A Rally Without Faith

“God if you’re there, we’re here in Washington, come down now,” atheist Comedian Eddie Izzard shouted mockingly during Saturday’s Rally for Reason. “If you’re there, this is a pretty good time to show up. I’m sure folks here would love it.”

“He never comes down,” Izzard added with a laugh before launching nearly an hour long comedy sketch mocking God, the bible, and religion for a soggy crowd of about 8,000 – 10,000 people who stood on the National Mall in the rain.

“This weather isn’t from God,” added Izzard. “If God was the judge of the weather, what was all those tornadoes that go down the Bible Belt? What does that mean? Weather is just weather ladies and gentlemen.”

Saturday, secular atheists met in Washington D.C. for a rally billed as “the largest gathering of the secular movement in world history.” Organizers insisted prior to the event that the rally was to encourage each other, to dispel stereotypes, and seek “legislative equality.”

But as gloomy rain clouds hung low over the Washington Monument, the rally quickly degenerated into open mockery of religion and people of faith.

“F— the motherf—-, f— the mother—- pope,” sang Musician Tim Minchin as he played profane songs on the piano for a laughing and cheering crowd.

Few religions remained unscathed while cruel spokesmen of reason roundly ridiculed Mormons, Buddhists, Christians, and Muslims.

As the event continued, it became clear that the leaders of the movement were not clamoring for equality, but rather superiority.

“When it comes to religion, we’re not two sides of the same coin and you don’t get to put your unreason on the same shelf as my reason,”  HBO’s Liberal comedian Bill Maher said to the crowd via a video monitor. “Your stuff has to go over there on the shelf with Zeus and Thor and the Kracken.”

The audience then cheered loudly as he began a mock ritual that “un-baptized” Mitt Romney’s father-in-law out of the Mormon faith.

But even the laughs turned into malaise as the event drew to a close. Famed atheist headliner Richard Dawkins labored through a speech that quickly grew bitter.

“Do you really believe that when a priest blesses a wafer, it turns into the body of Christ?” he said, ridiculing Catholics. “Are you seriously telling me you believe that?  Are you seriously saying that wine turns into blood?”

Dawkins challenged his fellow atheists to expose people who still cling to their faith in spite of their doubts.

“Mock them, ridicule them in public, don’t fall for the convention that we’re far to polite to talk about religion,” a frustrated Dawkins continued, “Religion is not off the table. Religion is not off limits. Religion makes specific claims about the universe, which need to be substantiated.  They should be challenged and ridiculed with contempt.”

Saturday’s rally provided a rare look into the secularism that is pushing its way into the public square.

The speakers that drew the loudest applause were not the people who praised reason, but persecuted faith. Unchallenged and in like-minded company, the cultural and political leaders of the atheist movement freely mocked and dismissed people of faith.

The brash superiority preached by atheists such as Dawkins shows that they are not content with a right to “unreligious freedom,” but seek suppression of religious expression.

If people of faith allow themselves to be bullied into silence, we can expect this sentiment to grow in our society. The existence of such a society requires submission from people of faith.

Charlie Spiering


Charlie Spiering writes in Washington D.C. for the Washington Examiner. He previously wrote for the Rappahannock News and worked as a reporter for columnist Robert Novak.

  • Yeah gnus keepin’ it real. Bravely cussin’ out the Pope (who said atheists got no songs?), courageously invite Westboro Baptist church as jester but Tom Gilson at Thinking Christian –police if any Christians tried that ‘reason’ business…  Izzard the creature demands the Creator dance for the crowd, Dawkins demagogues with billionaire backing,  the psychologically rigid and disturbed united in hatred and derision – what a soggy sad-sack of lifeforms the nothing kept warm that day.

  • And then they have the nerve to act all offended and saddened when people of Faith want nothing to do with them.

  • poetcomic1

          Bereft of splendor, beauty, tenderness, youth, innocence, love.  Funny how OLD God-hating young people look and sound.  How tired and confused their passionate and very UN-reasonable outpourings of bile.  Nothing of wisdom, thoughtfulness and not even the intellectual panache of the great 19th century secularists, who were at least worthy sparring opponents.  Potty-mouthed comics are their real ‘intellectuals’. 

    • Rob B.

      For people who claim to be rational, I see rationality in their invective…

      • Rob B.

        Sorry that should be “little rationality in their invective”

  • MarkRutledge

    I’m am impressed to hear of these superior reasoning abilities.  Is it too much to ask for a display of such?

    • Rob B.

      Yes, it is!  For these people, reason is just a word that allows them to oppose religion.  Devotion to reason always leads to irrationality…

  • Pargontwin

    It’s been put forth that entire societies can be possessed, and I think that may be what has happened here.  Why else would atheists suddenly become so vehemently anti-religion?  Atheists have been around for ages, but never have they been so vociferous as they are today.  The Evil One can’t stand to hear the Name of God, and he’s going all-out to silence any mention of it.

    Personally, I think it’s significant that it rained on the day of their rally.  I don’t recall ever hearing of rotten weather on World Youth Day since JPII instituted it.

    • JOB

      In point of fact, Toronto WYD was soaked as a dog looking for a bone beneath a rainspout.

      But the sun actually came out for the Mass.


    • Brian A. Cook

      Is it because these people are angry with the injustices and crimes committed in the name of religion?  Is it because they take to heart Voltaire’s line in believing in absurdities leading to committing atrocities?  Is it because they mistakenly see religion as inherently totalitarian and hateful?

      • Richard A

        That is a truly awe-inspiring display of historical ignorance!

        Voltaire? Really? Right on the eve of the triumph of ‘Reason’ in 1789? And it’s ‘religion’ that’s inherently totalitarian and hateful?

        • Stevelsn

          The “triumph of reason” is a misnomer and has left atrocities and  hopeless, despairing degeneracy in it’s wake.

        • Brian A. Cook

           I did not say that the French Revolution was anything glorious or bloody.   I am simply trying to point out that injustices in the name of religion repulses people from religion.    I thought I made it clear that I am not in agreement with the notion that religion is inherently totalitarian and hateful. 

    • finiz

      Here’s my theory – atheists have become more vocal because of the internet.  In the past, people have had the same questions about the veracity of the Bible and the legitimacy of the Church, but never found a community that agreed with them.  

      Now, we can research questions independently and find real answers.  We get together with like minded people, just like religious folk.  And, sure, a bunch of us are really, really angry about being labeled ‘hateful’ and ‘without morals’ by the believers.  

      Seriously, some anti-religion mocking and comedy songs with off-color language (albeit about a real, troubling issue) equals “entire societies…possessed”?  That’s overreacting.

      (Oh…and weather happens.  I’d have been impressed if it just rained on Dawkins -that would have made me look again at supernatural beliefs)

      • Stevelsn

        Have you looked at all at supernatural events? They are many and varied,  but most of the time God speaks in a still, small voice. Believers are  those who have strained to hear that voice and have heard it. Seek God and you will find him.

        • JamieKL

          Has any supernatural event ever been truly ‘proven’? Supernatural would mean something that is outside the known natural processes of the universe. But at the same time we could all agree that all atoms that make up our universe are supernatural and spectacular in their own way. Absolute knowledge of the supernatural would be great. But imho, it seems to be left to personal faith/experience and not something provable in an objective sense.

  • It seems rather ironic that in the Narnia movies Izzard voices the mouse warrior Reepicheep.

  • Lisa_marie_peterson

    Truly sad. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that these people are filled with hate. May God soften their hardened hearts! We need to pray for these people whether they like it or not.

    • Michael Petek

      We also ought to mock and ridicule these people as the liars they are.

      • Jeremy-catholic

        That would only spur them on.  Jesus taught not to answer a fool according to his folly.

        • Michael Petek

          Elijah mocked and ridiculed the prophets of Baal.

    • Wayneg87

       Its better to be hot or cold, cause if you are luke warm(religious) I will spew you out of my mouth

  • Nicole

    The Eddie Izard line is so sad to me . . . I think he really *is* calling out to God and hoping somewhere deep down that someone will answer.  They all seem so angry and childlike; I wonder if a trauma didn’t take place that would stunt someone’s development at this fourteen to sixteen year old rebellious, shouty phase.  I’ve read, too, that many atheists have lacked a father, or an active, loving one.  Hence the inability to attach to a Fatherly God and especially an unwillingness to obey one.  

    • Rob B.

      Sadly, most of our society seems to be stuck in adolescence.  If that’s the case, then the future for the faithful looks grim…

  • Rob B.

