Do Pro-Life Christians Really Care About Babies?

Lately, I've noticed a number of instances of Christian schools (Protestant and Catholic) firing teachers who become pregnant out of wedlock. The schools are the sort that like to micromanage the personal lives of their teachers, as well as their students, and often require teachers to refrain from ‘ungodly’ activities such as pre-marital sex, pornography, and homosexuality. Quite possibly masturbation or reading 50 Shades of Grey might also be firing offenses.

In the case of Cathy Samford, she was engaged to be married and offered to move up the wedding date, so as to remedy her pregnant-out-of-wedlock status, but that simply wasn't good enough the squeaky-clean Pharisees at the Heritage Christian Academy in Rockwall, Texas.

According to Headmaster Dr. Ron Taylor,

"It's not that she's pregnant. The issue here is being an unmarried mother. Everything that we stand for says that we want our teachers, who we consider to be in the ministry, to model what a Christian man or woman should be."

Apparently, what the model Christian man would do is kick the pregnant Ms. Samford - along with her two dependent children from a previous marriage – out on the streets, leaving her with no job or medical care – WWJD – right?

Debating Randal Rauser in Edmonton, Canada

You can now listen to the audio of our debate in Randal's home church. It was our third and last one. There is a twist though. Just listen to the introduction to hear what it is. Hint: the Q&A was different. Enjoy. The video of it will be available soon.

A Tea Party Member Laments the Passing of White Christian Male America

{Note: Occasionally I’ll receive a spam email from the far right. The email below really drives home the ideology of the Tea Party as it confronts a changing America. Yet the IRS is being attacked for not giving immediate tax exempt charitable (non-political) status to Tea Parties with the mindset of the member below! Harry}

Written by a USMC Vet

(Spammer's Comment: The saddest, albeit possibly most accurate, short message you will read. I'm afraid this guy might be right on target! I can't argue with any of it. Passing it along as it was received.)

He wrote: The American Dream ended (on November 6th) in Ohio. The second term of Barack Obama will be the final nail in the coffin for the legacy of the white Christian males who discovered, explored, pioneered, settled and developed The greatest Republic in the history of mankind.

The Theology of a God as an Intelligent Designer Exploded!

Christian apologists claim that the detail of the universe proves the creation of a master designer: God. However, as you can plainly see in this video, a man made dumb frequency generator can create many different detailed intricate designs. Enjoy!

Tomorrow Night I'll Be Speaking for the CFI Group in Grand Rapids, Michigan

Here's the link. If you'd like to have me speak for your group email me at johnwloftus@comcast.net. Serious inquiries only.

Is Randal Rauser Impervious to Reason?

I have said this about Rauser before. See the definition at left? I could say it of any Christian to some degree, depending on how close he or she is to the truth (liberals are closer than progressive evangelicals who are closer than fundamentalists). Well is he?


Every claim is context dependent. I admit Rauser reasons well in other areas of his life unrelated to his faith. He could even teach a critical thinking class. So he's rational, very much so. But like other Christians he is not rational to believe or defend Christianity because it is not true. When it comes to Christianity he is a believer. Like all believers his brain must basically shut down when it comes to faith. When it comes to faith his brain must disengage. It cannot connect the dots. It refuses to connect them. Faith stops the brain from working properly. Faith is a cognitive bias that causes a believer to overestimate any confirming evidence and underestimate any disconfirming evidence. So his brain will not let reason penetrate it given his faith bias. Some people have even described faith as a virus of the brain (or mind). It makes the brain sick. Maybe Marx said it best though. It's an opiate, a deadening drug.

Jerry Coyne On "Are There Other Ways of Gaining Knowledge Apart From Science?"

This is a good discussion. See what you think.

The Best Robert Ingersoll Site Online

As some of you know, my friend Julian Haydon has provided me with some gems from the mouth of Robert Ingersoll to post (just click on the tag below to read them). Now he has developed what I consider the best site on Ingersoll. If you click around you'll see what some important people said about him, a biography, and a fully indexed list of his complete works. Take a good look. This agnostic was truly a great man, a genius. LINK

Can God Exist if Yahweh Doesn't?

My Book WIBA Was Found in an Airport Bookstore

When I was in Canada recently, Randal Rauser and I were discussing what indicators we look for to know our books are doing well. One such indicator is whether they can be found in an airport bookstore. The reason is because these stores have limited space, so books must sell well to be put on the shelves. And since people usually do more reading when flying, a book in one of these stores will sell more often. So after publishing a book or two I began looking for my books in these stores. But I never found one. I even stopped looking. Well, I received a message from a friend on Facebook, and guess what? I've now arrived. It's there. My book WIBA was found in not just any airport either. It was found in a bookstore at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport. I was furthermore flattered by what this person said of it:

Professor Keith Parsons Advocates Ridicule

He advocates this as one response to fundamentalism. He writes:

“A single belly-laugh is worth a thousand syllogisms” said H.L. Mencken. Fundamentalism and fundamentalists should be ridiculed in the media, by comedians, or wherever. You don’t have to worry about fairness, since, as Poe’s Law famously notes, no satire can possibly be more absurd than the real thing. Come on. You just can’t come up with anything more ridiculous than someone who honestly thinks that all human woes stem from an incident in which a talking snake accosted a naked woman in a primeval garden and talked her into eating a piece of fruit. Again, most ridicule would consist of pointedly drawing attention to what they really believe. Nothing could be fairer than that. As a sign admonished on The Simpsons, put the fun back in fundamentalism. Laugh it to death. LINK.

