In case Jon Stewart hurt your feelings

If you’re still miffed about Jon’s segment the other week on the American Atheists suit, this should put him back in your good graces.

Culture Wars in the Court House

In case you haven’t heard, Jon Stewart was making fun of us Thursday night. Well, to be a little more specific, he was making fun of David Silverman and American Atheists rather than atheists in general. Yet Stewart wasn’t just making fun of Silverman; he was also giving him a little lecture on how not to be a dick.

Stewart’s comments revolved primarily around his objection to this statement by David Silverman on the World Trade Center cross: “It has been blessed by so-called holy men and presented as a reminder that their god, who couldn’t be bothered to stop the Muslim terrorists or prevent 3,000 people from being killed in his name, cared only enough to bestow upon us some rubble that resembles a cross. It’s a truly ridiculous assertion.”

Continue reading…

Episode 45: An Impending Rapture, Revisionist History, Interview with Matt McCormick

Episode 45 features a discussion of the impending rapture (listen soon before it’s over!), David Barton’s interview on the Daily Show and his revisionist history, atheists in the military, and our own Robin sits down with writer and Professor Matt McCormick. Let us know what you think in the comments below.

Episode 45: An Impending Rapture, Revisionist History, Interview with Matt McCormick [ 51:16 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (2104)

Refuting Barton, Author Offers Book for Free

Chris Rodda, who for years has been penning a book largely against the ideas of Christian revisionist historian David Barton, has decided to give the book away online.

Rodda was inspired by the sheer depth of trouble in combating Barton, as seen on the May 4, 2011 interview on The Daily Show. This writer has not read the material but would be interesting to hear more on the Barton debate in the comments section.

Mike Huckabee does not know what he is talking about

Mike Huckabee went on The Daily Show last night and said some remarkably ignorant things about the history of the Constitution and what he refers to as the views of secularists.* In a discussion on the well-worn ‘debate’ about whether or not the founders intended America to be a “Christian Country,” Huckabee claims all conservatives like him want is a ‘recognition’ that most of the founders were Christian.

This is to bring some balance to the idea that the Founders had no spiritual direction at all …. there is a perception among many that this is a completely secular nation, and that the Judeo-Christian worldview was not a very significant part of our creation.”

First, I don’t know of a single atheist who would deny that the majority of the founders were professed Christians. This is obviously true. What Huckabee and nearly everyone on the Religious Right fails to grasp, however, is that this does not change the meaning of the First Amendment. Right now, conservatives like to claim that the separation of church and state is a latter invention (this is something else Huckabee goes on to claim in the interview), which only means that the state will not persecute religion (rather than also, the state will not advocate a particular religion). But these are not two clearly separate things - any attempt by the state to promote or advocate a particular religion is clearly, by implication, discouraging the practice of other religions (or no religion at all). As always, conservatives like to pretend that culture has no power except for when they fantasize it is arrayed against them in the form of the incipient atheist takeover.

Continue reading…

“The Thin Jew Line”

The Daily Show had a segment last week about a controversy about an eruv in Westhampton Beach, NY.

If you have no idea what an eruv is, you were like me. Apparently, an eruv, a practice observed by orthodox or observant Jews, is an enclosure around a community that allows for the carrying of things — as in, the transportation of objects — on the Sabbath. Which apparently you’re not supposed to do.

Interestingly, the segment focuses on the disagreement about the eruv between orthodox Jews and at least one, apparently reformed Jew. I personally think there is nothing wrong with the eruv, for as the segment explains, even the orthodox are content with this so-called enclosure consisting of a near-invisible string that couldn’t possibly inconvenience or bother anyone.

But from an atheist’s perspective, this is definitely one of the best examples I’ve ever seen of how silly the convoluted and absurd rules of religion can be. I’m quite surprised I’ve never heard of it before, actually, as the comedic potential in this is so great that the Daily Show couldn’t resist it and indeed, made a very funny segment out of it.

Why do you think the more devout among us continue to feel a need to follow these rules? Do they really think they matter, that they are handed down by God, or are they simply trying to preserve a cultural heritage that, for some reason, they think rules like this are a vital part of?

The War on Christmas Stewart style

Speaking of the (non-existent) War on Christmas, the Daily Show took on this manufactured nonsense last night: