Current location:	The Tobes of Hades
Current music:	Greatest Hits: 1966 (CD) / Various
Entry tags:	bullshit, fundie_follies, religious_nutters, vox_day

Book Review: The Irrational Atheist

 

This tome from World Net Daily contributor, Vox Day, carries the subtitle: "Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens". OK, so we establish that Vox Day has a bitch concerning these three (plus a few more).

And while I am a believer, a non-denominational evangelical Christian to be precise, my purpose in writing this book is not to defend God, or even to argue for the truth of my particular religious faith. I intend to defend those who are being misled into doubting their faith or are fooled into feeling more secure in their lack of faith on the basis of the fraudulent, error-filled writings of these three men. (The Irrational Atheist; p. 2)

Fair enough: you don't care for what they wrote. It would be just fine if Vox Day stuck with his expressed purpose. However, he does not. Vox Day just can not resist the urge to take pot shots at Atheists in general. Had he avoided that particular temptation, this damn thing would be as good deal shorter.

Would You Like a Side of Fries With Your Ass Burgers?

...in attacking the arguements, assertions, and conclusions of the New Atheists my only weapons are the purely secular ones of reason, logic, and historically documented, independently verifiable fact. (The Irrational Atheist; Preface, p. 2)

Like every other theist, Day imputes defectiveness to the unbeliever. It is not possible that the rejection of Christianity or any other religion is simply an honest difference of opinion. Even the very title of the book gives this away: The Irrational Atheist. Why not something like "Three Irrational Atheists" instead? Isn't this supposed to be about Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens? Then why the implication that all Atheists are "irrational"? It gets better. Day drags into his slander of Atheists that most trendy of psychological conditions.

There is even evidence to suggest that in some cases, High Church atheism may be little more than a mental disorder taking the form of a literal autism. On one of the more popular atheist Internet sites, the average self-reported result on an Asperger Quotient test was 27.9. The threshold for this syndrome, describes as "autistic psychopathy" by its discoverer, Dr. Hans Asperger, is 32, whereas the average normal individual scores 16.5. In light of Wolf's observations, it is interesting to note that those diagnosed with Asperger's tend to be male, intelligent, impaired in social interaction, and prone to intense, narrow interests.

This idea may explain why the following pair of definitions have proven useful in distinguishing between the High Church atheist and the agnostic.

Agnostic: I don't believe there is a God. Because I haven't seen the evidence.

Atheist: There is no God. Because I am an asshole.
(The Irrational Atheist; p. 17)

Here we see Day hypocritically doing the very thing he accuses the "Unholy Trinity" of doing throughout this book. On the basis of an "atheist Internet site" (he doesn't name it) an Asperger test he doesn't show us (so we have no way to determine its validity) self-reported results (we all know no one would ever e-lie or e-exaggerate because T3H INTARWEBS IS SERIOUS BUSINESS) he proclaims that Atheists are sick in the head: we have ass burgers, we're autistic psychopaths. And Atheists are assholes as well. Yeah, that's scientific and logical all right. Isn't this an extremely tenuous foundation upon which to construct such a sweeping generalization?

Furthermore, he is absolutely wrong. If one says "I don't believe there is a God", he declares his atheism. The Agnostic would say no such thing. The Agnostic would say: "I don't know if there is a God because I can not know".

This isn't the last time we will be seeing Day claiming that Atheists are defective. Indeed, he goes to quite the extraordinary lengths to defame all Atheists.

Watch Out For Those Atheists!

While the atheist next door is likely to limit his rejection to the specific aspects that proscribe premarital fornication or gluttony and indulge himself in the sort of everyday moral failure to which even the most devout Christians are susceptable, history demonstrates that the ambitious atheist who seeks political power is significantly more likely to reject moral proscriptions on things such as slaughtering large numbers of people who stand in the way of establishing a godless utopia. (The Irrational Atheist; p. 63

Here we have that age-old accusation that the Atheist doesn't want to believe in God so he can indulge his desire for "sinful" pleasure. Again, it can't be because "the Atheist next door" simply holds an honest difference of opinion.