It's not just the so-called "new atheists" like Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher and PZ Myers who advocate ridicule. I do too. So does Richard Carrier, as does Stephen Law. Keep in mind we don't advocate this as the only response.

Do Objective Unchanging Moral Facts Exist?

I have difficulty applying the word "fact" to morals. Morality is clearly not a fact in the same sense that a rock is a fact. A fact is something that exists for everyone. If, for instance, some people with good vision can see a rock directly in front of them and others with good vision cannot see it, then whatever is in front of them is not a fact. If morality is a fact then where does it exist? Presumably the theist will say it exists in the mind of God, their God. But clearly God does not abide by the same standard of morality he demands of human beings. For instance, God can kill people, whereas if we did, it would be murder. God can send people to hell, whereas if any judge punished any criminal for any crime like this, it wouldn't be considered just. God can sit by and do nothing while people drown, but if we did the same thing it would be considered criminal, especially if all we had to do was press a button to save them. So we have two moralities, one for God and one for everyone else. Is morality a fact if there can be two of them?

The Debate Audio With Randal Rauser is Now Available

This audio is from the first night in Calgary at Renfrew Baptist Church. Download it then open it in Quick Time, or some other related media you have access to. Enjoy. A video of our debate from the last night is forthcoming.

Canadian Amazon Ranking for "Why I Became an Atheist"

When I said earlier that the Canadian debate tour with Randal Rauser was very successful, here's some proof. Just look at the ranking of my book, WIBA, as of today:

Christian/Theistic Critiques of the Kalam Cosmological Argument

Jeffery Jay Lowder recently linked to two Christian, yes Christian critiques of William Lane Craig's Kalam Cosmological Argument. One is by Calum Miller and the other by Danny Faulkner. They join Wes Morriston, a theist, in arguing against it. Looks like the Kalam cannot survive the progress of science and the reasoning based on it. I thereby declare it to be dead.

The Canadian Debate Tour with Randal Rauser Was Very Successful

After having met Randal Rauser and laughed together I now consider him a friend. We've had some harsh words in the past but there is nothing like actually meeting people to realize that they are people. I think this was a good lesson and one I wish others could recognize, whether it's atheists debating other atheists, Christians debating other Christians, atheists and Christians debating each other, or anyone else who debates online. Randal wrote the book, You're Not As Crazy As I Think: Dialogue in a World of Loud Voices and Hardened Opinions, which I positively reviewed on Amazon. His book should serve a reminder that just because we disagree, the other side isn't crazy. Atheists, for instance, need to make a distinction that although faith is irrational, people like Randal are not irrational. It's a tough distinction to make and maintain, but we should try as best as we can, even though it can be very difficult.

This is just one of a few reasons I think the God or Godless debate tour, graciously sponsored by Taylor Seminary in Edmonton, Canada, was very successful. Let me comment then on my trip.

Counter-Apologist On Why Bother Reading the Book "God or Godless"

I think that even if one is firmly convinced on the subject, we should always search for the truth no matter what side you’re on. That means listening to what the other side has to say, especially if you’ve not heard it before.

As an atheist I think Randal is pretty good in terms of apologists specifically because he has such nuanced views on traditional objections that would cause a lot of doubts with Christianity. Similarly, in “God or Godless” he doesn’t go for the “standard” arguments you’re likely to hear if you watch formal debates with the usual apologists. Sure he’s got some version of the cosmological argument in there, but his presentation of it is not what you’d expect. I still think he’s wrong in these cases, but it’s nice to see a few new things thrown out there.

Loftus is similarly in very good form, he hits the major issues that should cause Christians to doubt their faith, which forces Randal to espouse his more nuanced views. In my opinion, if all we atheists could achieve was to move mainstream Christianity in line with Randal’s interpretations of hell, biblical slavery, and commandments of genocide, then the world will be better off for it.

Still, Loftus’s stated goal was to drive a wedge between what Christians believe versus what the bible actually says and he does a great job there. Randal is forced to provide rationalizations to square some basic version of Christianity with the problematic areas of the bible in terms of atrocities and failed prophecies.

Randal patches the theological holes admirably, but Loftus’s goal is to introduce enough doubt to get the believer to take The Outsider Test for Faithwhich I think is a great way to convince believers to become an atheist. LINK.

