December 2011

S M T W T F S
    123
4 5 6789 10
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Tags

Visitors

free counters

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
westonlockley: (Default)
Monday, December 5th, 2011 05:00 pm
It seems unbelievable, but the argument in the first box of this cartoon is actually used by Ray Comfort, a Christian, a creationist and a liar.

westonlockley: (Default)
Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 07:05 pm



Oh, a factless, baseless, frequently falsified, mistranslated and fallible 5000 year old story book written by desert savages tells you. That makes all the difference. Want to try again maybe?
westonlockley: (Default)
Thursday, August 26th, 2010 05:01 am
kids raped by the catholic church cartoon

The catholic church: raping the minds and bodies of kids and still having the arrogance to pretend to teach you what is right or wrong.
westonlockley: (Default)
Tuesday, August 24th, 2010 02:55 pm
Some people seem to think we need so called objective moral values.

I wonder where they get that idea? I also wonder where they would get those so called objective values?

I think moral values will always be relative to human understanding. Our best chances lie in good education and trying to better the general living conditions. Rich people don't fight as much. Not themselves anyway.

The Golden Rule seems to be a good point to start: "Treat others like you would want to be treated yourself." Or one of the variations. Or even Weston's Iron Corollary: "Try not to be too much of a dick." Add some logic and humanistic values and you're on your way.

Christians seem to think that the Bible is the source of moral values. I sure hope not, what with all the slavery, smiting of innocent children, human sacrifices and other disgusting, horrible stuff the insecure tribal desert deity of that book seems to insist upon.

What a weird idea to try to get your moral values from barbarians out of the Bronze Age. Oh, christians will tell you, that was the Old Testament. The objective, eternal moral values were revised in the New Testament. The Bible 2.0. The eternal, objective moral values in that part are totally different from the objective, eternal values in that other part. They are also somewhat more humane. Which seems logical, as humanity had progressed some three thousand years between the writing of the two.

But in that addendum to the immutable moral values, the spokesperson seems to say that all the laws and regulations of the Old Testament are still very valid. And even the New Testament is some two thousand years old by now. Isn't it time for a new version? The Bible 3.0? The Latest Testament?

Or are we such a sorry lot that we haven't learned anything in those two millennia?

Actually, the so called objective moral values are nothing of the kind. They are just a reflection of how a sourpuss, aggressive dictator with stomach ulcers would try to keep a backward, primitive and violent tribe in check.

The rules are furthermore confusing, often downright ridiculous, cruel and absurd. They tend to be self-contradictory as well.

Actually, the Bible is a gigantic moral salad bar and not only the more than 33,800 christian sects, but practically all christians, just fill their plate with the bits they find most tasty.

The Bible as bad source of moral values

Let's face it: as a source of moral values the Bible stinks.

And do you really need it?

If I have two sandwiches and across the table sits someone who hasn't eaten in three days and has no sandwich, is it really that hard to figure out what I should do?

Does it really matter that maybe he was too lazy, too stupid or just too unlucky to get his own sandwich?

I will give him one of my two sandwiches.

It will prevent unnecessary aggression. It will prevent him trying to mug me to steal my sandwiches. He will probably see that two people, two sandwiches, each a sandwich, is a fair solution to his own problems.

But actually, that's not even it.

I just won't be able to enjoy my sandwich with someone sitting at the other side of the table, looking on with saliva running out of his mouth and stomach aches from being hungry.

And even that is not it.

It just is the right thing to do. Somebody is hungry. I have the means to do something about it. So I do it.

That isn't difficult, is it?

I don't need some ancient collection of reprehensible desert stories to tell me that. I don't need some savage, bloodthirsty dictator with a penchant for torture to scare me into doing that. And it doesn't exactly make you respectable in my eyes if you do.

Yes, I might like to keep my second sandwich for myself.

I doubt however that I will go hungry.