    “Why, yes, Mr. Dawkins, we do believe this.  What do you believe in, other than the idea that the 90% of humankind who are religious are idiots?” 

    Aren’t these the same people who accuse religious people of being intolerant?

  • Dixibehr

    That they would have as one of their video speakers a man who called conservative women by crude anatomical epithets shows lots about them.

    And if they really wanted to show courage, just don’t mock the Eucharist. Protestants have been doing that for centuries. Be really brave heroes: defecate publicly on the Coran and see what happens.

  • Michael J R Higgins

    sad people

  • PL Ottawa

    “Do you really believe that when a priest blesses a wafer, it turns into the body of Christ?” he said, ridiculing Catholics. “Are you seriously telling me you believe that?  Are you seriously saying that wine turns into blood?”
    Believe it or not, but it’s true.

    • stanis02

      And Jesus said so…

    • finiz

      But….if you test the wafer and wine prior to blessing for its chemical content, and then test it after the blessing…you find no change whatsoever.  

      • Kentre1961

        After the consecration is the substance of bread and wine on the altar? No.
        After consecration are the accidents of bread and wine, are the physical properties of bread and wine, rea1 physica1 properties on the altar after consecration? Yes, that’s the first miracle of the Real Presence. There are two miracles to the Real Presence. The first miracle is that you have real physical properties minus their substance. The first miracle of faith in the Eucharist is in the Real absence of the substance of bread and wine. You can taste, you can touch, you can feel but the substance is not there.
        Is the substance of Christ’s Body and Blood on the a1tar after Consecration? Yes. In other words, does Christ have the organs of His Body, does He have His Hands and Feet, and Features, His Eyes, and Mouth, and Eyes and Heart? Do they have size and dimension and color? Is the human mind of Christ thinking in the Eucharist? Is the human will of Christ in the Eucharist loving? Yes. Is the whole Christ there? Yes. The fourth yes, is the second big mystery of the Real Presence. The first mystery is that we have accidents without their substance. The second mystery is we have physical properties without their visible sensibly perceptible manifestation.

    • Wayneg87

       Its not true. Its not really Jesus phsical body, its symbolic, an act remembering the last supper. Catholicism likes to puff things up to amaze its devotees, like all the big costumes their holymen wear

      • james

        Wayne: Please read John chapter 6 slowly. Jesus is either a liar, a lunatic on the level of a man who says that he’s a poached egg, or He is Lord of all. Don’t patronize him by saying that he’s just a good teacher. That option is not open for us; He didnt intend it to be. (paraphrazing CS Lewis)

      • Bob Ambrose Regan

        The Catholic Church has had this teaching on the Eucharist Wayneg87, for 2000 years since the time of the Apostles. My question to you is: where do you get the authority from to interpret Christ’s teachings? In other words, how do you know that you are right and the Catholic Church is wrong? The Catholic Church gets its authority to “bind and loose” directly from Christ……did Christ personally give you the same authority, 20 centuries after he ascended in to heaven? Read John 6, pick up the book “Hidden Manna”, change your life to the fullness of the Truth.

      • Michael Paterson-Seymour

        “an act remembering the last supper.”  I find that a curious idea. 

        I take “Do this for my memorial” as meaning “In commemoration of my redemptive act.”  Christ’s redemptive act was his death and resurrection.  The Institution Narrative shows how that act was and can be sacramentally realized.  It is scarcely self-evident that a sacramental memorial of the redemptive act should memorialize the institution of that memorial.

    • ex-atheist

      Because of atheists’ continuing fanatical diatribes posing as “reason”, it is fashionable today to suggest that historically Christianity has been a force for evil … rather than good:

      In his book “Atheist Delusions”, Historian David Hart describes how …
      Richard Dawkins and other New Atheists would have us believe outright lies such as that Western humanity, during the times of “the age of faith, culture stagnated, science languished, wars of religion were routinely waged, witches were burned by inquisitors, and Western humanity laboured in brutish subjugation to dogma, superstition, and the unholy alliance of church and state. Withering blasts of fanaticism and fideism had long since scorched away the last remnants of classical learning; inquiry was stifled; the literary remains of classical antiquity had long ago been consigned to the fires of faith, and even the great achievements of “Greek science” were forgotten…”

      Dawkins’ story then generally continues [with the assertion] that the dawn of a new age gave birth to the Enlightenment, where church, superstition and intolerance were cast off in favour of reason, science and progress.” This, says Hart, “is a tale that is ‘easily followed and utterly captivating in its explanatory tidiness…”

      …BUT there is a HUGE PROBLEM with Dawkins’ story:
      “… its DEFECT is that it happens to be FALSE in EVERY identifiable detail.”