This is why the philosopher John Locke reached the conclusion that atheists could be tolerated in civil society so long as they were not permitted to hold positions of political authority. Locke, who died in 1704, never lived to see just how astute his observation was; tens of millions of lives in dozens of countries would be saved had his wisdom been heeded. (The Irrational Atheist; pp. 63-64)

This is pure bullshit. Even Vox Day's co-religionist, the evangelical preacher Chuck Baldwin, doesn't believe this.

It is a sad day when many unbelievers seem to have more character and conviction about the foundational principles of constitutional government, liberty, and independence than do professing Christians. But then again, if Christians cannot be trusted to understand and revere the Sacred Text, how can they understand and revere the Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, and Bill of Rights?

-- Few Christians Have Biblical World View

Of course, no "Christian" candidate would ever lie on the campaign trail about his religious convictions, now would he? George W. Bush claimed he was a "Born Again Christian", but how would you know from the record?

Lastly, the most amoral philosophy in existence is the Calvinist branch of BornAgainChristianity™, which has historically been the dominant form of American Christianity. Antinomianism is part and parcel of the thing. Once saved, always saved, and all your subsequent sins are gimmies. It was also Calvin who said that whatever he did was "lawful" (this in reference to the burning of Michael Servetus) mirroring Alestair Crowley's infamous Law of Thelema: "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law", often cited to prove how "evil" Mr. Crowley was (IOIYAC). Depending on the particular version, they may be as up front about this as was Calvin, or they may down play this, however, the antinomianism is always there. Of course, you also have those espousing the Armenian "heresy" and if you want to see a real cat fight, get some Calvinists and Armenians on the same forum. More entertaining than getting Linux people and Windows people on the same forum. Seems Christians aren't so morally trustworthy after all. The lesson here is to be careful when assessing political candidates.

Back to the Future

Again Dawkins reveals his historical ignorance, and again, he demonstrates that he is not so much a bad scientist as an atheist propagandist who has abandoned science altogether. For this is not only the smallest evidence that atheism correlates with people doing very bad things, the evidence is so strong that it is almost surely causal. Dawkins, like Harris, focuses on the wrong question. Like medieval philosophers they focus on the explanatory logic of the perceived problem, and they do so ineptly, instead of examining the matter in a scientific manner be observing the relevant evidence. Dawkins can not think of why a war would be fought in the name of atheism -- a more relevant question would be to wonder why millions of individuals would be slaughtered by their own government in the name of atheism -- but this is putting the cart well before the horse. (The Irrational Atheist; p. 239)

WOWSERS! Did I just take a ride with Marty McFly in Emmett Brown's De Lorean back to 1955? Sure feels like it after reading this bullshit. All Atheists are godlesscommunists™ is a smear tactic that I thought was as dead and buried as Joseph McCarthy. Notice this bit of intellectual dishonesty: "...millions of individuals would be slaughtered by their own government in the name of atheism". Joseph Stalin did no such damn thing! He slaughtered and sent tens of millions to the gulag in the name of Communism, the Revolution, and/or the "people".

When Russian agricultural output went south, Stalin had a choice. He could have concluded that what he was doing wasn't working, and that since those capitalist countries didn't have any problems feeding themselves, they may be they knew what they were doing. Or he could do exactly what he did: conclude that the ideological model was just fine and dandy, but that it was being obstructed by "enemies". The peasants who grew just enough to sustain themselves because they knew that the Commissar would come acallin' to requisition the "surplus" -- therefore wasting their tikme and effort -- became the demons. Regardless of the fact that the "Kulaks" lived little better than landless peasents, they were demonized as "exploiters". Therefore, the engineered famine in the Ukraine to eliminate these "enemies of the people".

