Tag: Religious bullying

  • It’s only a ruddy parking ticket

    Remember the Monty Python court room bit?

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLplQWB2S_8

    Behold Michael Sean Winters yesterday in the National Catholic Reporter, doing a very similar bit.

    President Barack Obama lost my vote yesterday when he declined to expand the exceedingly narrow conscience exemptions proposed by the Department of Health and Human Services. The issue of conscience protections is so foundational, I do not see how I ever could, in good conscience, vote for this man again.

    I do not come at this issue as a Catholic special pleader, who wants only to protect my own, although it was a little bracing to realize that the president’s decision yesterday essentially told us, as Catholics, that there is no room in this great country of ours for the institutions our Church has built over the years to be Catholic in ways that are important to us. Nor, frankly, do I come at the issue as an anti-contraception zealot: I understand that many people, and good Catholics too, reach different conclusions on the matter although I must say that Humanae Vitae in its entirety reads better, and more presciently, every year.

    No, I come at this issue as a liberal and a Democrat and as someone who, until yesterday, generally supported the President, as someone who saw in his vision of America a greater concern for each other, a less mean-spirited culture, someone who could, and did, remind the nation that we are our brothers’ keeper, that liberalism has a long vocation in this country of promoting freedom and protecting the interests of the average person against the combined power of the rich, and that we should learn how to disagree without being disagreeable. I defended the University of Notre Dame for honoring this man, and my heart was warmed when President Obama said at Notre Dame: “we must find a way to reconcile our ever-shrinking world with its ever-growing diversity — diversity of thought, diversity of culture, and diversity of belief. In short, we must find a way to live together as one human family.”

    To borrow from Emile Zola: J’Accuse!

    And so on, for 13 more throbbing paragraphs, all to upbraid Obama because, to quote the NCR’s own reportage,

    Although Catholic leaders vowed to fight on, the Obama administration has turned down repeated requests from Catholic bishops, hospitals, schools and charitable organizations to revise its religious exemption to the requirement that all health plans cover contraceptives and sterilization free of charge.

    It’s quite extraordinary that Winters thinks (or pretends to think) that requiring all health plans to cover contraceptives and sterilization is somehow the opposite of a greater concern for each other and of protecting the interests of the average person against the combined power of the rich. It’s quite extraordinary that he thinks it’s liberal to want to make it harder for women to use contraception. It’s quite extraordinary that he thinks it can possibly be liberal to attempt to force people to have children when they don’t want to. It’s extraordinary that he thinks the church should interfere with and mess up people’s lives in that way.

    Zola, of course, wrote his famous essay in response to the Dreyfuss affair. Then, the source of injustice was anti-Semitic bigotry. Today, while I cannot believe that the President himself is an anti-Catholic bigot, he has caved to those who are. In politics, as in life, we are often known by the company we keep. Hmmmm. Sr. Carol Keehan, a woman who has dedicated her life and her ministry to help the ill and the aged or the fundraisers and the lobbyists at NARAL? Is that really a tough call?

    What a disgusting bit of rhetorical bullying. Because Obama hasn’t caved to Catholic demands over insurance coverage for contraception, therefore Obama is doing something mysteriously bad to Carol Keehan?

    Theocracy at work.

    H/t  Dan Fincke.

  • The organisers have refused to hand over the tapes

    The police are still policing the writers who read from The Satanic Verses at the Jaipur festival yesterday.

    A day after author Salman Rushdie made it clear that he would not be coming to India, alleging that he was told that underworld hitmen were out to get him, the raging debate at the Jaipur Literature Festival is still on. The police have now asked for the tape recordings of author Amitava Kumar reading out excerpts from Mr Rushdie’s controversial book – Satanic Verses – which is illegal in India. The organisers of the event, however, have refused to hand over the tapes.

    Authors Hari Kunzru and Amitava Kumar, as a mark of protest, used their session at the festival to read from Satanic Verses. Later, authors Jeet Thayil and Ruchir Joshi also read out from the banned book. “We asked organisers today to provide us details and video footage of a session in which the book was allegedly read,” Jaipur Police Additional Commissioner Biju George Joseph said.

    “We will examine whether the alleged reading from the banned book was done. It is a suo motu action. After examining the matter, appropriate action would be taken against those who were found guilty,” he said.