      IN FACT the TRUTH is the very OPPOSITE of Richard Dawkins’ claims. Hart says:
      “Of all the movements and transitions across Western history – Christianity is the one true revolution which has transformed civilisation for the better.

      Let’s also see what even German (atheist) philosopher, Jurgen Habermas (who nevertheless appreciated the existence of the Christian ethos), had to say: “Christianity – and nothing else – and nothing else … is the ultimate foundation of liberty, of conscience, of human rights, of democracy – which are the very benchmarks of western civilisation.”

      So Mr. Dawkins has either:
      – lazily “copied and pasted” from other atheist propaganda, his own polemic, dripping with abusive, poisonous invective (but this is apparently acceptable for atheists – to have two sets of rules – “one for us, quite another for ‘them’ “)
      – manufactured his own hysterical propaganda for monetary gain in sales of “controversial” books.
      – or he actually believes his own propaganda.

      A Mr. Hitchens asserted that “religion poisons everything”.
      It seems to me that it is the sheer volume of embellished atheist lies on top of more lies which in fact “poison everything”

      • ex-atheist

        Illustrating absence of logic in Richard Dawkins’TV documentary of “sex, death and the meaning of life”: :

        Non-thinker: “Could God have stopped the tornado?”
        Thinker’s reply [to the effect]:“Yes, it is God’s power to intervene. But He can take Satan’s evil and turn it around and use it for the good of mankind.
        Non-thinker: “So why didn’t he [stop the tornado]?
        Thinker [should have replied]: “Positive results can take time to eventuate. Mankind is a bit slow on the uptake – when he becomes lazy and slides into the self-indulgence of arrogance, and self-justification of his wrong-doing; eg., is it God’s fault that man has become so greedy and wasteful, taking more than his fair share, polluting the planet and then drowning in his own waste?
        Perhaps mankind , in his arrogance, needs just such “wake-up calls” to own up to his faults and take a more noble direction in life.

        … And don’t forget, the enormous number of people the world over who do not bother with engaging with God and the power of prayer , leaving themselves open to the whims and capricious sadistic humour of Satan.
        … and other “reasoned” assertions such as:
        Non-thinker: “How can a good God exist when there is so much evil in the world?”
        Thinker: “The vast majority of evil: envy, selfishness, hatred, cruelty, exploitation, greed, crime, conflict, war, etc. are actually man-made anyway. Men who are enticed by egotistical desires or expediency and choose evil, also bring disaster upon themselves / the nation / the culture.
        But there is still no dichotomy. Mankind has been given “free-will” to choose. God will not retract this gift as He is not interested in mindless robots. It is important for mankind to be able to make choices and to come to God freely. Yet God, like any parent, is aware of the potential danger of choices His children may make, but they are still given countless opportunities to seriously amend their behaviour and to be forgiven.

        So, when mankind chooses evil instead of good, it is not illogical for evil to exist on this planet.
        So it is not illogical for collective evil to bring punishment upon itself.

        But there is a bizarre intellectual dishonesty and glaring absence of logic in Mr Dawkins referring to ‘good’ and ‘bad’ – yet at the same time telling us that “there is no such thing as ‘good’ or ‘evil’, just a merciless universe.”
        … and then in his seeming pre-occupation in pontificating to others, condemning their behaviour – when he himself recognises no benchmark anyway against which to judge “good” or “evil” .
        This means that he actually also has no benchmark to judge eg., mass-murderers in history as “evil” … Dawkins can then only label them as “different”…. and this is Dawkins’ “reasoned” deduction?

    • John Byde

      Not according to the bible

  • Pingback: Anonymous()

  • Canvetnion

    How long before violence?  These poor folks do not respect God or others or life itself.

  • Alison

    How blessed we are who have been given the gift of faith. Truly, that rally is a vision of hell.

    • Brian A. Cook

       It looks more like a group of misguided civil-rights activists to me. 

