums interpretation of me. Its almost as if DiMarco was confirming something I already knew about myself, and helping me reframe that in a different context.

For example, she knew about one of my family members struggles with addiction, even though Ive only discussed this with a small handful of people close to me.

She also knew about the distance between my mother and one of my brothers, and she described me as a gift to my mother.

We dont know how many predictions were misses. We only know which ones struck a chord with Strickler. We also dont know if the medium had a chance to learn anything about Strickler before their meeting (via Google or elsewhere). Its also not weird to suggest there are rifts in a family or that a child is the apple of her mothers eye.

DiMarco went on to predict that Strickler loves the sounds of nature and that she has vivid dreams. Really, who doesnt?

Im unimpressed, and this story certainly didnt make me question my atheism. Strickler would be wise to use the skepticism that guides her thinking about religion to the medium. Would she have felt any differently if a pastor said similar things in a sermon?

Go here to read the rest:
Why a Psychic Reading Shouldn't Make You Question Your Atheism - Patheos (blog)

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off on Why a Psychic Reading Shouldn’t Make You Question Your Atheism – Patheos (blog)

Atheism is the Uncoolest Choice Ever, and I Can Prove It – National Catholic Register (blog)

Posted: at 10:34 pm

A man at an atheist rally in Milan, Italy, on June 2, 2012. (G.dallorto, via Wikimedia Commons)

Blogs | May. 21, 2017

I've read a number of stories about how atheism is seen as "cool" by many young people, especially among college age youths. That's funny to me because I couldn't think of anything less cool than becoming an atheist. So, just in case any young people are reading, here are eight reasons that atheism is the in-coolest choice ever.

8) Religious people live longer, happier lives, according to numerous scientific studies. I know you atheist types are all about the SCIENCE even though you pretty much get all your scientific information from Huffpo articles with clickbait headlines like "Watch Bill Nye completely own a Creationist!" or "How Rolling Your Eyes is the Greatest Debate Tactic Against Christians!" (Rule of thumb: if the article you're reading contains exclamation points, it's probably not a respected scientific publication.) But I guess because you're an atheist who will live a shorter life maybe you don't have time to read actual scientific journals. I mean, something's gotta' be cut out, right?

But on top of shorter lives, studies indicate you'll be more miserable too. So while your life won't be longer, it might just feel that way.

7) Michelangelo and Bach (look 'em up kids!) were indisputably awesome Christian artists. But hey, atheists have the kid who plays Harry Potter. Do you really don't want to be a part of any group that includes the actor formerly known as Harry Potter. Or maybe you do because that's how uncool you actually are.

Michelangelo was never photographed like that. Ever.

6) Typical Atheist gathering:

World Youth Day:

See the difference?

5) Most of your big time mass killers of the 20th century were atheists. I'm talking Stalin, Mao, and Che among others. These guys had the kind of body counts that there weren't enough body bags for so bulldozers needed to be employed. And nothing says uncool like being a mass killer of the innocent.

4) This is an extreme Christian.

This is an extreme atheist:

See the difference?

3) As a Christian, my wife looks at me like I'm a gift from God. Seriously, to her that's what I am. Your atheist girlfriend (should you ever get one after you move out of your stepdad's basement) will see you as a gel-haired accident in skinny jeans on a lonely rock orbiting a meaningless sun in a mistake of a universe. See the difference? It's kind of a big one.

2) Many of your college professors agree with your atheist beliefs. How's that for the uncoolest choice ever? Hey, look at you siding with all the gray-haired tweedy authoritarian types at your school. Note: If your best friend at college is the "Diversity Awareness Coordinator" you're colleging wrong. And if you think your professors are cool, I think they call that being a brown-noser. And brown-nosers are even less cool than gender studies majors.

Y'know when the whole 60's thing happened, young people would say not to trust anyone over 40. But now, you guys go off to college wanting nothing more than to adopt the beliefs of your old boring professors. What could be less cool than wanting to be like your teacher? (Except if your teacher is Tony Esolen. Then it's ok.)

1) Atheists have less children and that probably means...well you probably know what that means since you're all about SCIENCE! Once again, to sum up, you'll be miserable, have a shorter life, and quite likely less sex than your religious counterparts. And you thought atheism was cool? Reconsider and repent ye' fools. Jesus said he is the way, the truth, and the life. Left unsaid, is that He's totally cooler than Richard Dawkins!

See the rest here:
Atheism is the Uncoolest Choice Ever, and I Can Prove It - National Catholic Register (blog)

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off on Atheism is the Uncoolest Choice Ever, and I Can Prove It – National Catholic Register (blog)

4 Real Reasons Why Catholicism Is Cooler Than Atheism – Patheos (blog)

Posted: at 10:34 pm

I was innocently catching up on Facebook this morning when one of my friends shared The Friendly Atheists post Catholic Writer Thinks He Can Prove Atheism is the Uncoolest Choice Ever (He Cannot). Hemant Mehta as many of you know is the creator of The Friendly Atheist blog and is the author of that piece. Under normal circumstances, Hemant is on the money. His editorials on the faith-based news are spot on. But not this time.

