Richard Dawkins calls for arrest of Pope Benedict XVI

Richard Dawkins (author of The God Delusion) plans to have Pope Benedict XVI arrested upon his arrival in the UK, for "crimes against humanity"; and is being aided in his fiendish plot by fellow Atheist and author Christopher Hitchens (author of God Is Not Great).  The duo plan to exploit a legal principle that says that Pope Benedict XVI is not recognised as a head of state by the UN; which means he cannot claim diplomatic immunity while in the UK.  Both Dawkins and Hitchens are confident that their legal team can mount a case against  Pope Benedict XVI for his alleged cover up of sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Church.

Now, this is not exactly breaking news, and if Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens succeed in their legal pursuit of Pope Benedict XVI, it won’t be the first time that a pope has been arrested either; but what are the implications of such a case?  Dawkins and Hitchins argue that the victims of abuse in the Church; will finally get the justice they deserve, if Pope Benedict XVI is made accountable for his alleged part in the cover up.  However, many critics of the two are claiming that this is simply a self serving publicity stunt, aimed at undermining the Church.

Either way, I for one can't wait to see if the UK government will allow it to happen, or if they will, as they so often do, pander to the wishes of the religious right.  After all, there are about 1.3 billion Catholics in the world; that's almost as many people as there are in the world, who already hate the UK.  No doubt, Pope Benedict XVI is wishing this would all just go away, or would that be praying?  I also wonder whether he will have to swear on the bible, like everyone else, or does he have the big guy on speed dial?  I would imagine that God's number is assigned to the voicemail key, because we all know he never picks up his calls, in fact, he usually doesn't get back to you at all...unless you’re on death row, then there he is, and praise the lord, you're born again; convenient, eh?  If nothing else, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens have filled the void that was left when Mayweahter refused to fight Pacquiao; let’s hope this one goes the distance.

Agnostic - What do you believe?

Image source

I have often been asked why I am an atheist; which never ceases to make me laugh, because in actual fact, I am not an Atheist, I am an Agnostic. Believers and non-believers alike, assume that I am an Atheist based on my views of Christianity, Islam, and any other religious (in the spiritual sense) belief system you care to mention. You see, I don't believe in the existence of any variation of God(s) that mankind has dreamt up; but that does not mean that one or more Gods do not exist. Now, this is where most people seem to find it difficult to understand my stance, so I'll try to elaborate on what I think about the possible existence of a supreme being.


The God I don't believe in
When asked to present evidence of the existence of their God, most people of faith will roll out the same tired arguments. These usually consist of; and this list is by no means exhaustible: quoting their scriptures, talking about feelings of being touched by their god; and in more recent times, claiming parts of their holy books contain scientific knowledge that predates the study of a particular field of science. None of these arguments have any substance in reality; but that doesn't matter to people of faith, because they are blinded by their faith, and only see what they want to see. This is especially evident when people of faith complain that they are being persecuted because the rest of us freely express our own beliefs. How dare we tell them that we don't believe in their God; and then have the gall to explain why, right?

The God that could be
Although I do not believe that there is any evidence of God; I refuse to rule out the possibility of one existing. Mankind is an arrogant species, and we think we have it all figured out; but there is so much that we do not know. Atheists can no more prove that God does not exist, than people of faith can prove he does, yet Atheists are just as secure in their belief as people of faith are. Granted, in terms of actual, tangible evidence, to support their argument, Atheists would appear to have the upper hand. On a basic level, this would also suggest that every one of us should be on one side of the fence or the other, so to speak; but there is another possibility. What if there is a Creator; but they don't actually care if they are worshipped, they have no desire to reveal themselves to us, and they simply brought the universe into existence because they could? Don't get me wrong, I'm not in the process of registering myself as the founder of "The Church of indifference" (although I do own the copyright, so hands off); but it is possible, isn't it?

Of course, unless this God does in fact reveal itself, and there is no room to deny its existence, it will remain no more than a possibility; but a girl can dream, can't she? I don't claim to speak on behalf of all Agnostics either, I just thought that it was time that we stood up and were counted; and if you wait until my next post, I might even introduce you to the other four of us. Thank you for taking the time to read this and if you liked it, please feel free to share it with your friends.

Happy Stolen Religious Holiday

The name "Easter" originated with the names of an ancient Goddess and God. The Venerable Bede, (672-735 CE.) a Christian scholar, first asserted in his book De Ratione Temporum that Easter was named after Eostre (a.k.a. Eastre). She was the Great Mother Goddess of the Saxon people in Northern Europe. Similarly, the "Teutonic dawn goddess of fertility [was] known variously as Ostare, Ostara, Ostern, Eostra, Eostre, Eostur, Eastra, Eastur, Austron and Ausos." ₁ Her name was derived from the ancient word for spring: "eastre."

...Read full article at www.religioustolerance.org by clicking this link.

How many Christians, all over the world, will be celebrating Easter today, and rejoicing in the resurrection of Christ? You would imagine they all are, but you would be wrong. There are many Christians who accept the origins of this, and other holidays, such as Christmas and Halloween, as being pagan; and actively discourage their Christian brothers and sisters from participating in the traditional celebrations held on those days. So what does this say about the Christian belief system; that it's ok to borrow other peoples myths to make yours more substantial? The answer is simple; it doesn't really matter, because most Christians don't believe it anyway - they're too busy following their blind faith in their ancient stories....

Christian: So, God, why do we have bunnies on Easter?

God: They're cute; what's to know.

Christian: Um...okay; but why is it called Easter?

God: Jeez, there were these other guys whose festivals were much less boring than ours, so we took them; what's the big issue?

Christian: Isn’t that stealing?

God: No silly; you can’t steal from Godless heathens.

Christian: Does it say that in the Bible?

God: Yes; right under the part where it says stop questioning God’s word. You know, just above where it hints that there is a distinct posibility there’ll be a smiting if you do?

Christian: Yay for Easter?

God: That’s right, little buddy, that’s right.