    Pathetic.

  • Mr Rushdie regrets

    More on Rushdie not in Jaipur.

    Times of India:

    Two prominent authors on Friday read out portions from Salman Rushdie’s banned book “Satanic Verses” at the Jaipur Literature Festival as a mark of protest after the India-born author had to pull out of the event over security concerns.

    As the literary community expressed outrage over Rushdie not being able to make the trip, Hari Kunzru and Amitava Kumar used their session at the festival to read from “Satanic Verses”. The controversial book was banned in the country shortly after it was published in 1988, for allegedly hurting the sentiments of Muslims.

    Love those guys.

    The organizers later asked Kumar not to go ahead with his reading. Kumar initially agreed to the suggestion but later continued reading from Rushdie’s work.

    Later, authors Jeet Thayil and Ruchir Joshi also read from the Satanic Verses.

    The BBC:

    Author Salman Rushdie has withdrawn from India’s biggest literary festival, saying that he feared assassination after influential Muslim clerics protested against his participation.

    The author had been due to speak at the Jaipur literature festival.

    He said he had been told by sources that assassins “may be on the way to Jaipur to kill me”.

    Wait for it –

    Salman Rushdie sparked anger in the Muslim world with his book The Satanic Verses, which many see as blasphemous.

    There it is. Wouldn’t do not to have that.

    The author had been scheduled to speak on the opening day of the five-day Jaipur event which began on Friday, but earlier this week organisers said his schedule had changed and took his name off the list of speakers.

    “I have now been informed by intelligence sources in Maharashtra and Rajasthan that paid assassins from the Mumbai underworld may be on their way to Jaipur to ‘eliminate’ me,” Salman Rushdie said in a statement read out at the festival.

    “While I have some doubts about the accuracy of this intelligence, it would be irresponsible of me to come to the festival in such circumstances; irresponsible to my family, to the festival audience and to my fellow writers,” he added.

    “I will therefore not travel to Jaipur as planned.”

    Correspondents say the protests against this year’s planned trip are linked to crucial state elections due in Uttar Pradesh.

    Correspondents say no political party wants to antagonise the Muslim community, which constitutes 18% of voters in the state, India’s largest.

    Notice that correspondents apparently assume that Muslims can be seen as a solid bloc or a “community” which thinks and votes as one. Somewhat “Islamophobic,” that.

     

     

     

  • No longer a “safe space”

    Alex Gabriel reports another front in the battle against “Islamophobia” (meaning, in the battle against any and all criticism or mockery of Islam). This time it’s LSE’s Student Union hassling LSE’s student atheist society. It has to do with the atheist society’s Facebook page not being a “safe space” for Muslim students.

    What?

    Well don’t look at me, it’s not my idea. It’s what they were told:

    Here’s part of the e-mail I got today from the society, who’ve just met with their union to discuss the issues:

    Essentially, a large of group of Muslim students felt offended that there were pictures of Mohammed on the facebook group. As a result, they felt that our facebook group was no longer a ‘safe space’ for Muslims. Thus, they have ‘requested’ that we remove the offending images. Until an official complaint procedure is completed they cannot mandate we take it down. However, they made it pretty clear that would be the next step should we choose to keep the images.

    Was the atheist society’s Facebook page ever intended to be a “safe space” for Muslims? Is that the point of such societies – to be “safe spaces” for their opposites? Aren’t people allowed to be X without also having to be a “safe space” for anyone who disagrees with them?

    No no and yes. It’s just a new way to bully people you don’t like – conflate a difference in world view with a personal assault.

  • Muscle v truth and humour

    Salman Rushdie stayed away from the Jaipur Literary Festival because of threats. So, defying the organizers of the festival, Hari Kunzru and Amitava Kumar read from The Satanic Verses, then Jeet Thayil and Ruchir Joshi joined them.

    And then what happened? According to Stephanie Nolen, South Asia correspondent for the Globe and Mail, who is at the festival and tweeting from and about it, the four writers are being investigated by the police. Since she tweeted that from the festival, it must mean that the cops were “investigating” the writers up close and personal, right then and there.

