Notes Of A Free-Speech Junkie

Dear TT -

One can easily show the stupidity of Cardinal Newman's words by altering but a single word in his statement. To whit:

“Love Zeus,
Then The Greater Your Distress,
The More He Will Comfort You!
The More You Are Scorned,
The More He Will Love You!
The More You Are Insulted,
The More He Will Exalt You!
The More You Are Forgotten,
The More He Will Remember You!
If Abandoned, He Will Draw You Closer To Himself”

To TT...

The majority of people use 99% of their brain power to corroborate their prejudices. (Not only in religion).

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ writes:
"Are those who malign God as stupid and scandalize one of the most renown intellectual scholars of the 19th Centurey, as sophomoric and shallow protected from criticism?"

Of what value is intellect and scholarship when it is dedicated to probing the depths of abject fantasy?

Whose intellect is to be more admired? An average mind who goes about finding the cure for some disease or a great intellectual who spends their time discerning proof of a flat earth and the religious fairy tales from whence such myths are born?

Are those who malign God as stupid and scandalize one of the most renown intellectual scholars of the 19th Centurey, as sophomoric and shallow protected from criticism?

Thus, a word to the wise should be sufficient:
“Love God,
Then The Greater Your Distress,
The More He Will Comfort You!
The More You Are Scorned,
The More He Will Love You!
The More You Are Insulted,
The More He Will Exalt You!
The More You Are Forgotten,
The More He Will Remember You!
If Abandoned, He Will Draw You Closer To Himself”—Cardinal John Henry Newman."

Absolutely sophomoric.

Oh, and the exclamation points are a poor substitute for depth.

I'm beginning to believe that religious titles are euphemisms for degrees of stupidity, and in this case, I don't know if one can get much stupider than Cardinal.

Sheesh.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
AUTONOMOUS:
IRT:
“Why do people need to believe in God? I'd like to hear just one reasonable explanation. Life is directly in front of your face, and yet you're pining away for an eternally invisible entity. This has got to be a case of the human ego gone wrong somewhere, somehow - how else to explain it? The human ego = another illusion.”

ANS:
St. Augustine said, “Lord you have created us for yourself. Our hearts are restless until they rest in you.”

It is said, in birth, God gives a mother her child that she might nurture, guide him, and return him back to God.

Just recently, the Boston Celtics won the NBA National Championship. Several players said it was the greatest thrill in their lives.

The crowd cheers a baseball player when he hits a home run. All these senses of pleasure are fleeting, temporary, and not lasting. Days, weeks, years later the event may be remembered, but that pleasure, that excitement, the thrill that existed then isn’t there.

The greatest sex in the world is only temporary; yet man is never completely satisfied. Even millionaires are not completely satisfied with their wealth; they want more. Wealth is not happiness; home runs are not happiness.

What was happiness for Elvis, for Rock Hudson, or Marylyn Monroe? They had an abundance of the goods of the world but died unhappy seeking some kind of pleasure that would satisfy their innate desire to be happy.

The vanities and wiles of the world are temporary and they blow over because nothing in the world satisfies man forever. Yet man’s heart is always searching and longing to be satisfied.

Nothing seems to be sufficient, not even succulent food, or good drink, or good times, because man is not made for the world; he is made for eternal happiness. No one is exempt from that feeling of desiring the good. Man always acts for the "good" or he acts on what appears to be the "good" to him.

What are the end, the purpose, and the meaning of human life? The Beetle, Ringo, thought it was the mystics in India. Others thought it was money, and when the stock markets crashed, they committed suicide. Aristotle, a pagan, wrote about it in his treaty on Ethics and found it was eternal happiness.

In Victor Hugo’s classic, "Les Miserables," the protagonist Jean Valjean was hounded by his nemesis Javert who had placed the purpose for his life on the strict adherence to the law.

Valjean was a bitter man who hated everything. He had served time in a harsh and torturous prison for stealing one loaf of bread.

When released he stole some silver from a priest who took him in to feed him. The police caught Valjean but the priest said he gave the silver candelabras to Valjean. Valjean was changed.

Javert found the law was the purpose of his life; Valjean found that Love for others was the purpose of life. The law failed Javert, love sustained Valjean. Javert committed suicide; Valjean lived a happy and virtuous life.

That which gives one the most lasting pleasure is love, not of self, but love of others. Many have testified that spending time in Calcutta with Mother Theresa helping the poor and dying changed their lives forever.

Charles Dickens saw the same importance of love in his novel. “Scrooge" was an avarice miser who had no love for anything but money. It was a fleeting pleasure that left him to himself, until he found what really made him happy, doing good for others.

Why is this so? Because we are made to seek what is good, but God is All-Good, as Aristotle, a pagan, deduced from his Metaphysics.

Thus, it is written of the Creation in Genesis that God made man to the image and likeness of Himself. Thus, the greatest love on earth is to love another, not things, but people. Why, because we are made in the image and likeness of God, and man find his highest pleasure by loving man through this veiled glimpse of God in man.

Hence, every one loves the Good without exception. Why do they love money, sex, or something else? They do so because it is an apparent good; therefore, they lack the knowledge of what is the genuine good because of their ignorance.

Hence, it is essential to seek the true God. Moreover, to seek Him one must know Him. Therefore it is said, “Lord give me the wisdom to know and seek my end that I may never sin against you.” You never sin against someone you truly love.

Thus, a word to the wise should be sufficient:
“Love God,
Then The Greater Your Distress,
The More He Will Comfort You!
The More You Are Scorned,
The More He Will Love You!
The More You Are Insulted,
The More He Will Exalt You!
The More You Are Forgotten,
The More He Will Remember You!
If Abandoned, He Will Draw You Closer To Himself”—Cardinal John Henry Newman.

Afterthought: many of the world's greatest monsters have been highly intelligent and atheist.

Moral of the story: intelligence does not equal virtue or wisdom. Rigidity of thought is found at all IQ levels, in atheism as in theism.

Your short piece has given me much food for private musings. Thx.

Both Ms H Ali and Dr Wafa Sultan have known intense personal suffering which they attribute to Islam as practiced in their respective countries. Suffering changes perspectives and cuts through any form of concrete mentality much faster than any book learning can.

It was instructive to read the case you made for your own concrete atheism mentality.

The issues you have pointed to have been discussed at length elsewhere on this forum, so I won't go into them again.

It has been claimed people come with one perspective and leave with many.

Much sharing has been done on this forum. Anyone following the discussions on various threads over nineteen months could attest Jihadist has changed her mindset much faster than anyone else, adopting other views she has read quickly as her own.

As to Islam why she remains a Muslim I can only guess, why should anyone give up a religion from which they have had only advantages and no disadvantages whatsoever. If she were living in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim woman, her experience of Islam would be different, or if she belonged to a low social class which could not flout the strict Islamic laws for women and get away with it.

My additional $ 0.02.

The „concrete mentality“ refers to the strength and immobility of one’s judgment (to which I also subsume a religious belief), independent of an ever so high degree of education and intelligence, which nobody would seriously draw into question for Jihadist, from whom I have learned a lot. Therefore I used the example of Heidegger’s lack of judgment as to Hitler. Probably only very few people would call Heidegger stupid.

Far from being a Marxist, I think his statement “das soziale Sein bestimmt das Bewusstsein” (the social “being”, a persons environment, defines his consciousness), is not completely wrong, although there are quite a few examples where the “social being” stopped forming the consciousness, and where the “consciousness” changed according to free thinking. That was the case with a lot of atheists, many of whom, me e.g., have been brought up in a very Christian environment (“social being”).

Intelligence is a tool that can be used for all sorts of consequences. It can be used in a Marxist meaning, to fervently rationalize the inherited beliefs, or it can be used to question those beliefs. That would be Hegel’s view, who, contrary to his student Marx, posited that the consciousness defines the social being.

Oh well, shrug. You are welcome to call my atheism “concrete mentality.”

Jihadist is an intellectual and businesswoman who has three advantages compared to ordinary Muslim women in Malaysia. She has a European mother, a Westernised education, advantages of having a native Muslim father in Indonesia, a Muslim country and now a native Muslim husband in Malaysia, a Muslim country.

So Jihadist has the luxury of shrugging her shoulders about Wafa Sultan's views on Islam and refuses to display her great intellect by writing a lengthy and serious essay as rebuttal. Such an essay would have gone a long way in helping non-Muslims on this thread understand Islam better. As an extremely intelligent Muslim woman it is one thing non-Muslims on this thread need to really hear from her.

Muslims intellectuals living in the West have the best of both worlds. They enjoy complete freedom of expression to criticize the Western governments in which they live whose foreign policies in Muslim countries they detest as Muslims. They enjoy all the advantages of a non-Muslim culture, including the right to protest loudly and publicly against real or imagined slights or criticisms of the behavior of any Muslim or any aspect of Islam. They are worshiped as protectors of Islamic ideals by 1.3 billion Muslims worldwide, even by those suffering under Sharia Law, although they themselves would never want to live in those countries. UK is a perfect example of how Muslims enjoy their freedoms, both in the good and bad sense.

CCNL, give up your obsession about the real gender of Jihadist. She cannot be male because she addresses her flirtatious entertaining comments only to males. Maybe very un-Muslim for a married Muslim woman, mother of three children, living in Malaysia but not masculine by a long shot. You should know that best because of the way she teases you like her domestic pet. No male could imitate her behavior because it has got woman written all over it.

Get profession help for your list posting OCD which is now also taking on qualities of outright paranoia.

Y C+2 & Co., PSC:

I realize how busy You are, and am stunned that You have found the timelessness to attend to the Operatives' wardrobe issues. But that is why You are You, I guess. When You have a moment between, could You, if possible, consider these questions?

1. This should be of interest to You. Why is it that the Brooklyn Botanical Gardens outdoor cafe cannot brew a decent cup of coffee?

2. Since there are tax-free zones in the continental US, why can't one of them sell top quality read to wear Vera Wang? Wouldn't the US then be able to compete with Dubai for Wang?

I mean if the Operatives have to fly all the way to Dubai to purchase Wang, what with the cost of the airfare, wouldn't any possible savings be lost?

Sincerely,

Farnaz

RE: The Vera Wang Question

If there is one thing that is to be trusted in the created world, it is the Dubai airport, which is duty free and which recognizes its importance to air travelers.

The only "authentic" Wang (We are not a philosopher) is that which comes directly from Wang. For the "real," the Operatives should go to Wang. For top-quality-ready-to-wear at the best prices, the Dubai airport would be the wisest bet.

We say "bet since no one has yet questioned Dubai, and though omniscient, We are busy and need to consider the matter further before making a definitive pronouncement.

Y C+2 & Co., PSC

RE: W. Wang

Ready to wear.

RE: Wang

What is "original"? What is a "designer"?

RE: Authentic Wang

What is "authentic"?

Uhhh! LOL

Looks like I have had a sex-change operation into a male and not feel a thing. It's a miracle!

And I have "concrete mentality" too. And to think that another poster asked how soil turns to brain.

Now we know soil can turn into brain, and brain can turn into concrete.

What Wafa Sultan said? Only if I think what she said has relevance and is worth commenting on. That is the ultimate human ego.

Shrug.

Concy pussycat!

You Homeland Security friend found me yet? I could be in Brooklyn. Or Dubai. Or Rochester. Or the Vatican.