Not only does Hemant have it all wrong but so does Mathew Archbold the author of the original pieceAtheism is the Uncoolest Choice Ever, and I Can Prove It 8 Reasons Why Christianity is Cooler than Atheism.Mr. Archbold is too courteous to the other less tangy sects of Christianity. In all reality, its a case of Catholicism being way cooler than atheism.

Allow me to show you the 4 reasons why Catholicism is cooler than atheism.

Do have to say it? The 2015 epic movie Spotlight was amazing!It won an Oscar for Best Picture and Best Screenplay that year for its painstakingly accurate analysis of the inner workings of the Catholic Church in Boston.

If youre not acquainted with this awesome flick here is a very short trailer.

Pope Innocent III was large and in charge and someone who meant business. Lets check out what the JewishEncyclopedia has to say about our boy.

The extreme in the hostile enactments of the popes against the Jews was reached under Innocent III. (1198-1216), who was the most powerful of the medieval popes, and who convened the Fourth Lateran Council (1215); this council renewed the old canonical prohibitions against trusting the Jews with public offices and introduced the law demanding that Jews should wear a distinctive sign on their garments (see Badge). The theological principle of the pope was that the Jews should, as though so many Cains, be held up as warning examples to Christians.

Atheists are smug and think they know everything. They set themselves up like gods. This Catholic Archbishop shows how humble he is when he admits he didnt know adults having sex with kids was illegal.

The Church is truly universal in scope. And do you know whats in the universe? Penises and vaginas. Reproductive organs are firmly in the hands of the Pope and his underlings. Here is just one facet of divinely inspired public health teachings of the Church.

Stay in touch! Like Laughing in Disbelief on Facebook:

See original here:
4 Real Reasons Why Catholicism Is Cooler Than Atheism - Patheos (blog)

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off on 4 Real Reasons Why Catholicism Is Cooler Than Atheism – Patheos (blog)

Atheism More Prevalent Among Americans Than the Polls Generally Show – Reason (blog)

Posted: at 10:34 pm

ZazzleAlthough acceptance of atheists is increasing, their fellow Americans still eye them with considerable suspicion. The percentage of Americans who declare themselves religiously unaffiliated has risen from 5 percent in 1972 to 25 percent now. But depending upon the poll, the share of Americans who call themselves atheists varies from a low of 3 percent to around 11 percent.

Given the social stigma attached to atheism, researchers at the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) hypothesized that polls might underreport the number of Americans who are nonbelievers. To test this hypothesis, they used the unmatched count technique, in which poll respondents are randomly divided into two groups. The control group is asked how many of a number of harmless statements"I am a vegetarian," "I can drive a motorcycle," "I own a dog," etc.are not true statements about them. The second group is asked to respond to one additional, more sensitive statement: "I believe in God."

Respondents are not specifically indicating which statements are true for them, only the total number that is. This type of polling has been used, for example, to estimate the size of the LGBT community and the extent of antigay feeling.

The researchers ran two slightly different unmatched count technique surveys involving 4,000 Americans. In their report, "How many atheists are there?," they conclude that about 26 percent of Americans likely do not believe in God.

Over at FiveThirtyEight, PRRI research director Daniel Cox notes that public attitudes toward the LGBT community have become more accepting as more Americans report having a gay friend or family member has increased. He suggests that the same dynamic is happening as more atheists come out of their nonbelief closets.

Interestingly, PRRI's 2013 American Values Survey reported that "fewer than 6-in-10 (58%) libertarians believe that God is a person with whom one can have a relationship, one-quarter (25%) believe God is an impersonal force in the universe, and 16% report that they do not believe in God."

For more background, see my article, "The New Age of Reason: Is the Fourth Great Awakening finally coming to a close?"

Also see ReasonTV's report on the Rally for Reason, a 2012 gathering of nonbelievers on the National Mall:

Here is the original post:
Atheism More Prevalent Among Americans Than the Polls Generally Show - Reason (blog)

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off on Atheism More Prevalent Among Americans Than the Polls Generally Show – Reason (blog)

What Do Atheists Do All Day? – Patheos – Patheos (blog)

Posted: at 10:34 pm

Catholic blogger Matthew Archbold recently wrote a post titled Atheism is the Uncoolest Choice Ever, and I Can Prove It. What struck me, in reading through his piece, is a series of specific assumptions. Take this, for instance:

4) This is an extreme Christian.

This is an extreme atheist:

See the difference?

Mother Theresa believed that suffering and poverty were beautiful, and reportedly denied patients in her care access to pain medicines or other interventions that would have increased their comfort. Shes not the person Id pick as a positive example of a Christian who lived a life of selfless service. In addition, many atheists are extremely critical of Dawkins, something Archbold seems not to know. More to the point, why does Archbold think it makes sense to compare an atheist professor with a Catholic humanitarian? Why not compare two professors, or two humanitarians?

But theres perhaps an even more important point to make:Many people who dont believe in God also dont give a whit about atheist figureheads. Atheism is not a church, with members and theology and an authority structure. Its not a belief system, and it has no dogma. There are conservative atheists and progressive atheists, anti-abortionatheists and pro-choice atheists, feminist atheists and misogynist atheiststhe list goes on and on.

Theres an assumption here thatthose who do not believe in the supernatural replace church with some sort of organized atheist activities. You can see that here:

6) Typical Atheist gathering:

World Youth Day:

See the difference?

The idea that that is a fair comparison is bizarre. For one thing, its a highly selective choice of imagesthe protesting atheists should be compared to pro-life protestors, not a worldwide meeting between youth and the pope, featuring live music and a festival atmosphere. For another thing, most individuals who do not believe in God arent replacing God-time with organized-atheist-time. Instead theyre replacing it with family-time. Or community-time. Or friend-time, or outdoor activities, or visiting museums, or playing board games, orwell, the list goes on forever.

Those who are actively religious, with a full schedule of church, youth group, and other church-related activities may have a hard time seeing past their experience to understand what life mightlook like without those things. Im sure I couldnt have imagined it myself at one point, during my many years as an evangelical. And yet, here I am. I take my daughter to Girl Scouts. I volunteer at my kids school. I have friends and neighbors over for cookouts. I garden. I campaign for local political. I take my kids to the library. I stop and talk with other parents dropping theirkids off atschool.

Not believing in God does not mean you lose all sense of community, or that you replace religious community with overtly atheist community. Far from it. While some atheists do become involved in organized atheism, thisinvolvement is often little different from other forms of activism, political, community, or otherwise. We all choose causes we are passionate about, whether it be womens issues, immigrants rights, poverty alleviationor defending the separation of church and state. In other words, even organized atheism is not about replacing religion.

One last thing. Note this part here:

1) Atheists have less children and that probably meanswell you probably know what that means since youre all about SCIENCE! Once again, to sum up, youll be miserable, have a shorter life, and quite likely less sex than your religious counterparts. And you thought atheism was cool? Reconsider and repent ye fools. Jesus said he is the way, the truth, and the life. Left unsaid, is that Hes totally cooler than Richard Dawkins!

This is a very serious whole to part fallacy. Even wereArchbolds claims here are trueand his claim that atheists have less sexseriouslyneeds a citationthere is some serious confusion of correlation and causation going on here. Being an atheist wont make you have fewer children, becausesurprise!how many children you have is up to you! (Well, and your partner, but you get the idea.) Being an atheist does not shrivel your ovaries (or testicles). Sure, religions frequently pressure their adherents to have children,but theres nothing stopping individual atheists from having children.

Whats missing is an understanding that atheism offers people choice. You want to have three or four children? Guess what, you can! You want to have no children? Guess what, you can? You want to spend your weekends hiking? Have at it! You want to spend your weekends gaming? You can! You want to focus your energy on environmental activism? Go to town! You want to work with local immigrant outreach groups? Be my guest! You want to go to a rock concert, have sex with your boyfriend, get a tattoo? By all means! You prefer the symphony,enjoy being single, and memorize poetry in your spare time?You go girl!

Im not saying that religion (in this case Catholicism) brings allend to choice. It doesnt. You still choose your passions, your interests, your areas of activismbut generally within certain boundaries. There are pressures exerted by your religious communitypressure to attend church and reconciliation, pressure to remain abstinent until marriage, pressure to oppose abortion and gay marriage. And depending on the sect, pressure to not drink, to not wear certain clothes, to not listen to certain kinds of music, and so forth.

Archbold presents a contrast between two sectsone, he suggests, with stellar role models and events, the other with crappy role models and eventswhen in fact the actualcontrast is between joining a community with specific rules and norms, on the one hand, and being able to more freely follow your interests and create your own communities and social circles, on the other.

To be sure, some, like Archbold, prefer joining a ready-made community with its own rules and norms to creating their own communities. Thats understandable! This decision, however, should notbe backed up with stereotypes and falsehoods aboutthe alternative like those bandied about in Archbolds article.

Or has the Catholic Church exited the eighthcommandment?

See original here:
What Do Atheists Do All Day? - Patheos - Patheos (blog)

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off on What Do Atheists Do All Day? – Patheos – Patheos (blog)

Speaker to address ‘The Church and Modern Atheism’ – Nogales International

Posted: at 10:34 pm

Father Jude Eli will again offer classes at Sacred Heart Church in Nogales, this time with the topic of Current Trends of Secularism, the Church and Modern Atheism.

The classes will run from Monday, June 5 through Thursday, June 8, with a morning session from 10-11:30 a.m. and an evening class 7-8:30 p.m. Each class will have a unique focus; he does not repeat the information covered in the morning class at the evening class, organizers said.

The classes will be held at the Sacred Heart Center on the corner of Walnut and Araballo streets, and all are welcome.

Eli has been a member of the Dominican Order since 1964. He holds degrees in cultural anthropology, philosophy and theology, and has done sabbaticals in Biblical archaeology and Judaic studies in Jerusalem.

For more information, contact Irma Lopez at (520) 287-9221.

Originally posted here:
Speaker to address 'The Church and Modern Atheism' - Nogales International

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off on Speaker to address ‘The Church and Modern Atheism’ – Nogales International