    I get all this via the invaluable Salil Tripathi (#FF!), who said at Facebook about an hour ago:

    Stephanie Nolen has tweeted that the authors who read from The Satanic Verses (Hari, Amitava, Ruchir, Jeet) are to be investigated by Rajasthan’s finest. Many of my friends reading this are in Jaipur, some as writers, some as participants. Overwhelm the cops; hope more and more of you read publicly from the novel, and shame the state further. Deoband and the state may have the muscle – the writers have truth, humour, and Gandhi on their side.

    Go, writers. Rock the world. Push back.

    Update

    Subir Ghosh reports a press release that he got from Kavita K Bhaskaran, Senior Vice President, Sampark, the PR agency running the Jaipur festival:

    This press release is being issued on behalf of the organizers of the Jaipur Literature Festival. It has come to their attention that certain delegates acted in a manner during their sessions today which were without the prior knowledge or consent of the organizers. Any views expressed or actions taken by these delegates are in no manner endorsed by the Jaipur Literature Festival. Any comments made by the delegates reflect their personal, individual views and are not endorsed by the Festival or attributable to its organizers or anyone acting on their behalf. The Festival organizers are fully committed to ensuring compliance of all prevailing laws and will continue to offer their fullest cooperation to prevent any legal violation of any kind. Any action by any delegate or anyone else involved with the Festival that in any manner falls foul of the law will not be tolerated and all necessary, consequential action will be taken. Our endeavor has always been to provide a platform to foster an exchange of ideas and the love of literature, strictly within the four corners of the law. We remain committed to this objective.

    So much for solidarity in defense of free expression.

  • Are you now or have you ever been an Islamophobe

    The UCL Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society put out a statement today. They’re tired of the whole thing and don’t want to talk about it any more.

    What makes a student society is the ability to be open, foster community and – most importantly – encourage critical debate. The principal objective of our Society is to maintain a sceptical view on everything, be it astrology, numerology or theism. I am personally a strong believer of freedom of speech and I believe that it is a vitally important freedom to maintain. Freedom of speech guarantees the space for intellectual discourse, and in that space, people should be able to say what they want, without being afraid of censorship on the grounds of offence.

    In other words – thank you so much for your valuable input, Ahmadiyya Male Muslim Youth Association UK, but we’ll take it from here. We would actually like to run our organization in a way that fits with our reasons for belonging to it in the first place rather than according to your reasons for wanting to kick up a fuss. We’re terrifically grateful for your energetic – indeed, truth be told, rather insistent – offers to help, but we think we know better how to run our own organization than you do. We would draw your attention to that lack of input from us on how you should run your organization; there’s a reason for that.

    By our publication of this image there was no intention to offend and i am sorry to hear that people took personal offence when viewing it. However, ‘offence’ was certainly inadequate grounds for the removal of the image to be requested by the UCL Union. Their policies need clarification to prevent this same situation from arising in the future.

    Yes they do.

    Meanwhile, in case anyone’s blood pressure should fall dangerously low, the LSE Students Union has leapt into the breach created by the UCL ASH’s retirement. The LSE Atheist, Secularist and Humanist society has also put out a statement.

    Today we were contacted by the LSE Students Union to “discuss some of the issues around recent postings on facebook etc.”

    We think this might have to do with the accusations of “Islamophobia” that were levelled against us during Thursday 19th Union General Meeting after some “Jesus and Mo” cartoons were posted on our facebook group and Marshall Palmer posted an article on his blog about the cartoon controversy at UCL.

    Any accusation of “Islamophobia” against the LSE SU Atheist, Secularist and Humanist society are baseless. We will be meeting SU officials tomorrow 20th to discuss this issue.

    And so the secret police continue their vital work.

     

     

  • More from the bully boyz

    And then we drop in on the Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Association UK – which is actually not a “youth association” at all because it addresses members as “Brothers,” so clearly it’s only for male youth. Anyway we drop in on it and find its views on how to get more deference and obedience from people who don’t share its religious commitments.

    You should all now be aware that we have been running a campaign over the past week in response to the decision take by Atheist Society of UCL to post a cartoon depicting the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) and the Holy Prophet Jesus (as) having a beer (God forbid) at a pub frequented by some of the UCL students.

    To defend the honour of our beloved Prophets, a press release was issued along with a number of articles. Our message to the UCL Atheist Society was simply that they should use their right to ”freedom of speech” in a responsible way which demonstrates both tolerance and respect.