Cheers
"J"

Well, none of us really know who the others of us are, do we?

E Favorite

You are right; the subject of religious belief almost never comes up among friends or family. Therefore, I must have been referring to this blog, or blogging, in general.

Over the past few months, I have voiced alot of my own observations and beliefs, which are often non-standard, and "off-brand." And I got a lot of rude reactions, that I am stupid, a moron, an idiot, my head it in the sand, I'm gay, I am a lier, a deciever, that I am "leading my followers astray."

And so, WOW! If someoene says they an atheist, and tries to explain why, it is 10 times worse.

In general, though, I think there are people who accept the religious heritage that is handed to them, because they have no interest in questioning it, and there are people who are more "philosophical" about life, and naturally question things, and question their own religiou heritage.

Yet it is a conversation that almost never happens with others, but is mainly, conducted inwardly, with oneself.

So perhaps that expalins why we are here; wwe are hungry to discuss these things with other perople who might be interested, like ourselves.

CCNL wishes Farnaz to consider herself "lampooned," and she gratefully does, since she feared for the Concerned Christian's questionable sanity. Alas, fears continue.

CCNL believes Jihadist to be a male operative living in the County of Kings (Kings County = Brooklyn). He is correct.

All Saudi operatives meet at the Brooklyn Botanical Gardens outdoor cafe on Tuesdays at 1:00PM, to discuss investment strategies for gated yuppy communities developing in said borough.

Following old business, they are joined by the Vatican Guard, MPAC, IPAC, the NRA, the Pro-Lifers, the CIA, the Wiccans for an Arboreal America, the Greater New York Cartoonists Society, and Materialists for a Non-Exploding Earth.

Mostly they review the latest from Vera Wang. Jihadist, though male, reveres Vera Wang (as do all Reformed and Conservative Jews, Hindus and atheists regardless of gendered persuasion) and is always at pains to point out that Vera Wang can be purchased most economically at the Dubai airport.

Jihadist has tried everything to get these people to Dubai and improve their wardrobe, pointing out that the medium is the message, and should they develop a message, Vera is their medium. Alas, Jihadist's dream could be a lost cause as authentic Wang is now seriously in doubt, what with all the ready to wear. Farnaz insists that the Dubai airport is to be trusted, but no one knows what to make of Farnaz.

To quell developing fear, Jihadist has written to Fr. Crossan to discover the 30% extent that is authentic Wang, to be designated the W Document.

the Jihadist is a fine example of the shrugging concrete mentality impenetrable even by its own high education and intelligence. Education, intelligence and judgment are different human qualities.

Education and intelligence are secondary or "operational" virtues, whereas judgment is a primary virtue: It refers to the consequences of one's actions rather than to their roots. Judgment requires courage, intelligence can be applied to anything, good or bad.

If intelligence would lead to judgment, Heidegger would not have supported Hitler and Jihadist would have looked through the essence and historical relativity of her creed.

Why do people need to believe in God? I'd like to hear just one reasonable explanation. Life is directly in front of your face, and yet you're pining away for an eternally invisible entity.

This has got to be a case of the human ego gone wrong somewhere,somehow - how else to explain it?

The human ego = another illusion.

Jihadist who otherwise posts essays on every topic under the sun has nothing to say about Wafa Sultan's comments about Islam her own religion. Only a shrug. Shrug.

thus far unable to post, testing

unable to post

My heartfelt condolences to the family and friends of George Carlin!

test

Ayaan Hirsi Ali : "Islam must be crushed!"

Jihadist : (Shrug).

Wafa Sultan: "Islam must change or be crushed!"

Jihadist : (Shrug).

Kola Boof : "I want my own religion!"

Jihadist : (Shrug).

CCNL: "I am a Crossanized Christian of Reality who believes in a Singularity!"

Jihadist : (Shrug).

Cheers and good day my time zone.
"J"

Concy pussycat,

So many speculative-obsessive posts on moi.

Shrug.

Cheers

Hmmm, Arminius aka The Jihadist without the fake hijab????

Actually tis a minor issue with respect to that famous quote:

"Until the koran is deflawed, all mosques are Febrezed and all Shiites and Sunnis pacified, no one is safe !!!!!"

:( :( :(

Wafa Sultan

Alas, poor CCNL!

So bewildered, so lost! Fear not, Jihadist will be back soon to deliver a spanking, which I know you are looking forward to.

CCNL, poor you, another attack of OCD. Your pet owner Jihadist will be here shortly to offer you crumbs.

Farnaz, Farnaz, Farnaz,

The topic this week is lampooning religions and the followers of said religions or in your case of no religion.

Consider yourself lampooned!!!!!!

The Reality Challenged and Obfuscating Jihadist though is really a male, Saudi operative working out of Brooklyn. Again his major obective is to distract us from the flaws and errors of Islam. Note how he never addresses said flaws and errors.

Once again a synopsis of said flaws and errors and to be fair the flaws and errors of all the contemporary religions:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

Many of the 1.5 million Conservative Jews and many of their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.

simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

3. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

4. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds this terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

The caste/laborer system and cow worship/reverence are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies, and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.

E Favourite, only a nutty religious fundamentalist would even try to reconvert you since you have consciously abandoned your faith in God.

E Favorite, in real life, the healthy response to your atheism would be, "Ok, so now you don't believe in God. So what?" End of story.

E Favourite, in real life atheism vs belief does not make for a topic fit for conversation. How does a stamp collector discuss stamp collection with one who doesn't? This blog situation is very unique. It cannot be replicated in real life. Hence all sorts of people are hanging out here to have the kind of conversation that is not possible in real life. Many times it is not even more than shallow entertainment. People do it anyway each one for their own undisclosed reason.

Daniel ITLD: "I think that a lot of atheists innocently give voice to their doubt, or their lack of belief, in a sincere expression of feelings, and then get clobbered from every direction, for all kinds of reasons, that have nothing to do with religion, or belief."

Insightful - and true for me, in certain circumstances. In other circumstances, I stay silent, just because I don't want to be shocking and really change the tone of the conversation. As you know, I'm was until recently, a believer and a regular church goer, so many of my family and friends don't know about the change unless I tell them. Religion doesn't come up in conversation much, so it's been a little awkward for me. I'm getting better. I want to be more straightforward - it's my nature - but I don't want to hijack the conversation with my shocking news either.

Sharia Law for Germany. It is better than the Catholic Church of yesteryears.

Catholic bashing seems to be just as popular as Muslim bashing. Political maps are being redrawn too. Interesting, interesting! velly, velly, velly interesting!

Pussycat Concy!

You've been busy here! Leave Farnaz alone.

How can you be sure I am not freelancing for CIA, KIA, MI5, MI6, KGB and Mossad among others?

How can you be sure I am also not working undercover for the Vatican to collect more "documents" for its Secret Archives? Very easy to get into nun's habits once you're used to wearing hijabs.

You friend in Homeland Security is still trying to find me. I asconded from paying my half of the bill for dinner in Havana. Your friend wanted to go Dutch. So cheap of your Homeland Insecurity friend.

Cheers and out of here.

Farnaz, Farnaz, Farnaz,

What proof do you provide that you are not a Saudi operative? I have a friend in Homeland Security by the way.

And heck, I could be a Vatican operative testing the "waters" of current orthodox "pew sitters" beliefs while at the same time relating Reality and History to the foundations of other religions.

And say Hi to your other Saudi operative living in Brooklyn, the one and only Reality Challenged and Obfuscating Jihadist!!!

Arminius, Daniel,

I hear you! I won't engage him--Promise!

Farnaz

Farnaz,

Daniel ITLD is right, CCNL cannot be reached - a lot of us have tried. I put him in the same sad group as TTwhatever, Spidey, and JJ. It is a good idea to ignore CCNL because he will come back at you, usually with a long list of crap that clutters up the blog.

Arminius

Hi Arminius,

I take you at your word about CCNL. I've never seen him this irrational, unreasonable and fanatical, yes, but outright delusional, no.

CCNL writes:

I see Farnaz did not deny he/she was a Saudi operative. Again be very wary of anonymous blogs!!!

Farnaz is a woman. She is not a Saudi operative. To the best of her knowledge, there are no Saudi Jews, Iranian or otherwise.

Farnaz regrets that by casting doubt on your views of American foreign policy, she may have unintentionally pushed you over the edge to the dark, dark side.

She wishes you well, and urges you to seek help. She suggests you contact someone from the Seminar and ask him for a referral.

Though an atheist, she will pray for you.

Farnaz

Yes, CCNL is the resident "sore head." Nothing anyone says ever moves him. So, why bother, ever to address him? Jihadist likes to mess with him, but he never seems to get it. I wouldn't let anything he says bother you.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ

I am having a hard time understanding most of the comments on this thread. I cannot imagine what you are trying to say. If you have something on your mind, why not just come out with it, and say it?

The fanatical tirade by TTWSY regarding the Cathars was inspired by an rather extensive discussion we've been having on the Susan Jacoby/Obama thread just preceeding this one - e.g. the high crimes, misdemeanors and murderous escapades of the Catholic Church over the centuries, and other cogent issues.

But 'there are none so blind as those that will not see' - and the villany of various Popes and Saints is apparently either to be excused, ignored or rationalized away, at the discretion of the devoted believer/apologist.

The truth hurts. There are no good excuses for the self-deception that generates mass homicide by the faithfully religious, regardless the faith.

Ah, yes - TTwhatever. The medieval mindset at work. His motto: 'Kill them all and let God sort it out'. 'Troll' is too polite a description of him.

I see Farnaz did not deny he/she was a Saudi operative. Again be very wary of anonymous blogs!!!

Farnaz,

Yes, that is CCNL. As he always has been. I've seen him deliver very bad ad hominem attacks. He is best left to stew in his bigotry and lists.

Arminius

Daniel,

I should have written--"intellectual surrender of that sort"--Sorry.

Daniel,

Gerry writes:

I am so happy I live in a country where people ignore such trolls and let people believe whatever sense or nonsense they may care to believe, as long as they leave others alone.
------------------

Well, basically, this is my view. People may believe whatever they wish as long as they don't force their religious views on me or try to legislate them. If the latter, I will do everything I can to stop them.

Generally, I do get irritated by racism, bigotry, intellectual surrender of that thought--this I confess. But one can easily be an atheist and a bigot!

Farnaz

Atheists are "hostile" not to truth, but to the perversion of "truth" people like TT... try to sell with a straight face.

Same as his assertion that Albigensians were "destructive and dangerous", again for refusing to be subdued by the catholics in power. TT... is a guy who certainly would have us atheist slaughtered like the Albigensians, if he could. He obviously approves of the slaughter of the Albigensians. What a farce of a world view in the 21st century!

I am so happy I live in a country where people ignore such trolls and let people believe whatever sense or nonsense they may care to believe, as long as they leave others alone. The catholic church never left others alone: A person hostile to their "truth" should preferably be killed to have their "truth" prevail - or else their "truth" would be debunked as "true" illusion, stripping them of their power.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ANONOMOUS
“ALBIGENSIAN CRUSADE”
IRT
"In the end, the Albigensian Crusade killed an estimated 1 million people, not only Cathars but also much of the population of southern France—Wikipedia."

"The heresy disappeared about the end of the fourteenth century."