  • shieldsheafson

    Atheists never
    stop dodging the question raised by Aristotle and Aquinas (3rd Way). Intelligence and design are
    mostly red herrings.  That which cannot explain itself in its
    existence has to be explained by the Necessary One.  Particles in energy or matter, alone or
    collectively, finite or infinite, are forever without explanation without the
    immaterial (spiritual). The imagination and tendency to materialise often impede recognising this vital truth

    .… and thus we find the
    highest expression of human dignity in ‘gay pride’ parades; abortion and euthanasia clinics; needle
    exchange programs and the ennoblement of sodomy.

    Sic transit gloria

  • Jacques

    Question: What is the MAIN MOTIVE for unbelievers to so adamantly try to obliterate faith from the face of the earth?
    There can be only one answer…. GUILT Religion denies them the enjoyment with full peace of mind in there libertine behavior. Deep in their heart they know what is wrong and what is right. Conscience… UN-avoidable   Conscience…   The only thing they can do is be angry with those assisted by faith to follow their consciences.

    • Brian A. Cook

      I get a VERY different impression.  They honestly believe that religion poisons everything.

      • aearon43

        They believe it, yes. But why? Why the bitter anger? Isn’t it because they know deep down that they aren’t just a random arrangement of molecules?

  • Pingback: Though this be Contempt, Yet there is Method in it | Unequally Yoked()

  • Wow, they really show their true colors don’t they?

    I doubt that they will convince anyone but those who are already atheists of the bitter and rude sort. What kind of people go around promoting treating others or their cherished beliefs with contempt, as a fundamental practice? And who wants to be associated with a rude and obnoxious movement whose m.o. is to insult others as a main “duty” ?

    Gee, let’s see. Jesus said, “Love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you.” Dawkins says, “Ridicule your enemies with contempt.” Does anyone find following Dawkins an attractive alternative to following Jesus? It would just be sad except that it has the potential to help create a climate of persecution. 

    Not all atheists would approve of the vile language and coarse attitudes displayed by these atheists, by the way. But it should give atheists a sense of who their colleagues are, which is not a good sign! Try Jesus instead, you will never be sorry!

    • Brian A. Cook

      Unfortunately, there’s still that matter of Christians who malign  and demonize people who disagree with them, regardless of what our Lord said. 

      • Stevelsn

        What exactly does that prove?

  • dean

    Did this group come away with greater peace and love of fellowman? It’s so sad that they ridicule and deny the only source of LOVE. We pray for all of them.

  • Linus

    Why does anyone care what Dawkins thinks? I never argue with athiests. As for the other rabble, they just prove that any culture or society is just one step from the jungle. Without God, you are living in a jungle. It is God Who civilizes the world and makes life at least tolerable.  A  man who does not believe in God is capable of any crime, can easily commit any degregation – as these folks prove.  

  • Jcsmitty1212

    ‘ “God if you’re there, we’re here in Washington, come down now,” atheist Comedian Eddie Izzard shouted mockingly during Saturday’s Rally for Reason.’

    Reminds me of those who mocked Christ  and dared Him to come down off the cross. Or famed atheist Madalyn Murray O’Haire, who was described in her son’s biography as shaking her fist to the heavens during a lightening storm, daring God to kill her, and then citing this as “proof” that God did not exist.

    We know about the Resurrection, and, sadly, we know wha t happened to Madalyn Murray O’Haire. God is patient and hopes for conversion since He has all eternity to punish. 

    Atheists are notoriously unhappy and angry people. I t is for us to pray for them and love them as best we can because I wouldn’t wish hell on my worst enemy.  

  • Corey F.

    Ironically, these “atheists” (and I use the scare quotes because the only _true_ atheism is a complete indifference to God and his Church) spend more time thinking about God than many theists I know.  If we Christians would devote half the energy to evangelization and devotion that they do to their belief (or unbelief?), imagine the souls we could save.

  • alan b.

    If your faith is so strong, why do you find them so frightening? 

    Listen, it’s always about the politics + religion. They are not angry at religion. They are angry at the people who want to impose religion on others. They are angry at people who want to use 
    religious reasoning to run a secular government. Clearly these people aren’t happy about it and expressing their anger through freedom of speech.In a country where we have separation of church and state, why do we think it’s okay to allow the policy makers and the politicians to use religious reasoning to guide legislation?  Something like stem cells or gay marriage where the opponents of it will give a religious reason against it, doesn’t that fly in the face of separation of church and state?If you try to drive religion into the political sphere, atheists WILL fight back, and for a good reason.