    The voice of the goombah bully boy again. The voice of the thug smacking a club against the palm of his hand in a threatening manner. “Hey you: use your ‘freedom of speech’ [pause to spit on the ground] in a responsible way or you might be getting a visit from us. Demonstrate tolerance and respect or we’ll make things hot for you. When we say ‘respect’ we mean do whatever we say as soon as we say it; that’s respect. We hope we don’t have to remind you of this again.”

    All this for the sake of “defending the honour” of a couple of guys who have been dead for many centuries.

  • History has told us that these things cause offence

    The president of UCL’s Atheist, Secularist and Humanist society, Robbie Yellon, has stepped down to be replaced by former vice president Michael Thor. Yellon quit because of all this mishegas about the Jesus and Mo image.

    “Robbie stepped aside because he signed up as president to organise events and run a student society,” said Michael Paynter, secretary for the National Federation of Atheist, Humanist and Secular Student Societies.

    “He did not appreciate the stress he would be under when dealing with a controversy like this, so he wanted to make way for someone else.”

    A small but no doubt pleasant victory for the shit-stirrers. The BBC goes on to make the shit-stirrer case.

    The Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Association is continuing with its protest against the image, saying it has wider implications.

    Adam Walker, the association’s national spokesperson, said the two student groups had worked well together in the past and said the offence was unnecessary.

    “The principle is more important than who is being attacked – this time it is Muslims and Christians* but in the future it could be atheists themselves.

    “There is no need to print these things other than to cause offence and history has told us that these things cause offence.”

    That is such an interesting idea, or not so much idea as trap. People have pitched huge violent rageboy fits in the past over what they chose to consider “offence”; therefore history shows that what rageboys choose to consider “offence” will be met with huge violent fits; therefore you must never do the thing which rageboys choose to consider “offence”; so just forget about this pesky liberal idea of free debate. It’s an elaborate threat. “Our goombahs have killed people over this stuff in the past, so you know they’ll do it again, so shut your filthy kuffar mouth.”

    But at the same time what we’re talking about here is a principle, and it could be atheists next time. It never is, of course, but it could be. We’re all in this together, united for the principle that perceived “offence” trumps freedom of discussion and criticism. In your dreams, Adam Walker.

    UCL Union (UCLU) said in a statement: “The atheist society has agreed they will take more consideration when drawing up publicity for future events.

    “The society was asked to remove the image because UCLU aims to foster good relations between different groups of students and create a safe environment where all students can benefit from societies regardless of their religious or other beliefs.”

    Yes it did. We saw that statement a couple of days ago, and a very nasty statement it is. A “safe environment” is interpreted as one in which one particular religion is given special treatment.

    *Note the lie. It’s not Christians.

  • Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?

    And then there’s this “Urgent – Calling all muslims” at Islamicawakening on Monday –

    Brothers, the Queen Mary Athiest Society, sister of the shaytaani UCL Athiest Society (which published pictures of Rasoolullah(saw)) are holding an event today at Queen Mary University of London at 7:00 pm on ‘ Is Shariah in violation of human rights’.. We need your presence. Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?

    The kuffar have no right to speak, at a university in London. That’s an interesting thought. Also the comment addresses “Brothers” – so apparently “all muslims” actually means only half of all muslims – and then the “kuffar” who was speaking at Queen Mary that evening is a woman, so her right to speak is even more non-existent.

    Let me ask you – if a bunch of kuffar got together and were given the right to touch your mother up and analyse her, then would you stand by and let it happen?

    The patriarchal mind at work – “you” are always male, and women are always “yours” as opposed to being you. Men are always the agents and women are always the faceless voiceless objects. That of course is before we even get to the confusion between molesting a human being and disputing a religion.

    Then what about your deen?!! Remember, these guys hate religion and are not looking to have an unbiased debate. Please be here by 7 pm. to let them know what we think. Back in my day no-one in UNi would dare even look the wrong way at a muslim, because we used to represent our deen and didnt take kindly to it being insulted. It is only when the pacifists ecame numerous that the kuffar dared to raise their heads.

    A bully and a thug.

    Update

    Via Anne Marie Waters – she and Maryam debated sharia with an Ahmaddiya Muslim at UCL last month, and here that debate is:

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTYrjFE6Rcg

  • Threat threat threat threat

    On Rhys Morgan’s (currently very busy) Facebook page – a guy called Safwan Ahmed, a graduate of Rhys’s school, posted to say

    take that blog down before i fly kick you!