Their moral teachings are maniacally fanatical. Trying to deal with maniacs sometimes ends in violence, as we see in the Middle East.

“Man, they taught, is a living contradiction. Hence, the liberation of the soul from its captivity in the body is the true end of our being. To attain this, suicide is commendable; it was customary among them in the form of the endura (starvation). The extinction of bodily life on the largest scale consistent with human existence is also a perfect aim.

As generation propagates the slavery of the soul to the body, perpetual chastity should be practiced. Matrimonial intercourse is unlawful; concubinage, being of a less permanent nature, is preferable to marriage. Abandonment of his wife by the husband, or vice versa, is desirable.

Generation was abhorred by the Albigenses even in the animal kingdom. Consequently, abstention from all animal food, except fish, was enjoined. Their belief in metempsychosis, or the transmigration of souls, the result of their logical rejection of purgatory, furnishes another explanation for the same abstinence.

To this practice Albigensians added long and rigorous fasts. The necessity of absolute fidelity to the sect was strongly inculcated. War and capital punishment were condemned.

An agreement between the papal legates and the Count of Toulouse, the latter left the council and prepared to resist. He was declared an enemy of the Church and his possessions were forfeited to whoever would conquer them.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01267e.htm

There was a high degree of political turmoil caused by the heretics. Priests and all Catholics were severely persecuted and many put to death. The Inquisitions were somewhat a self-defense against the Manicheans.

Albigensians were neo-Manichean sect that flourished in southern France in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. They were also called Catharists (katharos, pure), though in reality they were only a branch of the Catharistic movement.

The rise and spread of the new doctrine in southern France was favored by various circumstances, among which was their contempt for the Catholic clergy, caused by the ignorance and the worldly, too frequently scandalous, lives of the latter; the protection of an overwhelming majority of the nobility, and the intimate local blending of national aspirations and religious sentiment.

The Albigenses asserted the co-existence of two mutually opposed principles, one good, and the other evil. The former is the creator of the spiritual, the latter of the material world.

The bad principle is the source of all evil; natural phenomena, either ordinary like the growth of plants, or extraordinary as earthquakes, likewise moral disorders (war), must be attributed to him. He created the human body and is the author of sin, which springs from matter and not from the spirit.

The Old Testament must be either partly or entirely ascribed to him; whereas the New Testament is the revelation of the beneficent God. The latter is the creator of human souls, which the bad principle imprisoned in material bodies after he had deceived them into leaving the kingdom of light.

This earth is a place of punishment, the only hell that exists for the human soul. Punishment, however, is not everlasting; for all souls, being Divine in nature, must eventually be liberated. To accomplish this deliverance God sent upon earth

Jesus Christ, who, although very perfect, like the Holy Ghost, is still a mere creature [human material]. The Redeemer could not take on a genuine human body, because he would thereby have come under the control of the evil principle. His body was, therefore, of celestial essence, and with it He penetrated the ear of Mary.

It was only apparently that He was born from her and only apparently that He suffered. His redemption was not operative, but solely instructive. To enjoy its benefits, one must become a member of the Church of Christ (the Albigenses).

Here below, it is not the Catholic sacraments but the peculiar ceremony of the Albigenses known as the consolamentum, or "consolation," that purifies the soul from all sin and ensures its immediate return to heaven. The resurrection of the body will not take place, since by its nature all flesh is evil.

In the end, the atheists have a history of violence and destruction of society and the social order.

Contrasted to all the fanatical escapades to Christianity and they are losers. In an attempt to salvage their religion, they tried to adopt some of the Christian principles, as all the other failed religions have done, to no avail because it can’t be done in part but must be done in the whole.

Hi Daniel,

I guess it goes both ways. I think of people like Arminius, who simply wishes to believe what he wishes to believe because it serves him well.

Similarly, I know observant Jews who study Torah and Talmud, and whose knowledge enhances their lives.

Often, it seems that atheists, among whom I number, are at pains to enlighten them, but I think this is due to ongoing attempt of "religionists" to impose or legislate their beliefs.

I think we atheists need to be able to distinguish those who simply to follow a religious path from those who insist that we all travel with them, no?

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
ANONYMOUS:
DANIEL IN THE LION'S DEN: JUNE 24, 2008 9:47 AM

"I was pointing out the hostility of Christians to atheists. My point was, that atheists are so hostile to religious people in REACTION to religious hostility directed against atheists. And if religious people want atheists to "calm down," then they should calm down too."

ANS:
Atheists are hostile not because of the reaction to religious hostility, but more so, because atheists are hostile to the truth.

Since Catholics are religious people, what hostility have they done to atheists? More so Catholicism, from its conception, continuously has been persecuted, not just by atheists or pagans, but also by other religions. It started with the Jews, and it continues in Israel and in the Holy Lands.

The Turks and Saracens slaughter many in the Christian settlements in the Holy Lands. The Crusades were initiated to defend Christians against maniacal extremist.

All the Muslim tribes in the Middle East are inordinately hostile to Christians, viz. Saudi Arabia for one; the Muslims in Pakistan and Afghanistan harbor fanatic religions that are extremely hostile to Christians. The atheists Sandinistas in Central America, assonated a Bishop. In the Holy Lands both the Jews in Israel surreptitiously and the Muslims openly persecute the Catholics still.

You cited the Albigensian Crusade a twenty-year war between the Catholics and Albigensians. You happen to have left out the context. One being that the city was asked to surrender. They refused. Not even the Catholics would leave or could leave.

The Popes made many efforts to appease the Albigensians to no avail. These people were destructive and dangerous There was the slaughter of many innocent children, women and men.

"Contemporary sources give estimates of the number of dead ranging between seven and twenty thousand. The latter figure appears in the Papal Legate Arnaud-Amaury's report to the Pope.--Wikipedia"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albigensian_Crusade

“In 1198 Innocent III became Pope. He first tried peaceful conversion, but the preachers sent out to return the schismatics to the Roman communion met with little success.

"Even St. Dominic succeeded in converting only a handful.[9] The Cathar leadership was protected by powerful nobles,[10] and also by some bishops, who resented papal authority in their sees.

"The powerful count Raymond VI of Toulouse refused to assist and was excommunicated in May 1207. The Pope called upon the French king, Philippe II, to act against those nobles who permitted Catharism, but Philippe declined to act.

"Count Raymond met with the papal legate, Pierre de Castelnau, in January 1208,[14] and after an angry meeting, Castelnau was murdered the following day.[15]

"The Pope reacted to the murder by issuing a bull declaring a crusade against Languedoc – offering the land of the heretics to any who would fight. This offer of land drew the northern the northern French nobility into conflict with the nobles of the south

"Lavaur, Dep. of Tarn, fell in 1211, amid dreadful carnage, into the hands of the Crusaders. The Crusaders, exasperated by the reported massacre of 6,000 of their followers, spared neither age nor sex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albigensian_Crusade

“In July the crusaders captured the small village of Servian and headed for Béziers, arriving on July 21.

“They invested the city, called the Catholics within to come out, and demanded that the Cathars surrender.[20] Both groups refused.

"The city fell the following day when an abortive sortie was pursued back through the open gates.[21] The entire population was slaughtered and the city burned to the ground.

CCNL:

Is that really you, and, if so, have you literally gone insane? Is there no thorazine in your neck of the woods, or whatever it is they currently give paranoid schizophrenics?

Also, have you changed your mind about the Saudis?
I thought they were your friends.

Seriously, if you are CCNL, are you joking? If not, I'm frightened for you, and I mean it. I'm not kidding at all. Please get help.

Anonymous says I should lighten up? I wonder what that could mean. I only made a very, very brief comment.

For Farnaz, I think it is the religious people, who are hostile, and atheists, mostly are not hostile, except in reaction. And why are religious people hostile towards atheists? Are they afraid that God may be offended, or that God may be thrown off his stride? No, I do not think so. They are hostile, because, atheists remind them of their own doubts, and also, perhaps, threaten their own position of cultural superiority, which are problems of the pscyhe, and problems of wealth and power, but not problems of religion.

I think that alot of atheists innocently give voice to their doubt, or their lack of belief, in a sincere expression of feelings, and then get clobbered from every direction, for all kinds of reasons, that have nothing to do with religion, or belief.

As with the Reality Challenged and Obfuscating Jihadist, Farnaz is actually a operative for the Saudi "Wannabees" working out of another Brooklyn office. His/her main objective is to distract the non-Muslim world from the flaws and errors of Islam.

And as a warning, be very careful when blogging on anonymous blogs.

Anonymous:

Non-German:

Sie sind ein Rassist.

Exit.

June 24, 2008 12:04 PM

***************

Translation: You are a racist!

Oh come on Anonymous! Now it is becoming Kindergarten stuff. I do not happen to believe that the number of pigments in a person's skin makes them inferior or superior in one way or another. So hold your fire for *real racists,* and believe me the real racists are not even worth your fire.

Non-German:

Sie sind ein Rassist.

Exit.

Anonymous:

Non-German Anonymous:

Suggestion: Rutsch mir den Buckel runter!

June 24, 2008 11:40 AM

********

Translation: Get lost!

My response to Anonymous: Danke gleichfalls!

Non-German Anonymous:

Suggestion: Rutsch mir den Buckel runter!

Non-German Anon:

There are many things I do not know,
Many things I will never know,
There are many things I do not need to know,
Many things I do not care to know.

-----------------------
So, then an hour and a half ago it was yesterday, an hour and a half ago when you were posting of our correspondance, but now that I am here it is today!

How fortunate for you that you get to control time, offer "examples" for other ethnic/relgious groups to follow!

Yes, I can see there are "Many things [you] do not care to know." I'm sorry!

Do read "The Allegory of the Cave," or reread it. It's on the web, I'm sure. You will understand, then, why I'm sorry.

BTW. I know a little Yiddish, enough to understand, since I know a little German. I studied Yiddish because I wanted to read I.B. Singer in the original, but I simply didn't get to the level where I could do so comfortably.

Sfardim don't of course speak Yiddish, never have historically. Most Askenazm don't speak or write Yiddish either. There has been something of an attempt to reivive it, mainly in order to read the giants like Singer, but also as part of the reclamation of European Jewish culture.

Also, just for your edification, although there are many things you don't care to know, do know that just because I know a bit of Plato, you can't assume I'm married to an ancient Greek.

Finally, Pakistanis aren't particularly interested in the Dalit. I am, however.

Dalitnetwork.org

Farnaz, what started and remained just pure fun for me seems to have become serious business for you. It is a real pity. I carry no historical baggage of the kind we have been discussing, so for me it is all silly fun. I understand your biography is different and I respect that. I should just quit this kind of blogging in the future.

I prefer to leave your questions unanswered for fear of launching into an unpleasant discussion which could offend your feelings.

Good luck and wishing you great fun on this blog.

Best,

Non-German Anonymous

There are many things I do not know,
Many things I will never know,
There are many things I do not need to know,
Many things I do not care to know.

It seems filled with so much sadness today,
Tomorrow on waking up it will have gone away.
Life moves on, don't stay stuck all day,
Tomorrow looking back, today will be yesterday.

It seems filled with so much sadness today,
Tomorrow on waking up it will have gone away.
Life moves on don't stay stuck all day,
Tomorrow looking back today will be yesterday.

Hi DILTD,

Thanks for your reply! I meant that often atheists seem disrespectful to believers, at least, it seems that way to me.