    • Old Trooper

      alan b. The First Amendment gives ALL the right to speak in the public square, not just atheists.  We even let the KKK voice its opinions, from time to time. Read your history. Our REPUBLIC was designed to allow all religions and peoples to find *common* ground to guide the “secular” government.  It was never the intention or design of the founders to wall off, isolate, and ignore religion.
      Any movement that can get a part of the population silenced will not stop at one. First, it’s the religious, next, it’s the meat eaters, next, Evil Republicans!, so on and so forth
      until there is only one voice heard in the “public square.” The Official Voice talking to itself. That is how the Communists got their way in Russia and it is how the Communists are taking control here.
      Just in case you forgot, every basic law (not tech specs, like air traffic control stuff) has its roots in a religion.

    • alan b: I don’t think anyone finds them frightening and since when do Christians want to impose religion on others? Christianity has always been spread peacefully through evangelization and missionary work. You have it backwards, the secular government is forcing itself on the religious. 

      And why don’t you make a comparison between the hate-filled messages at the atheist rally to the peace-filled messages from the Vatican or even weekly Homilies delivered in church for that matter. When people think reasonably they behave calmly and speak intelligently, they should not be filled with contempt for others or acting so hostilly. The problem is, they refuse to acknowledge the truth about the existence of a loving God so whenever they are faced with that truth, it makes them uncomfortable so they need to attack it.

      • Finiz

        “…since when do Christians want to impose religion on others?”

        Umm…a lot. How about prohibiting Gay marriage? Sunday alcohol sales laws? Changing the motto of the USA from E pluribus unum to ‘in God we trust” in the 1950’s?

        Those are just a few quick ones off the top of my head. I think your last sentence is almost correct – just replace ‘existence’ with non- existence’ and it mirror why I think Christians are so mad that the Atheist had a little fun at their expense.

        • Umm, once again you have it backwards. 

          How is the retention of traditional marriage, which has been established for thousands of years, an imposition? The homosexual community is imposing itself on the rest of society. 

          Christian Americans are not imposing their views upon the homosexual community; rather it is some in the homosexual community who want to impose themselves and their beliefs upon all of society in their insistence to make this change in marital laws. 

          Again, Christians are not “mad” or “frightened.” They are just responding to an unprovoked attack by Atheists who have nothing better to do then mock and ridicule amicable people.

      • joshua

        As do many religious heads ridicule and attack anyone or anything
        that refutes them. This has been a common practice throughout history by both the religious and non-religious. Both sides fighting in a never-ending battle of who can speak the loudest. But this goes for ANY religion and I respect the opinions of both sides equally.

    • LAH

      Really!  I find Richard Dawkins about as frightening as a baby in a stroller rolling into the street in the path of  oncoming traffic.  Frightening indeed!

    • Stevelsn

      you dismiss anyone of religion because you don’t happen to believe it. You like to think that your reasons for believing what you believe are superior to the reasons that religious people have for believing what they do. Then you want to silence them and insist that they not bring their faith, which is what shapes and forms their outlook , into the world outside the church. The world in which they,as well as you, live. It is not          “religious” reasoning that informs one about issues like gay marriage or embryonic stem cells, it is reason itself. You want to live and believe as you do, but deny that those who disagree with you have the same right. Infantile,blathering alanbs.

  • We Catholics should be grateful to Richard Dawkins – after all, he fulfills Christ’s prophecy that we will be hated because of His name. Fiat voluntas Tua, amen.

  • Opinionated1945

    Mr. Dawkins must have never heard of the 8th Century miracle at Lanciano and the scientific investigations thereof.

    • Ilpapa

      I call nonsense, rudely described.  This is a completely unsubstantiated story, a fable if you would, to make an allegorical point.  I’d no more believe it than if somebody told me they’d walked on air across the Grand Canyon from rim to rim without any mechanical assistance.  I’m a real “show me” type….so show me.