    Rhys said no, Ahmed replied

    inappropriate and offensive! take it down before you lose the remaining half of your penis.

    Someone tried to tell Ahmed that threats are a serious matter and can be reported to the authorities. Ahmed replied

    nah no argument cbf wasting time with u. sorry if you were looking for a rebuttal, i will deal with this matter personally.

    More back and forth, culminating in Ahmed’s

    hahahahha scott you amuse me in the sense that your a fucking sad prick! look at my avatar? id rather not! go stick your avatar up your ass you lame cunt! Rhys u can stfu i will be seeing u soon!

    Helen Dale said she was taking a screenshot, and Safwan Ahmed went silent. Hooray for that, at least – but this is what’s at stake – threats of violence over benign cartoon images on blogs.

  • Jesus and Mo promote peace, tolerance and respect

    A new Jesus and Mo.

    bogus

    With an apt dedication:

    Today’s comic is dedicated to Rhys Morgan, Jessica Ahlquist, One Law for All, and Salman Rushdie. Heroes, all.

    Of course, author himself belongs in that company.

  • That kind of ruckus

    Separation of church and state? That’s terrorism!

    The mayor of Whiteville, Tennessee said his community is  under attack from a national atheist organization that is threatening to sue  unless they remove a cross atop the town’s water tower.

    “They are terrorists as far as I’m concerned,” said  Mayor James Bellar about the Freedom From Religion Foundation. “They are alleging that some Whiteville resident feels very, very intimidated by this  cross.”

    And that makes them terrorists. Saying a minority feels intimidated by a majoritarian religious display is terrorism, which is why the United States has never had any truck with pestilential terrorist ideas about the protection of minority rights. Thank god for loyal patriotic majoritarian anti-terrorism public officials like the mayor of Whiteville, Tennessee.

    [T]he Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation said the cross is a violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. They’ve given the mayor until the end of October to remove the cross. If he refuses, they have threatened to sue.

    “The law is very clear on this,” Freedom From  Religion Foundation co-president Dan Barker told Fox News Radio. “A secular city  may not promote or hinder religion. We don’t have a problem with believers putting up crosses wherever they want, but this is a cross put up by the city on the city water tower.”

    Terrorist bastard. Terrorist communist Muslim socialist anarchist godhating bastard.

    Barker said they’ve been sending letters to the city  since last year demanding that the cross be taken down, acting on behalf of an  unnamed resident who complained.

    “It offends many residents,” Barker said of the  cross. “Many of them think the cross symbol is an offensive symbol – that it’s  an insult to humanity.”

    But Mayor Bellar said he doesn’t believe that’s  true.

    “As a matter of fact, I don’t even think it’s a Whiteville resident,” he said. “We don’t have people of that belief here and if we do they’re not going to raise that kind of ruckus for the rest of the town.”

    He said menacingly.

    H/t Ed Brayton.

  • “Protecting faith and freedom”

    Oh no you don’t.

    I’ve already said I think Rev Jones is a bad man. He’s no ally or comrade of mine. In his world I would be a lifelong domestic servant with no vote no voice no views no rights, so even without his dramatic performances, he would be no comrade of mine.

    But that’s my reasoned choice; it’s not the law of the land. “Interfaith Alliance” please note.

    Washington, DC – Interfaith alliance President Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy issues the following statement in response to the killings of UN Workers in Afghanistan.

    …this violence is a response, unacceptable as it may be, to the burning of a Qur’an in Florida last month by a local pastor. The disrespect he has shown for the Muslim faith has now reflected on the rest of us and has led to the worst possible outcome.

    We as a nation must do more to make clear that bigoted rhetoric and action against the Muslim faith will not be tolerated and does not represent what is in the hearts and minds of the majority of Americans.

    Oh no we must not. We must do no such thing. What Gaddy chooses to call “bigoted rhetoric” against Islam is protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution, and even “interfaith alliances” don’t get to suppress it. We are allowed to criticize Islam, even harshly, and no interfaith boffin gets to stop us.

  • Why are atheists so angry?

    Rabbi David Wolpe pretends to be mystified that atheists find theism irritating.