I know that in parts of the US athiests feel bisieged, so I do understand to a point. Still, not to sound pompous, I think we owe it to one another to be civil, courteous, no?

Farnaz

Non-German Anon

You write to Another Anonymous

Pity I hadn't noticed that Farnaz is making chopped liver out of me. Pity too that I don't care about the time when *?we" would have said that so and so isn't a "real Christian." Real Christian by whose standards? A "real Christian" is a Waschlappen (German NOT Yiddish for Wimp)?

----------
Well, now, we know who you are. You need not post more.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I MEAN WHEN I SAY WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE, AND WHY I SAY THIS?

As I told you earlier, you don't understand what my argument is, and now I understand why. My argument has nothing to do with either Hindus or Muslims living in India or anywhere else. It has, as I posted earlier, everything to do with self-congratulatory ethnic/religious identities.

If you had been posting about the supreme "generosity" of Northern Vietnamese to Southern Vietnamese, I would have questioned it. See Plato's Allegory of the Cave. Yes, we Iranian Jews are amazingly literate.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I MEAN WHEN I SAY THAT YOU COULD JUST AS EASILY POSTED ABOUT THE SUPREME "GENEROSITY" OF NORTH VIETNAMESE TO SOUTH VIETMANESE, AND I WOULD HAVE QUESTIONED IT?
_________________________________
WOULD KNOWING ABOUT THE HISTORY OF VIETNAM AND CURRENT ISSUES CONFRONTING VIETNAMESE MAKE ME THE SPOUSE OF SOMEONE FROM VIETNAM?

WOULD KNOWING ABOUT CHILE MAKE ME CHILEAN? COLOMBIA, COLOMBIAN?

Sixth request: Examples for Christians/Catholics/Jews/Bahai, et al.

I GUESS WE ARE UP TO THE SEVENTH OR EIGHT REQUEST. IF JIHADIST IS TO BE AN "EXAMPLE" FOR MUSLIMS TO FOLLOW, THEN I CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WON'T GIVE THE REST OF US "EXAMPLES" AS WELL.
---------------------------------
Third request: Examples of books written overnight of Iranians fleeing in the night.

THE TITLES OF ONE OR TWO BOOKS WILL DUE, ALONG WITH THEIR RELEVANCE TO THIS DISCUSSION.

Yes. We know who you are.

June 24, 2008 12:30 AM
-------------------------------------
AWAITING YOUR REPLY TO THIRD AND SIXTH REQUESTS, RESPECTIVELY.
-------------------------------------

Daniel in the Lion's Den: June 24, 2008 9:47 AM

"I was pointing out the hostility of Christians to atheists. My point was, that atheists are so hostile to religious people in REACTION to religious hostility directed against atheists. And if religious people want atheists to "calm down," then they should calm down too."

You haven't been following discussion on this forum from the beginning my friend. One man's hostility is another man's humor. Lighten up. This too will pass.

Don't be such a nincompoop Dr. Fill.

Read O'd2J as Ode to Jihadist!

O´d2J,
In other words: don't confuse me with facts

I have not looked at this blog since Friday; this morning I have tried to catch up; it is almost impossible for me to follow or figure out the many references to previous comments. I wont' work too hard to catch up, since I believe the topic is about ready to change again.

I wanted to reply to Farnaz's reply to me, way, way back. I was pointing out the hostility of Christians to atheists. My point was, that atheists are so hostile to relgious people in REACTION to religious hostility directed against atheists. And if religious people want atheists to "calm down," then they should calm down too.

And also to Farnaz, very much of what you say is beyond my abilitiy to understand. There is something about your fundamental background education that seems very different than my own; perhaps mine is lacking. But in browsing through all these many comments since Friday, I think I understand you a little better than I did before.

Whether I feel it in my head
Or if I feel it in my heels
Then tell me who are you to say
That´s not exactly how it feels
And if I hold it in my hands
Or if I heed it in my heart
Then tell me who are you today
To come to take it all apart

To Jihadist --- free translation service from a believer

Said Gerry ---

Nationalist/Fascist (du bis nichts, dein Volk ist alles!)?

June 24, 2008 3:54 AM

Du bist nichts, dein Volk ist alles!

You are a nonentity, your nation/folk/people is everything.

First, is the purpose of the joke to justify the thoughts and actions of those who are genuinely hostile to its practitioners?

Second, does the joke offer any sense of the underlying value of the tradition or teaching being skewered?

Third, if someone were to make a similar joke at the expense of our own tradition, would we find it acceptable?

Principles for those on the receiving end of such humor would include an honest assessment of the partial truth which makes the joke recognizably funny, the willingness to ask if the joke makes us uncomfortable by itself or because we feel generally insecure about the place of our faith in the larger culture, and asking how often we are able to laugh at ourselves and share that laughter with others.

Of course, following these principles will frustrate the culture warriors, or it could transform them to warriors for laughter in a world that could surely use more, especially in the name of religion.

Posted by Brad Hirschfield on June 23, 2008 10:48 AM

Gerry, the "politics" is simple to understand. In atheist vs believers, Jihadist is on the side of believers against atheists. In Muslim vs other religions she is on the side of Muslims. Period.

Gerry, politics is part of Islam. Read the Koran to know how a good Muslim woman should behave. Morality is seldom practiced by those who preach it most and seldom preached by those who really practice it. Religious hypocrisy is sickening but it is real, the only difference is that the religionists know it is wrong.

Gerry, politics is part of Islam. Read the Koran.

Jihadist,

thanks for the "non-immutability". Even you are developing! "Semifinal", wow! A Moslem defending an incessantly-bible-quoting Christian fundie against the assault of the atheist hordes! There is hope!

Well, front lines have been known to change: US together with SU against Germany in WWII, Germany together with US against SU in cold war etc. The US sending the gas to Iraq with which Saddam killed his enemies, then hanging him...

Your definitions of my list of eternal truths by TT... would have had a lot more weight had you omitted the old debunked sham of the "morality" connection to religion. Btw, which group morality is "morality"?

Moralities: Muslim (e.g. prescriptions on how to beat your wife)? Christian (women have to shut up in church, crusade morality)? Socialist (everybody to his ability: Who decides?)? Capitalist (the richer I am, the more God has awarded me)? Pagan? Jewish? Tribal (members of an anthill kill all members of any other anthill)? Nationalist/Fascist (du bis nichts, dein Volk ist alles!)? Scientologist (Psycho-brainwash)? Jehovas witnesses (only 144000 pious go to heaven) Mormon (everybody must proselytize J.S.'s "visions")? KKK (Blacks stem from some inferior bible figure?)

Nobody, even "insightful believers" maintain this lie any more - there is not the slightest proof of it, statistical or otherwise. (Faith, of course, proves everything, as shown by this definition of yours!) And "liberal"! The worst swear-word of the English language! (Since it starts with "lib...", you could even have added it to your "freedom" definition...)

Your "truth" definition is also a little light-weight, don't you think, irony included?

Lol!

Yours, the rampaging amoral atheist hordes.

News Flash!!!

Malaysian city bans lipstick and high heels for Reality Challenged and Obfuscating Muslim women. Muslim men in the same city are still allowed to wear these sex attractants.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/06/24/malaysia.lipstick.ban/index.html

Another Anonymous:

Chopped liver, anyone?

June 24, 2008 1:02 AM

***************************

O yes please!

Chicken liver is best for health. Try it sometime.

Gotta find that recipe now...so bye!

Here my very very personal opinion. Farnaz could be an atheist Iranian Jew married to a Pakistani Muslim, hence her intense interest in Pakistani politics and the Pakistani Muslim version of Indian history and Hinduism. She mentioned having fled Iran overnight, having lived in India and Pakistan, now living in the US she mentioned a recent visit to Pakistan.

In closing Farnaz, it has been interesting reading your take on history. You are entitled to your understanding and I to mine. I enjoy a good debate.

I have absolutely nothing against Muslims or Jews or Hindus or Christians anywhere. I dislike all fundamentalists, Christians, Hindus, Muslims... I'm interested in facts from all sides and know people are shaped by their biographies in how they interpret it.

Good luck!

Writes FARNAZ ---

Examples of books written overnight of Iranians fleeing in the night.

June 24, 2008 12:30 AM

******************

I wrote *books have been published* not books have been written. No book as far as I know gets published overnight.

I wrote *fleeing overnight* not writing overnight.

Since I'm not a highly literate atheist Iranian Jew, I must clarify what I really meant.

The fleeing took place overnight.
Books were published about fleeing overnight, which does not automatically imply that the books were written overnight (which I didn't mention at all), and neither did I mention that any book was published overnight.

Farnaz you, not I, made it a point to specify your ethnicity and religion or the lack of it, over and over again - atheist Iranian Jew.

It is a term that is confusing to many, including me.

Pam wanted to know how it was possible to be Jew and atheist at the same time since the common understanding of Judaism, according to OT is as a religion practiced by a particular people. It was the religion that made them unique as a people, not their ethnic origin.

Your portrayal of Indian history from a Pakistani Muslim perspective is very confusing to me as is your intense interest in Pakistani politics, your familiarity with Jinnah's letters and speeches, your trips to Pakistan...

We could exchange list of topics for googling and keep track of each other's progress. But that is not the point of Susan Jacoby's essay on satire and humor, is it?

Exit!

Writes FARNAZ ---

Examples of books written overnight of Iranians fleeing in the night.

June 24, 2008 12:30 AM

******************

I wrote *books have been published* not books have been written. No book as far as I know gets published overnight.

I wrote *fleeing overnight* not writing overnight.

Since I'm not a highly literate atheist Iranian Jew, I must clarify what I really meant.

The fleeing took place overnight.
Books were published about fleeing overnight, which does not automatically imply that the books were written overnight (which I didn't mention at all), and neither a

Farnaz, in my book, a Pakistani Muslim woman living in the US would write exactly as you do. As to the Iranian stuff, books have been published about *fleeing overnight* etc.

---The devil's advocate take on your posts

Non-Muslim take

June 23, 2008 11:37 PM

Chopped liver, anyone?

Non-German Anonymous:

Non-German Anonymous writes to Another Anonymous:

Pity I hadn't noticed that Farnaz is making chopped liver out of me. Pity too that I don't care about the time when *?we" would have said that so and so isn't a "real Christian." Real Christian by whose standards? A "real Christian" is a Waschlappen (German NOT Yiddish for Wimp)?

----------
Well, now, we know who you are. You need not post more.

As I told you earlier, you don't understand what my argument is, and now I understand why. My argument has nothing to do with either Hindus or Muslims living in India or anywhere else. It has, as I posted earlier, everything to do with self-congratulatory ethnic/religious identities.

If you had been posting about the supreme "generosity" of Northern Vietnamese to Southern Vietnamese, I would have questioned it. See Plato's Allegory of the Cave. Yes, we Iranian Jews are amazingly literate.

Sixth request: Examples for Christians/Catholics/Jews/Bahai, et al.

Third request: Examples of books written overnight of Iranians fleeing in the night.

Yes. We know who you are.

June 24, 2008 12:30 AM
-------------------------------------
AWAITING YOUR REPLY TO THIRD AND SIXTH REQUESTS, RESPECTIVELY.
-------------------------------------
Non-German Anonymous writes to Another Anonymous:

And don't forget it is an ATHEIST Iranian Jew who is making chopped liver of me by presenting the Pakistani Muslim version of history.

