Comments on: Feb. 24th, 2009 Hate Mail

By: Kris

Kris — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 11:09:44 +0000

@Drew Hickcox:

I realise this is a little late, but I just have to…

It’s funny how you state that the US has a distorted view of the Muhammed cartoon affair, then go on to display a completely false and distorted view of it yourself.

The original controversy was NOT over any anti-islamic tone. They were made after some guy couldn’t get anyone to draw Muhammed for his book cover, because they feared repercussions from radical Muslims. They were a statement that we would not bow for any religion, no matter the amount of death threats.

Even ignoring the fact that Islam is not a people, how on earth could a cartoon EVER be a discrimination against a people? And no, there is no general anti-Islamic sentiment in Denmark. Of course we have our problems with racism, but can you name me one country that doesn’t?
Just comparing racism in Denmark to the Nazi persecution of Jews is incredibly offensive and demeaning towards both Jews and Danes.

By: Apostate Lois

Apostate Lois — Mon, 18 May 2009 22:12:03 +0000

You know, the Lassie game sounds kinda fun. Can you make it animated? Like, there’s this army of evil Lassie dogs and you have to shoot them. And little Timmy, too (0r whatever that kid’s name was).

By: Steven Bentley

Steven Bentley — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 07:09:33 +0000

Wait one minute, to make fun of Lassie is just going too damned far.

“Lassie died for our sins; that whomever believeth in her/him shall not perish but have everlasting life.”

Tom Markham, How dare you make fun of Lassie, our precious Dog and Saviour.

Tom you may be an atheist, but you will spend eternity in HELL!!!!

By: doctor mario

doctor mario — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:11:33 +0000

Yeah I’m with Alleee on this one.

It just seems implausible to me that there is this group of tweed coat, with elbow patches, group of Cambridge intellectuals, discussing the offensive permutations of Bob’s magnets, on the world populace. Also, I find it impossible to believe that no one in an such an educated group, would let out so much as a giggle, if they were discussing them, especially the atheist.

Come on Tom. Have a nice chuckle with the rest of us. It’s fun.

By: Mandii

Mandii — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 05:12:37 +0000

What people seem to have trouble understanding, is that you are not entirely focused on converting Christians. I mean it would certainly be great if you were to make some men of god doubt themselves once in a while, but for the most part, what you do is help form a brotherhood of atheists in the form of your fanbase.
When I read your website(which I check regularly) I feel better, as an atheist.
Atheists don’t have churches or special networks, there isn’t a special form of rock and roll specifically for preaches the ills of following a religion, what we have is a handful of comedians, that range from big names like Patton Oswalt, to the humble website host that bashes god every once in a while(you’re someplace in the middle).
It’s great that you receive letters from christians, but your purpose in the entertainment industry is to please the young atheist with internet access, Not that you aren’t doing any help for the greater good, and I thank you for all the work you have put into this.

By: Rev. Hellbound Alleee

Rev. Hellbound Alleee — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:41:18 +0000

Anti-muhammad is NOT anti “a people.” That’s ridiculous. Religions are not people. They are religion–an aspect of a person that is the easiest to change–easier than, say, one’s weight. Just as anti-Jesus is not anti “a person.” Missed the whole damned point.

By: Rev. Hellbound Alleee

Rev. Hellbound Alleee — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:38:15 +0000

Damn. Someone on here is against the Danish cartoons?

Weak.

By: Janus

Janus — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:54:24 +0000

You’re not allowed to partake in civilized thought, Bob. Back to banging sticks on rocks for you.

By: Rev. Hellbound Alleee

Rev. Hellbound Alleee — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:56:59 +0000

Ha–After that long-winded diatribe (as I am so wont to do) I forgot the one most important rule of my new favorite short duration personal savior: Bob (the other Bob) and the Church of the Subgenius, which is:

FUCK ‘EM IF THEY CAN’T TAKE A JOKE!!!

By: Rev. Hellbound Alleee

Rev. Hellbound Alleee — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:35:52 +0000

I call bullshit on this “atheist society” in Cambridge.

If this guy is part of a respected group think-tank, then he would have mentioned the Jesus Seminar right off the bat–or at all–and would have not avoided (or would have at least known) of the work of Bob Price (member of the seminar). He would have known that the ex-biblical references are highly dubious if not falsified.

But it doesn’t matter! Because everything we know about Jesus is from the bible, everything we know about Jesus is based on the flying Supergod who walked on water and did magic tricks with wine. You take away everything magical about Jesus, and what we have left is the Gospels sans Matthew, which still is absolutely contradictory. We know that contradictions cannot exist, therefore we know the biblical Jesus did not exist!

Therefore, what we have left is ZERO. What I mean to say is, a Man Named Jesus existed somewhere, and we have no information on him. So, comparing him to the Man in The Bible is meaningless. What does it mean to talk about him? NADA. We don’t even know if Man Named Jesus=Man Named Jesus who was executed for heresy, or horse-thievery, or whatever it was random man was executed for.

Sure, there were lots of crucified people. But to seperate one of them out and name him Jesus is the SAME EXACT THING as believing in a God and feeling sorry for what said god went through as a human, like Hercules, if you will, who, it has been argued, is one source for the Jesus Myth.

Now, I’m no Rhodes Scholar. I have a bachelor’s degree in theatre and music. I didn’t go to an ivy league chi-chi school. (Although I suppose the Cambridge Mystique could be mythos as well). If I can figure this out, why can’t a Big Important Richie-Rich Philosophy group from Cambridge figure it out? If this Big Smartie Philosopher’s group is what he says it is, then they think about more philosophers than one, namely Aquinas. Do they know that there are more?

I have a link
http://www.cuaas.org.uk/
that might confirm his society, and I suspect that there are a few stray atheists in there who aren’t tolerantists. I suspect he failed to mention them. BTW, the society started in 2000, I suspect well after your endeavors.