I'll feast on the look in his eyes.
westonlockley: (Default)
Sunday, August 15th, 2010 02:08 pm
Christianity Hole


I know, it's an old one. Worth posting again though.
westonlockley: (Default)
Friday, August 6th, 2010 02:37 pm
"Why are many christians so bitter? Does their religion make them unhappy or does their unhappiness make them religious?"

~ Weston Lockley
westonlockley: (Default)
Friday, August 6th, 2010 07:41 am
Somebody explain please. What are christians objecting to now? A boy can't kiss a girl or he goes to hell? How do these people procreate? More importantly: why?


I Kissed A Girl
westonlockley: (Default)
Thursday, August 5th, 2010 09:29 am
god murders 103 people on a plane

forgets to kill one young boy


On May 12th, 2010, god mercilessly killed 103 people, including 11 crew members on an Airbus-flight to Tripoli, Libya. Everything, from the randomness to the injustice of the killings, points to Yahweh (a.k.a. Jehovah). Only one boy, who he evidently overlooked, survived the carnage by accident.

Scientists are baffled. "The theory behind airplanes is sound," they argue. "The technique has been proven again and again. The pilot was excellently trained, in good health and a teetotaler. He was happily and devoutly married. To a woman. There is no scientific reason imaginable why this plane should have crashed. The conclusion is inescapable: it was an act of god. He willfully killed those people. Thanks to coincidence one boy survived."

Pastor Houg Dumphrey (Apex, N.C.): "I heard the tapes out of the black box. It was panic all around. People were loudly imploring god to save their lives. One young man of 19, with his whole life still before him, sent a text message to his girlfriend from his mobile phone that he was praying to god to keep him safe. She, very sensibly, immediately went on Twitter. 'Pleese help me pray 4 my bf who is in a plain crush. praice the lord. RT if u agree. #bieberfans' It was all in vain. Notwithstanding all the prayers, he murdered them all callously. Only that boy survived. It's really a coincidence!"

TV-evangelist Matt Focker has railed against the godless, immoral, unbelieving scum who blame god. "God is blameless. He created it all, so he can do as he pleases. When you make a child with your spouse in holy matrimony, nobody of sound mind will deny that this child is your property to do with as you please. We must never forget that we are god's children and that he only tortures us because he loves us. He has his reasons. We're just to dumb to understand them. Send us money to help spread his word."

Benedict XVI has issued a statement that prayer is obviously useless. He has given orders to assemble a Holy Synod to investigate the possibility that the passengers were all grave sinners. "They probably were," the Vatican states. "They must have been all abhorrent unto him. Like the Canaanites, who also deserved to die. Painfully and cruelly. Or those evil little children of Egypt. Maybe the passengers were sloppy in attending mass, or worse, gay, which would explain why god murdered them."

Governor Rob Biley has declared next Sunday a day of prayer throughout the state of Alabama. "It's not because prayer has never ever worked in all of recorded history that it never will. That's so typical of scientific arrogance. As if science knows everything. Let's not forget god did not let that plane fall on one of the magnificent cities of our beautiful state. We should thank him for that. Lest he smites us."
westonlockley: (Default)
Monday, August 2nd, 2010 06:25 pm
"I have never seen the slightest scientific proof of the religious theories of heaven and hell, of future life for individuals, or of a personal god."

~ Thomas Edison
westonlockley: (Default)
Friday, July 30th, 2010 08:27 pm
OK, we knew creationists were a bunch of liars.

Creation Science Evangelism (CSE) describes itself modestly as "a leading Christian-apologetics ministry, defending the literal interpretation of the Genesis creation account from the theory of evolution."

Defending in this case means "lying our asses off as much as we can and committing fraud to prove the unprovable."

The most hilarious and pathetic attempt is a "poll", WHAT’CHA THINK?, they run on their front page.

One of those polls asks: What do you believe about evolution? Is it a fact, a religion or reasonable scientific theory?

As P.Z. Myers points out in his blog, this is less than honest: there are two reasonable answers (and one that is crazy), so the reasonable vote gets split up.

Let's for one moment also overlook the fact that scientific issues are not a matter of what the majority "thinks".