So...I'm no longer a Pakistani Muslim woman. Now, I am who I say I am.

Still, I must repeat, your ignorance of Gandhi gives me pause.

Non-German Anonymous:

Non-German Anonymous writes to Another Anonymous:

Pity I hadn't noticed that Farnaz is making chopped liver out of me. Pity too that I don't care about the time when *?we" would have said that so and so isn't a "real Christian." Real Christian by whose standards? A "real Christian" is a Waschlappen (German NOT Yiddish for Wimp)?

----------
Well, now, we know who you are. You need not post more.

As I told you earlier, you don't understand what my argument is, and now I understand why. My argument has nothing to do with either Hindus or Muslims living in India or anywhere else. It has, as I posted earlier, everything to do with self-congratulatory ethnic/religious identities.

If you had been posting about the supreme "generosity" of Northern Vietnamese to Southern Vietnamese, I would have questioned it. See Plato's Allegory of the Cave. Yes, we Iranian Jews are amazingly literate.

Sixth request: Examples for Christians/Catholics/Jews/Bahai, et al.

Third request: Examples of books written overnight of Iranians fleeing in the night.

Yes. We know who you are.

June 24, 2008 12:30 AM
-------------------------------------
AWAITING YOUR REPLY TO THIRD AND SIXTH REQUESTS, RESPECTIVELY.
-------------------------------------
Non-German Anonymous writes to Another Anonymous:

And don't forget it is an ATHEIST Iranian Jew who is making chopped liver of me by presenting the Pakistani Muslim version of history.

So...I'm no longer a Pakistani Muslim woman. Now, I am who I say I am.

Still, I must repeat, your ignorance of Gandhi gives me pause.

Another Anonymous:

Non-German Anonymous:

"If your Christianity is so weak"

Farnaz is making chopped liver of you. There was a time when we'd say, well, so and so isn't a "real Christian."

June 24, 2008 12:11

******************************

And don't forget it is an ATHEIST Iranian Jew who is making chopped liver of me by presenting the Pakistani Muslim version of history.

Non-German Anonymous writes to Another Anonymous:

Pity I hadn't noticed that Farnaz is making chopped liver out of me. Pity too that I don't care about the time when *?we" would have said that so and so isn't a "real Christian." Real Christian by whose standards? A "real Christian" is a Waschlappen (German NOT Yiddish for Wimp)?

----------
Well, now, we know who you are. You need not post more.

As I told you earlier, you don't understand what my argument is, and now I understand why. My argument has nothing to do with either Hindus or Muslims living in India or anywhere else. It has, as I posted earlier, everything to do with self-congratulatory ethnic/religious identities.

If you had been posting about the supreme "generosity" of Northern Vietnamese to Southern Vietnamese, I would have questioned it. See Plato's Allegory of the Cave. Yes, we Iranian Jews are amazingly literate.

Sixth request: Examples for Christians/Catholics/Jews/Bahai, et al.

Third request: Examples of books written overnight of Iranians fleeing in the night.

Yes. We know who you are.

Another Anonymous:

Non-German Anonymous:

"If your Christianity is so weak"

Farnaz is making chopped liver of you. There was a time when we'd say, well, so and so isn't a "real Christian."

June 24, 2008 12:11 AM

************************************

Pity I hadn't noticed that Farnaz is making chopped liver out of me. Pity too that I don't care about the time when *?we" would have said that so and so isn't a "real Christian." Real Christian by whose standards? A "real Christian" is a Waschlappen (German NOT Yiddish for Wimp)?

Non-German Anonymous:

"If your Christianity is so weak"

Farnaz is making chopped liver of you. There was a time when we'd say, well, so and so isn't a "real Christian."

Another Anonymous:

I hope you have really exited. Ideally for good.
If you are a "Christian," as you say, you don't make the rest of us Christians look good.

Maybe you're the example we shouldn't follow.

June 23, 2008 11:25 PM

***********************************

If your Christianity is so weak that it cannot even read a debate which is not even about Christianity in the first place, you are free to skip any post on this forum or any of the millions of forums on the Internet.

May I remind you to read Susan Jacoby's essay once more and her definition of satire...

Non-German Anon,

To repeat, your ignorance of Gandhi give me pause.

Second request: Books about Iranians fleeing Iran, printed overnight. Please list.

Fourth or fifth request: Since you have given an example of a Muslim that you "wish all Muslims would follow," we again request examples of Christians/Catholics/Jews/Bahai, etc, respectively.

Correction

Indian Muslims are better off WITHOUT an Iranian or ME version of Islam. So it would be a great help if ME and Pakistanis didn't feel a need to educate Indian Muslims about Islam. India knows about religions and Islam was transformed in many ways by Hindu spirituality over many centuries.

Non-German Anon,

If you have ever met a Pakistani woman, which I doubt, you would know that I am not one of them.
As for books by Iranian Jews fleeing in the night, books published overnight, kindly cite.

I have not questioned your identity, yet your ignorance of Gandhi does give me pause.

I await your replies on the matter of examples that Christians, Catholics, Jews, Bahai, etc., respectively, should follow.

You would do well to go to Dalitnetwork.org, Wikepedia. These are easily googled. Keep us abreast of your progress.

Awaiting your reply....

Farnaz, in my book, a Pakistani Muslim woman living in the US would write exactly as you do. As to the Iranian stuff, books have been published about fleeing overnight etc.

---The devil's advocate take on your posts

As to the rest, you would do great concentrating your efforts on helping the Pakistan to become a democracy. All the Muslim fundamentalism among some people there is real headache to the rest of the world, especially to India. You wrote you visited Pakistan recently. Maybe you should visit more often to teach Pakistanis the merits of the US Constitution and get them to change the Pakistani constitution to more closely match the US Constitution.

Let Indians take care of India. There are a billion of them, and even of only about a little more than half of them are literate, there is a powerful highly educated middle class, large numbers considering India has a population of over a billion compared to 160 million Pakistanis, who can do without your help. Sure atheist Iranian Jew may be great but India wanted independence even from Britan remember? Indian Muslims are better off with an Iranian or ME version of Islam. So it would be a great help if ME and Pakistanis didn't feel a need to educate Indian Muslims about Islam. India knows about religions and Islam was transformed in many ways by Hindu spirituality.

If you wish to extend your services beyond Pakistan, I suggest you fight for the causes in Bangladesh. With your knowledge of Islam and the US Constitution they could benefit.

Indians are not particularly impressed with atheism because it is the land of many religions.

Non-Muslim take

I hope you have really exited. Ideally for good.
If you are a "Christian," as you say, you don't make the rest of us Christians look good.

Maybe you're the example we shouldn't follow.

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
E FAVORITE:
POSTED ON JUNE 23, 2008 16:52
“GOD SEES ALL AND KNOWS ALL”

IRT:
“TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ: you say that God is in my bedroom? Prove it!"

ANS:
What does it the word God mean? In Aristotle’s proof of God by reason from motion, we can show by deduction that God is Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Prescient. Now if God knows all things, and He does, because He is the First Cause of all things, then God knows every thing you do. That is from reason alone that the First Mover must know all things, is pure Act, and nothing can be lacking in God.

From Scripture, it is written:
Isa 29:15ff

“Woe to you that are deep of heart, to hide your counsel from the Lord: and their works are in the dark, and they say: WHO SEETH US, AND WHO KNOWETH US? This thought of yours is perverse: as if the clay should think against the potter and the work should say to the maker thereof: Thou madest me not: or the thing framed should say to him that fashioned it: Thou understandest not.”

Luke 12:22-ff

“And he said to his disciples: Therefore I say to you: Be not solicitous for your life, what you shall eat, nor for your body, what you shall put on. The life is more than the meat: and the body is more than the raiment.

“Consider the ravens, for they sow not, neither do they reap, neither have they storehouse nor barn, and God feedeth them. How much are you more valuable than they?

“And which of you by taking thought can add to his stature one cubit? If then ye be not able to do so much as the least thing, why are you solicitous for the rest?

“Consider the lilies, how they grow: they labor not, neither do they spin. But I say to you, not even Solomon in all his glory was clothed like one of these.

“Now, if God clothe in this manner the grass that is to-day in the field and to-morrow is cast into the oven: how much more you, O ye of little faith?

“And seek not what you shall eat or what you shall drink: and be not lifted up on high. For all these things do the nations of the world seek. BUT YOUR FATHER KNOWETH THAT YOU HAVE NEED OF THESE THINGS.

“But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his justice: and all these things shall be added unto you. Fear not, little flock, for it hath pleased your Father to give you a kingdom.

“Sell what you possess and give alms. Make to yourselves bags that grow not old, a treasure in heaven that faileth not: where no thief approacheth, nor moth corrupteth. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

Psalms 19:1-6
“There are no speeches nor languages, where their voices are not heard. Their sound hath gone forth into all the earth: and their words unto the ends of the world. He hath set his tabernacle in the sun: and he as a bridegroom coming out of his bridechamber, Hath rejoiced as a giant to run the way: (His going out is from the end of heaven, And his circuit even to the end thereof: and there is no one that can hide himself from his heat.”

Mathew10: 28-32
“And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? AND NOT ONE OF THEM SHALL FALL ON THE GROUND WITHOUT YOUR FATHER KNOWING.

“BUT THE VERY HAIRS OF YOUR HEAD ARE ALL NUMBERED. Fear not therefore: better are you than many sparrows. Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.”

Amos 9:1ff
“Though they go down even to hell, thence shall my hand bring them out: and though they climb up to heaven, thence will I bring them down. And though they be hid in the top of Carmel, I will search and take them away from thence: and though they hide themselves from my eyes in the depth of the sea, there will I command the serpent and he shall bite them.”

Hence, God knows all and sees all things, because he is Omniscient.

Non-German Anon:

Gandhi was English dominant. He did his best with Hindi, which wasn't always good. Implying that I don't know he was assanssinated decades ago is grasping at straws, perhaps, straw, as it may be the only one you have left.

Non-German Anon writes to Jihadist:

Hats off Jihadist! Learning new perspectives is what this forum is about and you have set a good example. I only wish all Muslims around the world would follow in your footsteps.
----------------------------
I await you replies to my previous posts. I'm especially curious to know why it strikes you as startling that an "atheist Jew from Iran" should be familiar with Jinnah's letters, speeches.

I'd also like to be kept posted on your learning of new perspectives, beginning with whatever you may be able to develop after reading about the Dalit. Widepedia, Dalitnet.org are easily googled as I mentioned.
-----------------------------
Unlike anyone else on this thread, you seem rather obsessed by my etnicity, implying that in some way it detracts from my credibility.

Again, kindly go to Dalitnetwork.org, perhaps, Wikepedia to begin with--simpler. Keep us aprised of your progress.
------------------------------------
Since you are in the business of giving examples for Muslims, I paste my previous post, assuming that you have similar examples for all.

Re: Examples for Muslims

Kindly identify an example for Christians/Catholics/Jews/Bahai, respectively, that all may follow.
-----------------------------------

Over, and out.

Said Farnaz

Ghandi had real greatness. Perhaps if he got it early on, didn't don the dhoti, start speaking Hindi almost exclusively, notwithstanding his difficulties, things might have turned out differently.