    How harmless is it to post an article about why people should read the bible on a site devoted to religion? I did on this very page, and it evoked more than 2,000 responses, most of them angry…

    It is curious that a religion site draws responses mostly from atheists, and that the atheists are very unhappy…Only the untutored assume that religious people predominate on websites (Huffington Post Religion page, On Faith in the Washington Post, Beliefnet.com) devoted to religion.

    He thinks a section of a website is itself a website, or he pretends to think that so that he can claim that the religion section of the Huffington Post is a website and therefore that he was just minding his own business on a religion website and a lot of pesky atheists barged in and started yelling at him. But HuffPo is not a religion website and it is not obvious or self-explanatory that news sites or commentary sites have to include “faith” sections at all. The fact that some such sites treat “faith” with such deference is a major source of the irritation.

    Or to put it another way, HuffPo has a mixed audience, so Wolpe can’t expect atheists to stay off his particular articles on the grounds that he’s not talking to us. It doesn’t work that way. There’s no invisible fence around the “faith” section of HuffPo. We don’t look at his stuff and say “well he’s just doing his job” and go away again without saying anything.

    In short, no, it’s not curious that pieces like his draw more atheists than theists. It’s not that we’re trespassing on his space, it’s that he’s trespassing on ours – on everyone’s. We simply don’t take it for granted that religion should have a place at every single table.

    But why seek out a religious site solely to insult religion? I wondered: Why are atheists so angry?

    It’s not a religious site; it’s a section of a secular site, which we think pays far too much attention to religion. We don’t seek it out; it thrusts itself upon our attention. We’re angry because we’re tired of sanctimonious nagging.

  • Another mystery for Karen Armstrong

    Theocracy in Israel.

    Parents of European, or Ashkenazi, origin do not want their daughters to be educated in the same classroom as schoolgirls of Middle Eastern and North African descent, or Sephardim, claiming that they are not as religious…

    Batting off accusations of racism, the parents, who live in the West Bank settler community of Immanuel, have argued that their wish to separate their children is motivated only by religious and cultural differences between the different Jewish communities.

    “The Sephardic Jews are less observant, they dress differently,” said Carter Schwartz, a 31-year-old protester with an American accent. “It’s like sending kids of a totally different learning level to Harvard, and the government forces [Harvard] to take them in.”

    And thus we see how religion makes people nicer and more compassionate.

    Dressed in their traditional black garb and wide-rimmed hats, bearded marchers held aloft banners saying “God will rule for all eternity”, a reference to the supremacy of religious interests over secular law, and “High Court against the people”.

    Right, and that’s why people like that are so terrifying.

    The Haredi Jews are seen as an economic drain on society, with many of the men choosing years of subsidised religious studies over paid employment. A soaring birth rate has led to predictions that they could form a majority of Jerusalem’s half-million population in a decade.

    In recent months, they have proved a disruptive presence, littering Jerusalem with rubbish and soiled nappies to protest against a new parking lot that would encourage more traffic on the Sabbath and clashing with police to prevent the exhumation of ancient human remains that they claim are Jewish to make way for a new emergency hospital wing.

    Right, and that’s why people like that are such a pain in the ass.

  • A tinkling cymbal

    Is your stomach strong enough for more vulgar malice and abuse from that impressive Anglican priest George Pitcher?

    He starts with mere stupidity, attributing every good thing in the world apart from coffee and the internet to theology. Yes really: theology. Theology did democracy, the abolition of slavery, education, the family, marriage, our judicial system – everything. Then he goes on to rail at Terry Sanderson, but, quickly bored with that, he returns to his real voodoo doll: Evan Harris.

    The NSS (in which, never let it be forgotten, ousted Lib Dem MP Evan Harris is a leading light) likes to go on about opposing religious privilege, freedom for non-believers (as if they haven’t got it) and tolerance. But note that if the likes of Mr Sanderson ever came to power (and the likes of Mr Sanderson include the wall-eyed Harris, who might have a seat in government now if he hadn’t lost his seat – so who says there isn’t a God?) they would withdraw all funding from the teaching of theology, whence all education derives, in favour of what he and his friends have unilaterally decided is “real education”. That is extremist policy that has more in common with totalitarian regimes than with our parliamentary democracy.

    Completely random arbitrary abuse of Evan Harris coupled with the imbecilic claim that all education derives from theology; modern Anglicanism at its finest.

