Wasabi Peas' Home Page: This Peas' Got Kicks

Wasabi Peas' Home Page: This Peas' Got Kicks: Hi! I Wasabi Pea. That not my real name. Me newly minted U.S. style hobo. I come here in seeking friendly people to hold meaningful relation...

The Three Ancient Greeks

I hate religious bigotry

When atheists start to jabber about why they hate God and think they know something they always start the crap about religious bigots. They do not like the religions because people give them so much importance and they know they are all crap so they should just go away and shut up. Atheists are sick of all this bullshit. Why can't people just evolve? We can prove that anybody who is dead is is just dead and I am not worried about it. You are afraid to be dead so you have to make up stories where you don't die and it is just stupid.

This kind of argumentation is meant to enlighten the poor deluded people who can believe in astonishing things like miracles and life that exists without matter.

People complain about intrusiveness. Do not pry too much into other people's business. Being lectured by these intelligent atheists whenever they take a college course or gather for public consumption is meant to be a intrusive act against the people they object to. They mean to embarrass and bully everyone that hears and sees their behavior away from any thoughtful consideration of anything that is not a hard cold tangible. They are sterile and stupid and usually full of shit about everything. Atheism is usually a pathological condition. The atheist blames everything that he finds wrong with existence on the fact that religion exists. He believes that if humans could eliminate religion he and everyone else could be happy. I do not think Christians or religious people need to entertain atheists as much as they do. Politely telling them to shut up does not need to be a great cause for guilt. They love to talk and think wisdom bleeds from their black heart. Sadly, the argument will never be won with everyone, and arguing with people who are as confirmed of an opinion as an atheist, is as pointless an act as can be done.

They have found a fish that completely rules out God's role as creator

A flat fish has been discovered with pop-eyes that can look up from the ocean floor and this disproves any possibility of god being a creator. Such a thing could only have occurred through Natural Selection according to most of the article writers on the internet.

I just did a search to find a pop-eyed flat fish for this post but I found a picture of a "scientific atheist" who has been writing books about his science religion and how he is going to be able to show that "religion is a virus of the mind."

No one can prove God exists

The fact that one can not prove the existance of God does not prove his nonexistance either. The fact that some people want to try everyone they have access to over the proof of the thing they believe is petty persecution. I understand how they feel oppressed by people who use their religion to make political gains by putting their opinions into God's mouth. God is for a flat tax. God doesn't like immigrants. God says America should be an English only country. God says marriage is only valid between a man and a woman. These programs by religious leaders who claim to be practicing politics with God at the center seldom find corresponding scriptures to support thier goals. But have they so tainted the concept of God or the value of reading the Bible without a cynical disdain for the idiocy of the ancient sages who wrote it? The Bible is not their book. The stories are worth looking at without trying to stick it to James Dobson or whoever is the Christian bully who seperates one from their interest in the history of religion. And allow oneself to imagine the realities that religions present.

I had taken a number of introduction to philosophy courses and it was only upon a reading that I did on my own of the trial of Socrates that I noticed the part where he declares his belief in God. The subject was usually taught as he was on trial for not believing in the gods and nothing was ever said about the lines where he talks about his personal belief in a god who would punish his persecutors and put him in a better place. It is only one person's opinion. But Socrates was probably pretty smart and did a lot of thinking before he made up his mind and he did it against the wishes of most of his fellow Athenians who were in pagan cults that he thought were stupid.

The stories that people relate about God transform the universe for those people who care about them. Sour and cynical atheists who must have proof that in the end they will have an eternity are blind and insensible.

You have to be an atheist to believe in evolution

Evolution is a word and a concept. It is not merely the big one: Darwin's Evolution. It was a word long before Darwin and anthropologists took it from the language to be the label for their "discovery."

Evolving is the accumulations of changes that occur over time. It is an inarguable fact that the concept and the word have a true and useful meaning. The theory that Darwin created was Natural Selection. It has been "evolved" to be Evolution. The atheist evolutionist will usually cluck and crow about nothing more than his complete trust in the reality of any and all evidence of any and every definition of the concept of evolution.

His favorite accomplice in this din of mush-headed oppression is a creationist. Bible says I must believe that everybody must believe what the Bible says. And the debate rages on.

If it were not for this perfectly matched ideological bind there would be no atheism equals and/or is proved by evolution. It is unfortunate that the world had to be divided between such a mockery of intelligence as this debate has produced.

Character and intelligence and having values were once looked on as being of more value than being right about "the origin of species."

A lot of atheists would like to gloss over the moral license born from having no concern for religion inspired structures in our lives. They are still "good" just because they choose to be so and never needed to believe in fairy tales to stay that way. How do they propose to instill good civic values without religion? Atheists almost exclusively spend their energies on discouraging others to believe in their own religion. In this they are as zealous as any evangelist. When I was in my teens I had a crisis in my religion and declared myself to be an atheist to my religiously oppressive mother to better defend myself from her spiritual abuse. I decided after reading the marvelous "American Atheist" by the late Madeline Murray O'hare that I did not like advocating atheism. I had no compulsion for interfering with someone else on that subject and trying to make them feel like they are foolish in order to deprive them of the comfort of their beliefs. I saw it as an inhumane practice that even though I did not believe in the existence of God I had no interest in being deliberately cruel. Like most prattlers, the evangelical atheists are seeking attention and validation, because they feel sad and lonely. They want you to think they are smart.

Science Is True Because It Never Disagrees With Itself

The kids and others these days who argue against religion or traditional religions frequently use the argument that religion is inconsistant and science is consistant. The idea that science is a competitor for the position of religion was brought about using the supressive actions of the Middle ages against scientists along with strange old women who lived alone and anyone who did not have the support of the church for their way of life.

These medievalists would have had some notions of practical knowledge that were the state of the art science. Water is in the ground. I eat pigs. Things that by understanding helped them make lives for themselves.

Science has proliferated from the enlightenment to the scientific revolution and it is apparently viewed by most as a single body of proven facts and values that can compete with or replace religion as a means to assemble a livable way of existance. Religion is viewed as sullied from the misbeahavior of every preceding generation and as a cause of their misery and the proliferation of miseries for every generation ever known. That the world has been that awful for everyone is just assumed. But some pagans say that there were little "Fantasia" respites along the way when glorious free people sated themselves on all the beauty and bounty and killed without remorse for the benefit of the cool lifestyle.

The enlightenment did not only free science it also redefined the concepts of the individuals right to have a self at all. Human beings had not always been granted permission to learn or think beyond what they could pass along in their own private conversations. Classes of overlords held onto the history and had not the means or the interest to share it with the masses. Modern proponents of scientific atheism appear to think these people were dumb for going to church and believing in God.

When I read history anymore I do not look at it as anything but an attempt to describe something that occurred a long time ago. I can not try to argue with the ways these people behaved themselves because I understand that they were doing the best that they could with the values and beliefs that they were bound by. Understanding them is still interesting and worthwhile but pronouncing them as moral or immoral all the time I feel is beyond the capacity of anyone looking back at them from a modern perspective.