June 23, 2008 10:04 PM

------------

Advice from a atheist Jew from Iran is very good but a bit belated I'm afraid. Gandhi was assassinated in 1948 but not before he had completed his real mission of independence for India with non-violence. Luckily he managed to achieve his goals without your idea of how he might have done things better. In his lifetime he was surrounded by many learned people who gave him advice constantly.

Gandhi, with all his imperfections has inspired millions of people around the world including many prominent politicians. He was voted as the best man of the Millennium by the BBC viewer and readers. Not a bad thing for a man who could have done better with your advice had you been alive in his time. BTW, Hindi is understood only by 30% of the Indian population. Gandhi's mother tongue was Gujrathi. In Gandhi's time Hindi was not the official Indian language and British had been using English for two hundred years as the official language of India.

To close with a joke in keeping with the real
goal of this thread

Once a British official, very very high up the scale in the class system of England, was terribly offended that Gandhi didn't bother to abide by their dress code while being presented officially to him. Gandhi had no excuse for his disrespect; Gandhi had after all studied law in England and had followed the British dress code while he lived there. Gandhi explained that he preferred to dress like the poorest in India and he was mighty pleased that the British official had on enough clothes for both of them.

End of non-Muslim take

Exit!

Non-German Anon writes to Jihadist:

Hats off Jihadist! Learning new perspectives is what this forum is about and you have set a good example. I only wish all Muslims around the world would follow in your footsteps.
----------------------------
I await you replies to my previous posts. I'm especially curious to know why it strikes you as startling that an "atheist Jew from Iran" should be familiar with Jinnah's letters, speeches.

I'd also like to be kept posted on your learning of new perspectives, beginning with whatever you may be able to develop after reading about the Dalit. Widepedia, Dalitnet.org are easily googled as I mentioned.
-----------------------------

Re: Examples for Muslims

Kindly identify an example for Christians/Catholics/Jews/Bahai, respectively, that all may follow.

It is to Jihadist's credit too that she learns fast . This forum is *nineteen months* old. Lots and lots of ideas have been shared by many around the world in that time and Jihadist has not only been reading them but assimilating them and altering her views as well. Her ideas have evolved with time, and drastically too. Anyone familiar with her earlier comments *should* notice that.

Hats off Jihadist! Learning new perspectives is what this forum is about and you have set a good example. I only wish all Muslims around the world would follow in your footsteps.

To Anonymous who posted on behalf of Jihadist ---

The following comment was posted on several threads on 19 June 08, *four days in advance* of Jihadist's comment. See any similarity?

Dear Mr Zed

As a Christian who grew up in India, I cannot say for certain how my Hindu friends would react to this movie. My hope however is that they will not take offense and exhibit the generosity and tolerance that Hinduism at its best is known for.

I doubt too if great Hindus like Mahatma Gandhi and Vivekananda would have taken offense at a movie that portrays *false gurus* in a funny light. They, as Hindus themselves, did not withhold criticism about aspects of Hinduism they did not approve of.

The movie "Love Guru," from what I understand, is about a *false Hindu guru.* It is the equivalent of making a movie about a bad Catholic priest. As you are well aware, "Bhagavan" Rajneesh later known as Osho, was one such false Hindu guru. In India even Hindus referred to him as a "sex-guru" and had great fun laughing at Westerners who treated him like god and about how they gave up all their money to worship him in his Ashram. The opinion of the ordinary Hindu in India at the height of his fame was that Westerners were spiritually open but not discerning at all when dealing with gurus from India.

Hinduism is five thousand years old. It is a con-federation of religions. It has no proselytizing element. It is hardly likely that Hindus would abandon their faith because of a movie about a false Hindu guru. Every real Hindu knows that there are false gurus because real guru have warned them. So I do hope you would not feel overly concerned about the impact of a movie on a religion such as Hinduism. Those who are genuinely interested in Hindu philosophy would seek it in great spiritual works like the Vedas, Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita etc.

No, Brahman the Absolute, is not going to be harmed by this movie or any movie, not what I understand of Brahman and Hinduism anyway.

Here a few words of wisdom from Guru "Pikta" (the guru in the movie in question).

My only concern about the words of wisdom is that guru Pikta has plagiarised them.

1. Into me I see

2. An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind (well known saying of Mahatma Gandhi)

3. When love goes wrong nothing goes right

4. First reduce the greed, then reduce the need

5. There is no failure only early attempts at success

6. Go from nowhere to Now here

The Guru Pikta

June 19, 2008 4:38 AM

Non-German Anon:

Farnaz, the atheist Jew from Iran is very familiar with Jinnah's letters and speeches. Wow!

Exit!

-------------
A non-Muslim, non-Hindu take
____________________________________

Your "Wow!" suggests that there is some reason for surprise that an "atheist Jew from Iran" should have read Jinnah's letters and speeches.

KINDLY explain why this is so.
-----------------------------------

From what I've gathered in the years I've lived in the US, American Christians/Catholics from wherever they hale read. The practice isn't limited to "atheist Jew[s] from Iran."

That is why I suggest you google Dalitnetwork.org or even Wikepedia. A reading program could as easily begin there as anywhere else.

Non-German Anon, you said:

"The European version of invasion is being disputed by Indian scholars."

Me: Odd statement. It is no disputed that Sanskrit is an Indo-European language, of the same family as the English that we write in here.

Arminius

Non-German Anon

Many may like fair skin but a dark skinned Brahmin remains a Brahmin and a fair skinned lower caste remains lower caste. Gandhi did much to abolish the caste system. There is quota of jobs and places at educational institutions reserved for them. There are so called "lower caste" politicians and even a president. There is a long way to go yet. Bangladesh is full of Muslims. They have a long way to go too

----------
The Ghandi business regarding the Dhalit is more than tired. It is exhausted.

As you point out, googling is easy. Therefore, please go to Dalitnetwork.org. You could start with Wikepedia, also easy to be googled.

Of course, there are more darkly complected Brahmins, lighter complected Dalit. They are the exceptions.

I did ask that you not drag out the usual apologia.
--------------
One Indian Muslim movie star does not equal citizenship make. One thinks of Sidney Poitier.

You could have given better evidence of Muslim accomplishments in India, much better.

That would change nothing, would not vitiate Gujurat.
--------------

Hinduism and Judaism differ in ways most know. In addition, one cannot convert to Hinduism.

-------------
India is to be commended for achieving democracy, not for female feticide, female infanticide. dowry deaths, the caste system, etc.

--------------
Ghandi had real greatness. Perhaps if he got it early on, didn't don the dhoti, start speaking Hindi almost exclusively, notwithstanding his difficulties, things might have turned out differently.
--------------
Had the US not done what it could to drive out Zulfikar Bhutto, and bring in Zia, Pakistan might have continued on as a secular state.
--------------------

This doesn't make me one-sided or "loyal to Muslims," just averse to BS.

Non-German Anonymous,

Jihadist's left this thread. Don't waste your time. He posted this in Brad Hirschfield's thread -

__________________________________________________

Jihadist:
Thanks for the essay Rabbi.

You : "So this is as much about the popular foothold that Hinduism has established in American pop culture as anything else. And that kind of popularity always makes the purists in any community nervous. But that’s their problem. And it’s not limited to Hindus."

"Purists" nervous? Surely not for the reason you gave. And Hinduism is more complex than anyone to assume there are "purists" in Hinduism in the conventional sense of dogma or creed. Perhaps it is the distortion of Hinduism as projected in the movie that is disconterting to Hindus who protested.

Hinduism is grand - in belief and philosophy. There is more universal truths in the Bhagavad Gita than can possibly be in the Mike Myers movie. And one do regret that more attention is paid to "The Love Guru" and time wasted watching and discussing it rather than to read up on Hinduism's sophisticated concept of time and space.

Yes, it is "their" problem indeed. "Their" as in those who placed value on the entertaining shallow takes and cheap shots. Never mind. The masses "should relax, buy some popcorn and enjoy the movie" as you suggest Hindu groups who protested do.

Nothing like small time cheap thrills and laughs at the expense of others we do relish sometimes and yet know it is unfair and unwarranted, but can never stop because it makes us feel good about ourself over them? Or just to laugh at ourself? Or them?

Odd, is it not? We tell our children not to laugh at people as this is rude or not decent behavior no matter how stupid and ridiculous they are, and yet as adults, we value comedies, satires, humour as being frank in telling the truth and should laugh about it.

So, what are we telling our children? Of course. Do as I say, not as I do. Now, this is really no laughing matter.

Cheers
"J"

June 23, 2008 8:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments

Farnaz:

Jihadist writes:

"Hindus are proud to be secular."
---------------
Secularism and caste do not go well together. Hindu fundamentalism is a reality. Ask Aisha Jalal.
---------------
Jinnah's speeches and letters would seem to indicate that he envisioned a secular Pakistan.

June 23, 2008 5:07 PM

*************************************

Hindu fundamentalists claim that it is a belated Hindu response to Muslim violence in the past and rising Muslim fundamentalism spreading out from ME and catching fire among Indian Muslims. Read posts by bloggers on this forum Deb and Jai Kosla, both Hindu Brahmins quite well versed in Indian history from a Hindu perspective.

Millions of Indian Muslims would *not* want to live in Pakistan or Bangladesh although Hindu fundamentalists would be only too happy to have Muslims leave to live in countries where they could live happily ever after under Sharia Law.

Indian Muslims are desperately trying to introduce reform into Islam and are seeking out interfaith dialogue. New waves of ME version of Islam is being seem as a great impediment to their work.

Farnaz, the atheist Jew from Iran is very familiar with Jinnah's letters and speeches. Wow!

Exit!

-------------
A non-Muslim, non-Hindu take

Farnaz:

Jihadist writes:

"Hindus are proud to be secular."
---------------
Secularism and caste do not go well together. Hindu fundamentalism is a reality. Ask Aisha Jalal.
---------------
Jinnah's speeches and letters would seem to indicate that he envisioned a secular Pakistan.

June 23, 2008 5:07 PM

*************************************

Hindu fundamentalists claim that it is a belated Hindu response to Muslim violence in the past and rising Muslim fundamentalism spreading out from ME and catching fire among Indian Muslims. Read posts by bloggers Deb and Jai Kosla, both Hindu Brahmins quite well versed in Indian

Said Jihadist ---

Non-German Anonymous,

Ohh...what this? So, what is a Christian doing giving an Indian/Hindu perspective here on India?

Not to discuss "world history" and then going into it post after post? Even some go back to Zeus for a perspective on religion.

Muslims being alien invaders of India is a historical fact. Just as the Aryans were and subjugated the original inhabitants of India, among them the darker skinned Dravidians. The Aryans introduced the caste system too. Aryans and swastikas, reversed or ometherwise. What to do. Colour of skin and race matters. If not the caste system, then genocides of the other to prevent or solve the "mixing of the races".

The Chinese were ruled by Mongol and Manchu emperors too. Alien occupiers and rulers, and the Chinese not too happy about that either even if of the same faith, so to speak. The Manchus also introduced half-bald head (the forehead part) with pigtails for men. Now, that was regarded as as barbaric symbol of foreign rule, oppression and backwardness by Chinese men in the late 19th and early 20th century.

Muslims and caste system are still in India in spite of the partition of British India into India and Pakistan. It was Mahatma Gandhi who agreed to it and gave in to the very secular (non-religious, non-practicing Muslim if you will) Ali Jinnah. He loves his firewater, never prayed, never fasted and all that.

Winston Churchill said, "India is getting its independence sooner than it expected". We know how that went now.The Mahatma was murdered for it. Not quite generosity there, but real anger from some (many?) Indian Hindus. They still are.

So, what would happen if Iraq is partitioned? Happily ever after for Iraqi Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds?

And thus end my bit on a bit of Asian history.

Years back, an Indian friend e-mailed me about a play by an Indian Hindu which got some flak in India. I wish I could remember the name of the play and playwright, only to remember it was said to be performed by Shabana Azmi too, an interesting Indian movie actress who was also an MP. A quote from the play he shared is this:

"Christians are proud to be Christians. Muslims are proud to be Muslims. Hindus are proud to be secular."

Wish I had seen that play.

Cheers
"J"

June 23, 2008 4:19 PM

*************************************

Jihadist, there is a non-Muslim take on world events and history. Anyone may present that take. All it takes is a few minutes of googling time.

Farnaz's take was getting a bit too one-sided for my taste. Your strong support of her, and dead silence from the rest, seemed to heighten her pitch, so I decided to jump in and break the spell. Anything wrong?

Zeus is long overhauled, unless neo-paganism have brought him back to life. Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are living religions. Farnaz brought up living religions and its current impact on society worldwide.

Sure Indo-Aryans invaded India, or maybe not. Some Indians are light eyed and very fair skinned, but many who would claim Aryan ancestory are not. The European version of invasion is being disputed by Indian scholars. The point is that Aryans (the Indo-Aryans), if the invasion did take place, did not kill of the locals, but *integrated* with them even absorbing some of their gods into their own religion. Caste system was based on occupation not color of skin. A caste system based wealth and occupation is prevalent all over the world. A non-crossable barrier is the untold caste system based on color of skin, the caste system Hinduism knows nothing about. Many may like fair skin but a dark skinned Brahmin remains a Brahmin and a fair skinned lower caste remains lower caste. Gandhi did much to abolish the caste system. There is quota of jobs and places at educational institutions reserved for them. There are so called "lower caste" politicians and even a president. There is a long way to go yet. Bangladesh is full of Muslims. They have a long way to go too.

If there was such a thing as Aryan invasion, then Dravidians were not driven off their land, subjected to genocide, or converted at the point of a sword to an "Aryan religion" if one existed. Aryans did not suddenly wake up one morning and seek a separate country based on their religion after having lived and integrated with the locals for many centuries.

Indians were a mixed race with many religions, languages and cultures long before Muslims arrived.

To Indians a movie is a fantasy world like science fiction. They do not see movies to rearrange their society and religion based on it.

Shabana Azmi is an Indian Muslim woman, a former film star. Sure proof of Muslim second class status and discrimination in India.

Indian Hindus are proud of their secular constitution, envisioned by Hindus and Muslims who struggled for independence. Also among the framers of the Indian Constitution is a very secular and agnostic Nehru, the first Indian PM.

Hinduism like Judaism is a non-proselytizing religion based on ethnicity. Indian Hindus are proud of belonging to the oldest religion in the world, even though they many may be non-practicing/cultural Hindus just like many Jews who like Farnaz, who claims to be an Iranian atheist Jew.

---

Just a non-Muslim take

Farnaz said: Your posts show an alarmingly partial view of history and humanity.

Good luck. Read a bit more.

June 23, 2008 9:03 AM

****************************************

I was merely trying to add tidbits to highlight Farnaz's alarmingly partial view of history and humanity. She needs to read a bit more from a non-Muslim perspective.

Providing information that contradicts Farnaz's take on history and politics does not constitute ad hominem attack or abuse. To call it that is a cheap trick.

To Jihadist's credit I must say she
can accept there are non-Muslim takes on world events, and perspectives other than her own.

One example of "abuse" in Farnaz's book: I insisted that I knew the meaning of the German word Schmuck as the Germans use it and refused to accept the definition put forward by one blogger who called him/herself Pseudo, who turned up out of the blue to offer it. But Farnaz offered her support to the 'out of the blue Pseudo' and went so far as to claim she had heard the word used in Germany frequently as Pseudo and she knew the meaning of the word!

Farnaz claims to be a Jew from Iran who has lived in Pakistan and India. She mentioned her recent trip to Pakistan.

Farnaz claims with certainty Muslims in India are discriminated and Hindus in Pakistan are not.

For anyone who knows sufficient details of Indian history and culture (in the google age anyone who cares to invest a few minutes it is not difficult) one does not fail to notice Farnaz's Islamic interpretation of Indian history and Hinduism.

Surprise! Surprise! Jihadist and she agree with each other on Muslim interpretations of world history.

As an Iranian Jew who lived in India and knows all its history, Farnaz *should* know Jews were never persecuted in India and Israel has acknowledged that officially.

As an Iranian Jew who lived in India and knows its history well, Farnaz *should* know Parsis (Indian version of the word Farsi) in India are Iranians who fled Iran to escape religious persecution by Muslims. Parsis found a home in India. They were neither persecuted nor where they treated as second class. In fact they are an exemplary minority. India would not like them to die out.

As an Iranian Jew who lived in India Farnaz *should* know there are thousands of Tibetan Buddhists in India and the Dalai Lama was even allowed to set up a government in exile for his people.

As an Iranian Jew who lived in India, Farnaz *should* know India is the birthplace of four major religions. They have not only been allowed to practice their faith, there has never been a religious war between them.

As an Iranian Jew who lived in India, Farnaz *should* know that in its five thousand year history *not a single war* has been waged in the name of Hinduism.

If all that is not proof of Hindu tolerance and generosity of Hinduism in Farnaz's book, then she must use a different meaning for the word "tolerance" just as she did the word Schmuck in which I meant the German meaning and she insisted the Jiddish usage of the word as a slang was the accurate one.

-------

A non-Muslim take

Hello Arminius:)

My parents are fans of Richard Pryor and George Carlin (among comedians). So, I grew up listening to some George Carlin albums too. My favourite is "Class Clown" if I remember the title of that album correctly. The one that has seven words you can't use on TV.

Come to think of it, George Carlin made some funny anti-religion jokes too. Blame Carlin for immunizing me against all jokes made by atheists on believers in On Faith threads.:)

Cheers.

"J"

Wiccan,

"My favorite Carlin routine was his contrast between Baseball and Football, being a fooball junkie."

Oh, horrors! O tempora, o mores! Such blasphemy! I am agast, prostrate with grief! (...sob!)

Another beer is in order! LOL!

Arminius
Baseball RULES!

My favorite Carlin routine was his contrast between Baseball and Football, being a fooball junkie.

I bet he thoroughly enjoyed playing the bishop in "Dogma".

Jihadist,

It's true George Carlin is gone. He changed comedy forever, pointing it, in the true spirit of Aristophanes, back at making fun of society. With no holds barred and all cannon blazing. He will be missed.

Arminius

Hi, Wiccan,

Mead is hard to find. Maybe Guinness would do? Certainly not the same, but Celtic to the core, and very good.

Arminius

I just saw a news flash on one of the screens that George Carlin is dead. Condolences to his family. Real humour, comedy and satire is now poorer.

Merry Meet, Arminius!

Thanks for your good wishes, that's exactly what I had. Got up before dawn, lit my small bonfire at sunrise, and burned an incense of cinnamon, frankincense, bay, and orange (smelled wonderful!). That night I read my dog-earred copy of "A Midsummer's Night Dream". The only flaw is that I couldn't find any mead. Oh well, next year.

Hope all is well with you and yours.

Hello Wiccan,

Thanks for the advise on "The Love Guru". South Park is better satire then. Even "The Simpsons" too, judging by reactions of those who actually saw "The Love Guru".

**************************************************

Hello Farnaz,

You're right about Pakistan and Ali Jinnah. But it really started with Zia, the first general who executed a coup in Pakistan and "fundamentalised" that country.

You do know about the BJP. Quite an interesting fundamentalist-nationalistic party in India. One BJP delegation who visited Malaysia and wanted to know about banking and Islamic banking and financial services in Malaysia were entertained by our group to dinner.

Vegetarian food of course, and we do ply them with firewater as they requested and wanted thought we don't drink. One of the BJP happily tipsy BJP delegate called us, "You people".

No doubt, they are really upset with Pakistan and Muslims in India, and by extension, Muslims in Malaysia. That was in the late nineties when the BJP was ruling India and the surge of Indian nationalism very strongly articulated in politics.

It was under the BJP that India blasted its test nuclear bombs and Pakistan responded by blasting their own test nuclear bombs.

The quote I gave was from an Indian play in reaction to the BJP and Indian/Hindu nationalism, and to remind on India's secularism as per its Constitution. Like I said, I wish I had seen that play in full.

The play would resonate well (or otherwise) in societies where religious supremacists rears up to assert their primacy as the religious and/or racial majority to the detriment of the common good of the people and country.

**************************************************

Ah, as a believer, I am duty-bound to defend another believer from the atheistic, rampaging horde here.

As Gerry has compiled words from an earlier post of TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ, I will give them my semi-final and non-immutable definitions:

1. Truth - is as told by scientiests, not lay people or as decided by judges on what lay people say they say, they saw, they do.

2. Malice - what I say is the truth, what you say is maliciously untrue.

3. Feeling - cannot be quantified or measured by scientists.

4. Freedom - to believe and think as one want, obviously, not just freedom from, but also freedom to.

5. Faith - believers have faith, non-believers are faithless, unfaithful non-faith sorts

6. Reason - atheists have reason, believers have reason for being, reason for living, reason for giving.

7. Common Good - no such thing for man the selfish animal with selfish genes.

8. Decency - is what we tell our children to have but not for us to practice as adults in words and actions.

9. Bigotry - is always what the other fellow has on the way we think, we look, we eat, we dress, we voted.

10.Morality-Amorality - believers are into morals, have morality, are moralistitic and into moralising. Non-believers are amoral liberals.

11. Depravity - only applied to certain acts by those of the same sex by those averse to those acts.

12. Rogue - as in red in French? Or Mike Myers the rogue of bad movies?

13. The will of the people - as in will they or will they not act on their will that is bad for democratic and non-democratic forms of governments.

14. Probity - a good word and much desired in implementation and wanting in reality among those in public service.

15. Duty of the State - to fool all the people all of the time if possible, and to tax people as much as possible if possible to get away with.

16. Social order - good term to use for those with totalitarian and authoritarian instincts in goverments; good term to use for those wary and weary of discords created by those in the public square, goverments and the media among and between their own people.

17. Human Nature - and how to reconcile man as humans when man is a highly evolved animal as posited by evolutionary biologists, and have animalistic-survivalist instincts of the fittest etc.

18. Natural Right - that would cover ants and cockroaches and crocodiles and sharks too as fellow creatures and beings and animals on earth, not just highly evolved simians.

19. Substance - thereby raising the question of form over substance being more important, or substance given dignity and validity in forms.

20. Forethought - always harder than afterthought and the with benefit of hindsight.

Hi, Wiccan,

Hope you had a great Summer Solstice! I miss you Pagans.

Arminius

Merry Meet, Jihadist!

My son suggested I do like Stan and Kenny from South Park did to Mel Gibson and hunt Mike Myers down for a refund. Not worth the effort, but sheer human compassion compels me to warn others. Save your money!