Similarly, things weren't working out so swell in the factories either. Workers tend to get real unenthusiastic about their jobs when they don't get paid. Again, these "enemies of the people" needed to be rooted out. The political commissars overseeing the city dwellers were required to fill quotas of "spies" and "counter revolutionaries". If they did not, it was presumed that they, themselves, were concealing such "enemies". After all, Communism is supposed to work better than Capitalism. If it isn't, then it must be because there are numerous counter revolutionaries at work. It couldn't possibly be because the ideology itself is fucked up.

Ideology - that is what gives devildoing its long sought justification and gives the evildoer the necessary steadfastness and determination. That is the social theory which helps to make his acts seem good instead of bad in his own and others' eyes, so that he won't hear reproaches and curses but will receive praise and honors.

-- Voltaire

The ideologue can never contemplate the possibility that his particular ideology just might be wrong. He knows best, he has all the answers, and he must not tolerate the existence of others who just might think -- let alone say -- differently. He sees himself as the great Philosopher King who believes he has the right and duty to lead the rest of us, kicking and screaming, into his Promised Land. For our own good, of course. If you get in his way, or even if he suspects that you are less than enthusiastic about getting with the program, then you become the enemy. What else could you be? How dare you bar the way to the Promised Land? You are the enemy of "progress", of all of mankind, and so your liquidation becomes imperative.

So why the hostility to religion? The ideologue can't tolerate divided loyalty. Regardless of what you may think of it, religion does remind us that our ultimate loyalty is not to the man wearing the crown, or sitting behind the executive's desk. No one may know who "God" is, but one thing's for certain: that politician ain't God, and the State does not have the ultimate claim on your life and loyalty.

Here we are, born to be kings,
We're the princes of the universe.

Here we belong, fighting to survive
In a world with the darkest powers.

And here we are, we're the princes of the universe
Here we belong, fighting for survival
We've come to be the rulers of your world.

I am immortal, I have inside me blood of kings.
I have no rival, no man can be my equal
Take me to the future of your world.

Born to be kings, princes of the universe
Fighting and free, got your world in my hand
I'm here for your love and I'll make my stand
We were born to be princes of the universe.

No man could understand. My power is in your hand
Ooh, ooh, ooh, people talk about you.
People say you've had your day.
I'm a man that will go far.

Fly the moon and reach for the stars
With my sword and head held high
Got to pass the test first time-yeah
I know that people talk about me. I hear it every day.
But I can prove you wrong 'cause I'm right first time.
Yeah yeah alright watch this man fly, bring on the girls

Here we are. Born to be kings,
We're the princes of the universe.

Here we belong. Born to be kings,
Princes of the universe. Fighting and free
Got the world in my hands
I'm here for your love and I'll make my stand.
We were born to be princes of the universe.

-- Theme song: The Highlander / Queen

Make no mistake about this: this could very well be the theme song of every ideologue. Whenever you hear someone talking about building "Utopia" and/or remaking a "new man", don't walk away. Run as if your life depended on it! Because it probably does.

As for this attempt to smear Atheism with Communism's evils, correlation != causation. For someone who promises only science and logic, you'd think Vox Day would understand this. Since Day has demonized Atheists as threat to millions, can the call for the pre-emptive extermination of all Atheists be far behind? For our own good, of course.

This whole line of "reasoning" ignores one vital point. Even if it were true that every Atheist were a mass murdering monster, that would have precisely zero bearing on the question: Does the proposition, "God exists" express a true proposition or a false proposition? If it were likewise true that practicing Christianity made one healthy, wealthy, and wise, those would be excellent reasons for signing the church membership application on the dotted line. It, too, would have no bearing on the proposition in question.

To top it all off, we have this bit of intellectual dishonesty.

Harris wastes eight pages attempting to tar the Catholic Church and Pope Pius XII with the guilt by insufficient opposition, this on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, declares that Auschwitz was a logical and inevitable consequence of the Christian faith. (The Irrational Atheist; p. 210)

Here is a footnote from the same page.