  • The elites who run the Empire State Building

    Bill Donohue is in a huge giant rage again, this time because he ordered the people who manage the Empire State Building to illuminate it with blue and white lights one day in order to celebrate the birthday of “Mother Teresa” and it didn’t obey.

    Well – there are only 365 days in the year and the people who run the ESB can’t obey every single time someone orders them to illuminate the building in order to celebrate X, so why is Donohue all tied in knots? Because “Mother Teresa” is obviously one of the 365 most important and wonderful people of all time and therefore should get one of the 365 days there are in the year? Please. That must be why though, because nothing else fits. But what makes Bill Donohue think MT is all that important and wonderful? Apart from relentless PR by the short Albanian sadist, of course.

    Well – she’s Catholic – and – well she’s Catholic, and Catholics are like a totally persecuted minority, so if a Catholic doesn’t get her birthday celebrated on the Empire State Building when Bill Donohue says it should be, then…Well it’s an elitist plot, that’s what, and Bill Donohue and Bill O’Reilly (do we sense a theme here?) are going to make a big stink about it, so there.

    One wonders what world the elites who run the Empire State Building live in. Besides siding with the Communists and dissing Catholics, they are just plain stupid. If they think they can ride this out, they have no idea what they are dealing with.

    Ah – out come the threats. Suitable for a loyal Catholic perhaps – he must have grown up steeped in threats and bullying – but not very pretty to watch.

    Bill Donohue and George Pitcher: making religion look bad in every way they can think of.

    Hat-tip to Miranda.

  • For the record

    It gets more and more tedious, but it can’t be helped – or it can be helped but it shouldn’t be. The relentless brainless dishonest denigration of “New” atheists has to be shown up for what it is every damn time it happens. It may be futile to say “That’s a lie, and that is, and that is, and that’s another”; it may just entrench the lies even deeper (depressingly, there is research that indicates this is what happens); but it has to be done, if only for the record. (What record? Oh shut up.)

    Michael McGhee, Comment is Free (sugar and tea, rainbows at sea, la de da dee).

    I am not a believer. I incline towards a secular humanism that leaves space for “spirituality” – conceived as the disciplined search for self-knowledge – and recognises that we can sometimes and beyond the exercise of our will transcend the narrow perspective of ego-centric self-enclosure.

    That sets the scene. He’s not a believer, yet he chooses to call something entirely this-worldly and secular by the means-everything-and-nothing word “spirituality,” thus establishing himself as better and wiser than people who don’t call their thoughts by that elevated name. Then having done that, he moves right into the “New” atheist-bashing.

    But my wariness of “belief” is matched by an equal wariness of the new atheists’ rejection of belief. It is not just that their popular polemic shows a juvenile comprehension of religion as altogether “a bad thing”, nor that they are silent about self-knowledge and transcendence.

    There: that’s for the record. A stupidly sweeping and false generalization, closely followed by a stupidly sweeping and false generalization.

    After that there’s a lot of guff which boils down to some this-world morality bolted clumsily onto hand-waving about spiritual transcendence and transcendent spirituality for the sake of…I don’t know, separating himself from the “New” atheists or something.

  • Believers don’t believe in God

    Oh and by the way new atheists are bad and wrong.

  • It’s even more of an outrage than I thought

    Manic street preacher reports that

    Mr Taylor seemed like a perfectly rational, intelligent and calm man who wanted to put his point across and was certainly not the “crackpot” that several bloggers, including myself to an extent, had presumed him to be. He was clearly still deeply affected by his horrendous childhood experiences of a strict Catholic upbringing by the Christian Brotherhood and was so distressed by the prospect of receiving a custodial sentence that he had to leave the courtroom midway through the hearing after nearly fainting.

    He also quotes the Telegraph with more and even nastier details:

    Judge James told him: “Not only have you shown no remorse for what you did but even now you continue to maintain that you have done nothing wrong and say that whenever you feel like it you intend to do the same thing again in the future.”…

    He was sentenced to six months in jail suspended for two years, ordered to perform 100 hours of unpaid work and pay £250 costs.

    Remorse – why should he show remorse for something so minor, so non-criminal, so victimless, so basically anodyne? What is all this monstrous bullying in the name of ever more abject “respect” for religion?