Why I Am An Atheist, My Statement vs Dr. Rauser

This week I have been in Canada debating/discussing atheism vs Christianity with Dr. Randal Rauser. He and I co-wrote the book God or Godless?: One Atheist. One Christian. Twenty Controversial Questions.Here is my 20 minute statement on "Why I Am An Atheist." It took me over forty years to write it since it's based on all that I've learned in that time. See what you think. I'll be traveling home tomorrow.

An Update On My Debates With Randal Rauser

I have found Randal Rauser to be a gracious man who is fun to be around. He's a great guy, and extremely intelligent, although I think he's defending the indefensible. In our personal conversations he shows no signs of doubt. Nonetheless, I should say something about his views. He's less wrong than most other evangelicals and that's a good thing. He seems to be almost exactly where I was in about the year 1994. In some ways I hope he succeeds in helping other evangelicals understand that evolution is a fact, that at best the doctrine of Hell means the unsaved will be annihilated (describing himself even as a "hopeful universalist"), that the early Genesis creation accounts are myths, and that believers can accept some measure of higher criticism of the Old Testament. Again, this represents the same views I held on my road to unbelief. Rauser thinks that if evangelicals can be taught these same views from the get-go they won't so easily be led away from their faith later in life, especially when going to college. Okay. My prediction is that he's pushing evangelicals one step closer to unbelief. Since I think that's true, as a pragmatist, I hope his type of progressive evangelicalism becomes predominate among evangelicals, even though I think it doesn't go far enough. He's one step closer to the truth, and I welcome it.

The Edmonton Journal Covers the Loftus-Rauser Debates

Check it out.

Mind Games Christians Play: I’m Being Persecuted

It’s not uncommon to hear American evangelical Christians complaining bitterly that they are being persecuted. The circle-the-wagons, us-against-the-world mentality is a tool which religious leaders have frequently used to rally the faithful and whip up a frenzy of righteous indignation, so it’s not surprising that the sheep have bought into this oft-repeated lie. This mindset is bolstered by the biblical admonitions of Jesus and Paul that true believers will suffer persecution, and of course confirmation bias kicks in to prove them right.

The real mind game consists in the fact that these ‘beleaguered’ believers manage to convince themselves of this, while simultaneously persecuting those who they despise. They complain about people being intolerant of Christian beliefs, all the while, preaching and railing against other religions, gays and lesbians, and of course, those damned atheists and humanists. They warn about the dangers of Islam, and Sharia law, while attempting to force their particular religion and god into government, the judicial system, and schools, every chance they get.

Essentially, the fuzziness of the fundamentalist Christian mind allows them to simultaneously play the roles of both victim and oppressor.

Iowa Biblical Scholars Issue Statement on the One-Man-One-Woman Claim

In light of an imminent Supreme Court decision on two cases involving gay marriage issues, the influential The Des Moines Register today published what may be an academic landmark statement, at least in our state of Iowa. 

Biblical scholars from all three regents universities in Iowa published a joint statement challenging the popular claim that the only acceptable definition of biblical marriage is that between one man and one woman.  An appeal to the Bible has been endemic among those who oppose gay marriage. This is the first time that biblical scholars from all three major state universities in Iowa have joined together to issue such a statement.  See Statement.

The co-authors of this statement are Dr. Hector Avalos, Professor of Religious Studies at Iowa State University, Dr. Robert Cargill, Assistant Professor of religious studies at The University of Iowa, and Dr. Kenneth Atkinson, Associate Professor of History at The University of Northern Iowa.

Such a joint statement may mark a new emphasis on activist biblical scholarship that seeks to go beyond writing only for academic publications that the general public rarely reads. Academic biblical studies can be more relevant when it can educate the public and refute misinformed views on the Bible that are often used to enact social policies.

Iowa has been a leader in the use of faculty statements in the past, including during the Intelligent Design controversies at Iowa State University in 2005 and 2007 (see Intelligent Design Controversy). Iowa is also one of the first states to legalize gay marriage.

Could Anyone Tell Me Why the Race Ethics In This Sign Would Be Unbiblical?

Quote of the Day, by Kel

This is what really confuses me about believers. Are you gullible in everything, or only in things that fit your religious conviction? And I ask this with the utmost sincerity. Because an account of the dead rising from their graves and walking around sounds like something out of a bad horror film (see Matthew 27:51-54). I'm not even sure how you can call such a belief possible, let alone say it's not unreasonable. Believing something like that is the very definition of an unreasonable belief! I'm really confused as to how you could possibly defend such a passage as historical without having to throw out any pretence of having a reasonable account of history.

Randal Rauser Debunks Deconversion Stories

One thing about Rauser is that he's willing to take on atheists, and it seems he has no fear. So he's asking atheists why they don't believe and then he analyses those reasons. Guess what? He finds them all insufficient. See for yourself with three non-believers: 1) Justin Schieber; 2) Counter Apologist; and 3) Edward Babinski. I've already weighed in on what makes for a good reason for non-belief. It's called the "Argument from Ignorance" where I argue there isn't a bad personal reason to reject Christianity (seen in four parts in reverse chronological order). Maybe he'll consider my arguments? So far I don't see him doing so.