  • Meh809

    These people are like those who are color-blind. “Oh, I see everything clearly. My depth perception is perfect. My vision is 20/20. I’m not handicapped in any meaningful way, and, if you assert that I am somehow less than you, because you see colors, than you’re bigotted against people like me! I’m superior to you because I’m not distracted by all these mythical “colors” you talk about. My world is pure light and dark, with infinite shades of gray, and that’s how it should be!”

    Oh, Lord. How can you not just feel sorry for the poor, benighted blokes. It must be terrible to be lost, and not even know it. I know the Shepherd cares for all of his sheep, but, how can he save the ones who run from him, willfully, in to the darkness? And,when the wolves take them down, they will be utterly alone.

    Faith is a gift, like the ability to see the colors in the sunrise. Some get it, some don’t. All we can do is pray for them.

    • Ilpapa

      The difference is that the existence of color can be proven with mechanical devices even to the color-blind, and using mathematics and wave theory.  Your imaginary friend *can’t* be proven to exist to a non-believer, since there’s NO EVIDENCE, neither a mechanical method nor an objective theory, or even a subjective theory that works on anything other than a *particular* supernatural delusion.  There’s belief, and it can be VERY strong, but belief / faith is not proof.

  • The_Monk

    “Rational” Richard Dawkins has no idea how life began (see the movie “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”), yet he mocks the very idea of a Creator.  What’s up with that?…

    • Ilpapa

      Yup.  Dawkins isn’t into the beginnings of life, his training is in biology of existing life….so?  Your point?

      Dawkins mocks the very idea of a ‘creator’ because it explains nothing, predicts nothing in itself (all the religious predictions are based on writings *in* the faith, not the mere existence of your imaginary friend)  and can be neither proven nor reproduced.  Also, as I mentioned above, if we switched the label to ‘Allah’, ‘Zeus’, ‘Manitou’, ‘Athena’, etc.  I can pretty certainly guarantee you’d call it either myth (if you were feeling generous) to heresy.

      • The_Monk

        There is one living God who exists in a triune nature:  Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  That is a mystery beyond comprehension.  And many of us “faithful” Catholics have felt as Dawkins voices in the movie, “Expelled…”, the soulful cry that God has kept Himself well hidden.

        The other ‘gods’ you name are of no consequence except in mythology….

  • Deesis

    We have heard this all before! Protest…ant, the Deformation, the French Devilution, we worship the goddess Reason, Communism, Nazism, now materialist Capiltalism. hedonistic individualism. Dawins doctorate in chicken behaviour qualifies him to talk with authority as it did that other chicken farmer Himmler. Millions have perished killed by those that to repudiate God…. but Dawkins doesn’t grasp that if he kills or ignores the ultimate good then he destroys good and he will turn on those that beleive in an ultimate good.
    Dawkins problem is he confuses pleasure with happiness, awe with mystery, and the natural with the supernatural.
    As the spittle sticks on his lips and the bile poors from his mouth we see what sort on man this angel of light is. A man who has declared war on God. He life is finite and so he like Hitler ans Stalin will die biting broken teeth. In a whimper!

    • Brian A. Cook

       How do you explain “Gott Mitt Uns?”

      • Ilpapa

        Hmmmm, lessee….it’s a language in German, roughly translates as “God With Us” (I think)….and is a delusion like any other.  After all, which god-thing are you talking about?  Yahweh?  Zeus?  Thor?  Shiva? Asherah?  Manitou?  They’re all equally fictitious, and you can’t claim yours isn’t without resorting to special pleading for *your* preferred delusion.

    • Ilpapa

      Deesis, you might be a clear thinker, but you don’t express yourself particularly well in text.  I’m sure that if you spoke the same thoughts, they’d come out more coherent.  BUT…from what I can understand, you trade in poorly informed insults, seem to believe that this god-thing of yours is the ‘ultimate good’, are claiming to know what is in Mr. Dawkins’ mind, and don’t like it very much.

      All Richard Dawkins has said, is saying, and will continue to say is:  “Prove It”.  The same way you’d demand proof of how much tax you owe, or anything else that you don’t like, can hurt you, and feels unjust.  Mysticism won’t cut it, it has to be as concrete as basic math, and as reproducible.