How strange that it should happen once in more than 2,000 years and at the behest of a few fanatical anti-Christians, no less...

The mind just boggles at this. Whatever offenses the "Unholy Trinity" may have committed against history, Vox Day just exceeded them by many orders of magnitude. The Holocaust was the only pogrom in 2,000 years?! I wish Mr. Day would tell us what drugs he's been doing: that must be some awesome shit! Jews have been subjected to so many pogroms over the last 2,000 years that you'd be hard pressed to list them all. Jews have been hounded from one end of Europe to the other and back again. I doubt that there is even one European country from which Jews have not been expelled, or forced into ghettos, or send beyond the Pale (located in Russia).

Why anti-Semitism? According to Jews, Judaism is not a universal religion. The covenant was between God and Jews, and Gentiles were not involved at all. According to Christian theology, the god of the Jews sent a Messiah whose purpose was to abrogate the old deal, and establish a New Covenant, which included everyone. The old law was done away with, and a new law declared. There was just one little problem with this: the very people, the Jews, who should have been the first to get with the new program were in fact the very last.

How does one explain this? The only possibility is that Jews are too stubborn, or blinded to the "truth" by the devil, yada, yada, yada. Of course, one must never entertain the notion that Jews remain Jews because Jews know that the new theology is bullshit. Anti-Semitism naturally follows the attempt of one religion's trying to co-opt another and the original believers resisting being co-opted. Anti-Semitism put in its appearance very early as you can plainly see the creeping anti-Semitism in the Gospels themselves.

First to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing, and blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians. For whatever we tolerated in the past unknowingly ­ and I myself was unaware of it ­ will be pardoned by God. But if we, now that we are informed, were to protect and shield such a house for the Jews, existing right before our very nose, in which they lie about, blaspheme, curse, vilify, and defame Christ and us (as was heard above), it would be the same as if we were doing all this and even worse ourselves, as we very well know.

Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed. For they pursue in them the same aims as in their synagogues. Instead they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn, like the gypsies. This will bring home to them that they are not masters in our country, as they boast, but that they are living in exile and in captivity, as they incessantly wail and lament about us before God.

Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them. (remainder omitted)

Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb. For they have justly forfeited the right to such an office by holding the poor Jews captive with the saying of Moses (Deuteronomy 17 [:10 ff.]) in which he commands them to obey their teachers on penalty of death, although Moses clearly adds: "what they teach you in accord with the law of the Lord." Those villains ignore that. They wantonly employ the poor people's obedience contrary to the law of the Lord and infuse them with this poison, cursing, and blasphemy. In the same way the pope also held us captive with the declaration in Matthew 16 {:18], "You are Peter," etc, inducing us to believe all the lies and deceptions that issued from his devilish mind. He did not teach in accord with the word of God, and therefore he forfeited the right to teach.

Fifth, I advise that safe­ conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside, since they are not lords, officials, tradesmen, or the like. Let they stay at home. (...remainder omitted).

Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping. The reason for such a measure is that, as said above, they have no other means of earning a livelihood than usury, and by it they have stolen and robbed from us all they possess. Such money should now be used in no other way than the following: Whenever a Jew is sincerely converted, he should be handed one hundred, two hundred, or three hundred florins, as personal circumstances may suggest. With this he could set himself up in some occupation for the support of his poor wife and children, and the maintenance of the old or feeble. For such evil gains are cursed if they are not put to use with God's blessing in a good and worthy cause.

Seventh, I commend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow, as was imposed on the children of Adam (Gen 3[:19]}. For it is not fitting that they should let us accursed Goyim toil in the sweat of our faces while they, the holy people, idle away their time behind the stove, feasting and farting, and on top of all, boasting blasphemously of their lordship over the Christians by means of our sweat. No, one should toss out these lazy rogues by the seat of their pants.