So what do you do when the result is still not to your liking? What you always do in that pile of bunk called creationism. You falsify the facts.










(CET)

If that doesn't help... you can also just change the question.

Minutes later the poll was back online. Alas for creationism, it threatened to give the same result, and people began massively voting "it's a fact!". So they just changed the question from "What do you believe about evolution?" into "What do you believe about creation?"

Falsifying the vote for Jesus. Is there any task more noble?

Christianity and creationism always win. Always.

Of course, this poll is completely ridiculous, a lie and a fraud.

What did you expect? So is creationism.

Christians lying? I'm sure you're as shocked as I am.
westonlockley: (Default)
Wednesday, July 28th, 2010 02:40 pm
"My feelings as a Christian point me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. They point me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth!, was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter.

In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross.

As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice. And as a man I have the duty to see to it that human society does not suffer the same catastrophic collapse as did the civilization of the ancient world some two thousand years ago — a civilization which was driven to its ruin through this same Jewish people."

~ Adolf Hitler


speech April 12th, 1922
westonlockley: (Default)
Monday, July 26th, 2010 06:12 pm
All is well with the world.

Yep, everything is just going fine.

On Twitter some hysterical person was exhorting the devout masses to help the christian victims of rape by muslims in Iran, while the only thing those poor, innocent christians had been doing was trying to convert people to their own brand of barbarity, and away from that other skid mark upon humanity. A bit like selling Richard Dawkins' books in Saint Peter's basilica in Rome. Which would be totally OK by christians. They are known for their tolerance.

As if Iran wasn't in trouble enough with one retarded religion. As if christians hadn't anything better to do, like cleaning their own filthy house of rapists. To mention only the bleeding obvious.

Meanwhile the catholics in Boston are putting much effort in their marketing campaign called "Catholics Come Home". Yes, come home you lost sheep. We're beginning to feel the absence of your money.

One Joseph Kurtz, Great Padishah-Mogul of the Sacred Beehive of Poughkeepsie (that could also be Archbishop of the Holy Roman Catholic Church — I always confuse those two) insists on letting us know what his feeble mind thinks about marriage.

“Marriage exists prior to the state and is not open to redefinition by the state. The role of the state, instead, is to respect and reinforce marriage.”

Yeah. Kurtz obviously operates under the somewhat false impression he has any authority left. How dare that nincompoop even try to tell other people what to do and not. And, by the way, the State is not your business, Kurtz, you cheeky monkey. You have nothing to do with it. You have nothing relevant to say about it. You're just an insignificant old man who wears funny dresses and silly hats. None of those enhance your credibility. And, please, take your penis out of the anus of my underage son while you're talking gibberish to me.

Get it trough your calcified skull that chess rules only apply to the game of chess. Your ramblings only apply to people who want to belong to your club. Us sane people don't want to be bothered by your blabberings based on a collection of Bronze Age horror stories.

In Rome priests now pay adult call boys to have hot man-sex or go to gay clubs to have consensual intercourse. This is progress in comparison to raping altar boys.

Joseph "The Pitbull" Ratzinger, however, doesn't seem to think so. Still reeling from the howls of hysterical laughter and the outcries of indignation his latests inanity (declaring the mere attempt to ordain women into the priesthood equal to raping children) has provoked, he ordered gay priests to leave the priesthood. Not a wise move, a gay activist mused. The church stands to lose 98 % of its ground personnel.

It's things like these that make Ratzinger the best pope ever. He's destroying an almost two thousand year old institution singlehandedly. He is to be applauded and encouraged. Like Napoleon said "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." And another one. And another one.

You would think Ratzinger would do something for all those victims his vile, criminal organization has made. No, there are more important things to tend to than caring for some whining rape victims. What is the church? A compassionate institute preaching love? Perish the thought. Latest we heard he is writing the final part of a fiction work, "The life of Jesus, part III", based on an ancient fairy tale. (spoiler: the main character dies)

Unless he makes Jesus sparkle like the vampires of "Twilight" he could have saved himself the trouble.

All is well with the world.