  • LAH

    None of these atheists if taken back to the time of the Apostles could probably survive more than a few short weeks without all of the modern tools and human rights that they inherited from their God fearing fore bearers. These cultural throwbacks and cosmic ingrates deserve no human respect or support! They have never seriously studied or even considered the vast logic and fact and research and scholarship that has gone into the deposit of the Catholic Faith from the greatest thinkers of all time. Do not watch their trashy, ignorant, tasteless TV shows. Do not trade with them willingly. Do not listen to their counterfeit truth and idle prater. Do not socially acknowledge them in any way except when they are in the direst of want.  They are in the direst of spiritual want! They must learn from us in this life; out of Christian Charity,  (rather than in the eternal cruelty of the Devil in Hell) that God is not mocked!

    • Wayneg87

       The catholic church mocks god every day. The head of that greasy pole calls himself by gods name….Holy Father. This is blasphemy, the hallmark of the CC

      • LAH

        It has been interesting hearing a perspective from “Wayne’s World!” 

        • Ilpapa

          is that the best you’ve got?  making fun of a person’s name?  I considered that a lame excuse for discourse back in elementary school, and haven’t changed my mind much since.  It appears you haven’t progressed much since then.

    • Ilpapa

      LAH, *you* wouldn’t last any longer…Christians were *persecuted* back then, remember? If it was you or the lions in the Coliseum, my money would be on the lions.  Also, IF your god can perform miracles, why did he allow Christians to be killed by lions for the amusement of the majority (at that time in the Roman Empire) of polytheists?   BTW, if you decide to boycott, realize there are a LOT of us who just don’t want to deal with your sanctimony and so are non-committal in conversation, but will PURPOSELY patronize businesses that you boycott, like how theists’ boycott against Starbucks backfired.  I won’t accuse you of muddy thinking, but you might want to examine your first principles, and decide if you would still accept them if a person of another faith was proposing them for *their* religion.  If not, then maybe it’s time to re-examine your starting point(s).

  • Bob

    If atheists don’t believe in eternity after death, and that it’s total lights out and nothingness……..then why are they wasting such precious time their existence has left bashing religious people? Their clock is ticking down rapidly towards nothingness, spending so much time bashing my faith seems ridiculous!

    • Ilpapa

      Because theists are trying to get their religion written into law (idiotic, since once one is written into law, it can persecute all other religions…examine the Massachusetts colony for more details) and forcing their rituals onto government ceremonies that, since the government is secular, have no need for religious mumbo-jumbo.  If you want to pray in the audience, be my guest, a government official acting under the authority of office has no business promoting religion…y’know, that whole, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” thing in the first amendment?  I freely exercise my *dis*-belief of religion…is that a problem, as long as I’m moral and ethical?

      • Bob

        But if you’re an atheist……..why even believe in any morality or ethics? If when your heart stops beating, and death is here, and as an atheist believes there is a full stop nothingness comming, why observe any moral laws at all? It doesn’t matter if you’ve been bad or good, there is no heaven or hell for an atheist, just “non existence.” so if your an atheist…….why worry what Christians believe or teach? An atheists life clock is ticking down towards nothingness, seems like a waste of time bashing and attacking Christians.

  • Chardin

    “Mock them, ridicule them in public….” All I could think of were the beautiful little nuns taking care of  AIDS patients in San Francisco at Mother Theresa’s home for the sick on Fell Street. How pathetic.

    • Ilpapa

      oh, like how ‘Mother’ Teresa didn’t provide pain meds because suffering was ‘holy’?  How she lauded poverty and humility while hobnobbing with the richest and most powerful people on the planet, and taking in MASSIVE amounts of money?  MT can stuff it, and I’m just glad the sanctimonious liar is gone.

  • Pingback: SanktKlara()

  • Patrick Buck

    When they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him and the criminals there, one on his right, the other on his left. Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, they know not what they do.”  -Luke 23:33-34

    These atheists have no idea Who they’re missing, and it’s a shame. Open their eyes, Lord.

  • Pingback: An April Fool « David's Commonplace Book()

  • DanDi

    Saturday’s rally provided a rare look into the secularism that is pushing its way into the public square.  Indeed!As I commented elsewhere, a rally with a superabundance of comedians and other entertainers dropping the F-bomb, and a lead speaker – Dawkins – who, as a leading proponent of logic and reason, recommends mockery and ridicule as the basis for rational discussion.

    Yup; they made a compelling case.

  • Pingback: Lenten Experience 2012 « Reality and Illusions()