-- The Jews and Their Lies / Martin Luther

Four hundred years after writing this, Luther's vision would come to pass: synagogues would burn, Jewish homes would be razed, Jewish writings would be consigned to the fires, and Jews would be liquidated. The founder of Protestant Xianity would have approved. But the Christian faith has nothing to do with that. Vox, would you please contact me immediately? I have this bridge in New York that I'm willing to let go real cheap. I think you just might like to take advantage of this special offer.

If you don't think that the Christian faith has anything to do with anti-Semitism, then how to explain the historical fact that Imperial Japan did not harass the Jews living in the countries it conquered, and that it provided a safe haven outside the reach of Hitler's Reich when many other countries, including the US, turned Jews away? The Japs tortured Xians, but not Jews. Fact is: Jews don't go in for God-bothering, and never give offense to others who don't see things their way, which brings us to our conclusion.

Why the "Unholy Trinity" Wrote What They Did

I am a Christian. I'm also a Libertarian. I believe in free will as a gift from our Creator and that Heexpects us to use it. I believe in living and letting live. If you'll leave me alone, I'll be delighted to do the courtesy of leaving you alone in return...

All I ask, all the vast majority of the billions of people of faith on the planet ask, is to be left alone to believe what we choose to believe and live how we decide to live. (The Irrational Atheist; pp. 5-6)

Good for you. It's too bad that all too many of your co-religionists don't follow your good example. I, quite frankly, am sick and tired of all the God-bothering I encounter on a routine basis. I am disgusted with the on-going attempts of the so-called "Religious Right" to resort to the government's guns to enforce their vision of rectitude. If the Catholic elected official has a conflict between the dictates of his church and his duty as the elected representative of a secular Republic, then he should resign. Who are these Bishops and Priests to attempt black mail in order to get these elected officials to vote in the House and Senate as the Vatican dictates? The Pope didn't elect them; "We the People" did. They serve us, not the Magisterium. Who the hell do these people think they are, dictating to me that I can't buy a six pack of beer on a Sunday morning, or preventing an unwanted pregnancy with Plan B, or even terminating an unwelcome pregnancy? How does any of those things in any way, shape, or form interfere with any "person of faith" and how they choose to live their lives?

I have been accosted numerous times by these evangelicals. On street corners, at grocery and convenience stores, hell, one year they were out in force at Morphicon, and the hotel parking lot was littered with their pamphlets. Of course, they made no effort to clean up the mess they made. Very few of them ever take "Not interested" for an answer.

Want to believe that the universe is 6,000 years old and that Adam and Eve are historical, and they played with dinosaurs in the Garden of Eden? Knock yourself out. Don't try to use the government to insinuate this nonsense into the science classroom either by legislation, or concocting Trojan Horses like IntelligentDesign™ because your nonsense won't stand up to peer review in any reputable scientific journal.

And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

-- Mat 6 : 5

Follow your own damn book, get your lazy ass out of bed ten minutes earlier and pray around your breakfast table before sending your kids off to school. Don't demand that the Atheists' kids be subjected to your in-class indoctrination, or that we endure your God-bothering before school games, or during commencement ceremonies.

"We the People" are quite sick and tired of these self-righteous pricks shoving their version of rectitude down our throats. This is nothing new, but has long been a part of the American ethos. Fact is, The God Delusion, God is not Great, The End of Faith, and other so-called "New Atheist" writings are blow back. This, too, is nothing new, as we've seen this during the last decade of the 19^th century, and the early decades of the 20^th. Dawkins is the new Ingersoll. Temperance and Prohibition fanatics, rants about "immodest dress", Scopes "Monkey Trial", shady preachers like Billy Sunday and Amy Semple MacPherson: been there; done that. It doesn't play any better now than it did then.

For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind: it hath no stalk; the bud shall yield no meal: if so be it yield, the strangers shall swallow it up.

-- Hos 8 : 7

Just some more advise from the "Good Book" which most Christians ignore when its inconvenient (which pretty much is all of the time).

Note: You can get your own copy Here. It's a free download.