Jihadist writes:

"Hindus are proud to be secular."
---------------
Secularism and caste do not go well together. Hindu fundamentalism is a reality. Ask Aisha Jalal.
---------------
Jinnah's speeches and letters would seem to indicate that he envisioned a secular Pakistan.

TTWSY etc,
Another small point, which I let slide in your other posts, but your reiterations compell me to address:

There are no crosses in Arlington Cemetery. Perhaps you should pay it a visit. I drive by it almost every day on my way to work - there are just tombstone-shaped headstones.

Now ON the headstones, crosses are carved for those who self-identified as Christian, but there are also symbols for the other religions - and even for atheists. Check this out:
http://www.arlingtoncemetery.org/text/authorized_emblems_text.html

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ: you say that God is in my bedroom?

Prove it

Hello Wiccan,

Some suggestions for having seen "The Love Guru" and not quite liking it:

- Demand your money back from Mike Myers.

- Picket in front of the cineplex for showing such "rotteness"

- hold up signs that says, "New highs in lows" or "baddest of bad movies" or "down with Mike Myers" or "Love Guru? Trashy Guru!"

- recover by seeing a really good movie or listening to good music, or having a good meal or have a good night out with loved ones.

- start a "Recovering from Love Guru Anonymous".

**************************************************

Non-German Anonymous,

Ohh...what this? So, what is a Christian doing giving an Indian/Hindu perspective here on India?

Not to discuss "world history" and then going into it post after post? Even some go back to Zeus for a perspective on religion.

Muslims being alien invaders of India is a historical fact. Just as the Aryans were and subjugated the original inhabitants of India, among them the darker skinned Dravidians. The Aryans introduced the caste system too. Aryans and swastikas, reversed or otherwise. What to do. Colour of skin and race matters. If not the caste system, then genocides of the other to prevent or solve the "mixing of the races".

The Chinese were ruled by Mongol and Manchu emperors too. Alien occupiers and rulers, and the Chinese not too happy about that either even if of the same faith, so to speak. The Manchus also introduced half-bald head (the forehead part) with pigtails for men. Now, that was regarded as as barbaric symbol of foreign rule, oppression and backwardness by Chinese men in the late 19th and early 20th century.

Muslims and caste system are still in India in spite of the partition of British India into India and Pakistan. It was Mahatma Gandhi who agreed to it and gave in to the very secular (non-religious, non-practicing Muslim if you will) Ali Jinnah. He loves his firewater, never prayed, never fasted and all that.

Winston Churchill said, "India is getting its independence sooner than it expected". We know how that went now.The Mahatma was murdered for it. Not quite generousity there, but real anger from some (many?) Indian Hindus. They still are.

So, what would happen if Iraq is partitioned? Happily ever after for Iraqi Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds?

And thus end my bit on a bit of Asian history.

Years back, an Indian friend e-mailed me about a play by an Indian Hindu which got some flak in India. I wish I could remember the name of the play and playwright, only to remember it was said to be performed by Shabana Azmi too, an interesting Indian movie actress who was also an MP. A quote from the play he shared is this:

"Christians are proud to be Christians. Muslims are proud to be Muslims. Hindus are proud to be secular."

Wish I had seen that play.

Cheers
"J"

To get back to the topic of this thread, I made the mistake of seeing "The Love Guru" this weekend. I must quote Opus, of Bloom County, with appropriate changes:

"Mike Myers' new film "The Love Guru" has brought the word "bad" to new levels of badness.

Bad acting, bad effects, bad everything. This bad film just oozed rotteness from every bad scene...sinply bad beyond all infinite dimensions of possible badness.

Well, maybe not that bad, but Lord, it wasn't good."

One who tries to comprehend TTWSY ---- needs to understand that Catholic fundamentalism is not biblically based, but is doctrinally and dogmatically based via numerous Church Council rulings over the centuries. The entire coda of Church dogma and hierarchically based Church authority rules and shapes belief - including the authority, if not the infallibility of the Pope, in doctrinal matters.

This of course is why Martin Luther broke with the Church - he didn't much like Papal authority or Papal corruption either. Even today, Protestantism is much more partial to biblically based 'authority' as compared to Catholicism. That is probably common knowledge.

Non-German Anon:

Re: Human rights in countries you mention

The situation for religious minorities in Pakistan varies. For example the sweepers (PROVIDE information, please, since you surely know their ancestry), Christians, are pretty much left alone.

Christians who seek to convert Muslims would be better off in Philadelphia. Honor killings still occur, as you no doubt know. One out of every three murders in Palestine is an honor killing.

Human rights abuses in North Korea? What human rights are there in North Korea? China is a bit better, but not much.

On religious freedom in Iran, I have posted endlessly. There are almost no Jews left. Christians are theoritically a protected monority but are in fact limited with respect to the schools they can attend, the jobs they can hold. The situation of the Bahai deteriorates daily. Think about the American friend, Shah. Then consider Khomeini, under Carter's watch, Z Brezinski, Secretary of State (btw., he is Obama's foreign policy advisor. You remember Carter, Oilgate I, as they say.)

WHAT ON EARTH DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING?

You don't get it, I'm afraid. I'm not into dueling abusers. That is so very far from the point, my friend.

TTWSY etc.

Sorry, that should have been H.J.M.J. Goris.

TTWSY etc

H.J.M.M. Goris?

A bad edit on my part made nonsense of the second paragraph in my last post. Here's the correction:

Furthermore, Jewish law holds that a fetus is only a "potential life," and that a baby gains full human status at birth only. Jewish law also holds that the mother's life takes precedent over that of a fetus.

Dear TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ -

I'm a bit puzzled by your stance on abortion. Surely, you know that abortion is not only OK in many instances in the OT, but that the god of the OT actually demands the occasional killing of women who are with child.

Furthermore, Jewish law holds that a fetus is only a "potential life," and that a baby doesn't become It gains full human status at birth only. Jewish law also holds that the mother's life takes precedent over that of a fetus.

The Babylonian Talmud Yevamot 69b states that: "the embryo is considered to be mere water until the fortieth day." Afterwards, it is considered subhuman until it is born.

Rashi, the great 12th century commentator on the Bible and Talmud, states clearly of the fetus 'lav nefesh hu--it is not a person.' The Talmud contains the expression 'ubar yerech imo--the fetus is as the thigh of its mother,' i.e., the fetus is deemed to be part and parcel of the pregnant woman's body." 1 This is grounded in Exodus 21:22. That biblical passage outlines the Mosaic law in a case where a man is responsible for causing a woman's miscarriage, which kills the fetus If the woman survives, then the perpetrator has to pay a fine to the woman's husband. If the woman dies, then the perpetrator is also killed. This indicates that the fetus has value, but does not have the status of a person.

How do these Biblical truths square with your belief, which seems to come from somewhere outside of the Bible?

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
PAM:
POSTED ON JUNE 22, 2008 16:38
"DEMOCRACY"

IRT:
The USA is not, nor was it ever intended to be, a pure democracy. It is set up as it is, with the three branches, and all the attendant encumbrances to passing laws expediently, so that a simple majority is far less likely to trample on the rights of minorities...”

ANS:
I don’t believe I said anything about a Democracy. I believe I said the "voice of the people." Hasn't the majority have a voice anymore? George Bernard Shaw said, “Democracy is the government of the people, by the people and for the people.”

The only rights the minority have are equality and their inalienable rights, all others rights must be earned.

Disagree with that? The Supreme Court does. The Court doesn't protect all the people, in particularly, the unborn, who are human in spite of the Courts cacophony to the contrary.

Moreover, the Court decided Terri Schiavo wasn't human either, so they permitted her to suffer and die an ignominious death by torture for some 14 days through dehydration and starvation. A little barbaric and debilitating I would say. Well, it wasn’t to the Court.

However, it pleased Schiavo's adulterous husband who had the Hemlock Society and “Dr. Humane Death” murder her while he shacked up with his concubine who had bore him three children out of wedlock.

This archaic marriage thing is nothing but an interference of government into the privacy of couples' sex affairs. Michael Kinsley, then Opinion Ed. of the LA Times, said marriage ought to be abolished.

Who wants the Pope or the government in your bedroom? Ironically, it’s not the government or the Pope that’s in your bedroom, it’s God, and I think He has a little bit to say about it, whether the Court or anyone else likes it or not.

The Court is about to redefine marriage. Some State courts define it to mean same-sex shack-ups. We don’t want to discriminate against gay sex and gay marriage irrespective of its immorality, especially when traditional moral values are not a legitimate interest to the Court.

You see, the Court, without authority, redefined person. That authority belongs to God’s domain and is written in the Natural Law. The Court doesn’t have much respect for the Natural Law and over 48 million unborn have been legally murdered because of it.

In fact, the “Four” Horsemen of Apocalypse in the Court's amoral majority, Stevens, Ginsberg, Breyer, Souter, with Kennedy riding on their backs, don’t have much respect for the Founding Fathers or our Constitution.

Nor does the Court's dissolute majority care for much for traditional values. Thus, Justice Stevens, writing for the amoral majority in Lawrence v. Texas, said traditional moral values serve the State no legitimate purpose.

These three branches of government aren't recognized by the Supreme Court either. They think the Court has the prerogative to legislate and it does.

The question was, "Would you rather have an oligarchy of five unelected Supreme Court Justices writing your laws or the people and their elected representatives."

Maybe you support the minority, like atheists trampling over the rights of “freedom of religion,” irrespective of the legislatures of the States.

Subsequently, it seems apparent that you approve the Court, a non-elective body, trampling over our “freedom of speech and religion,” as well as the Constitution envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

Namely, that all men are created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights by their Creator isn’t that important to the Court. Is it to you?

Unfortunately, the unborn, who are human beings, don’t get Constitutional protection but the terrorist do. Evidently, the Court seems to have the support of the American majority who have moved to the alternate world where up is down and down is up, where evil is good, and good is evil.

Consequently, contradictions for the Court are now in vogue. Hence, the Court banned the “Ten Commandments” from the Public Square while the Decalogue and Moses adorn the doors entering into the Court and ornament the East Pediment of the Court’s building.

And what about all the monuments in Washington DC that refer to God? Shouldn't the Court remove them as well. We shouldn't embarrass an atheist's freedom from religion, irrespective of the majorities’ beliefs.

And, while at it, since the Court thinks crosses are an expression of religion, the Court might remove all the crosses in public cemeteries like Arlington. We don't want the dead practicing religion in the Public Square, especially if atheists are buried next to them.

We wouldn’t want agnostics and atheists becoming paranoid at the sight of crosses. The Court did rule against crosses along highways where people died in accidents.

So as the Irish say, “Smile and give your face a holiday,” and don’t worry about the voice of the people, you have a Court that is doing a fine job silencing the majority.

Anon:

Farnaz, don't bother to discuss democracy in Pakistan either. I appreciate your loyalty to Muslims even though you are Jew who suffered because of institutionalized discrimination in Iran and had to flee overnight. We are only discussing facts here and distorted interpretations which ignore history and facts doesn't help.

Good luck!

-----------------
Again, your post shows nativism and the distorted vision it inevitably calls forth. Rather than address the Dalit, Gujarat, bride burning, or female feticide, female infanticide in Indai, you again resort to ad hominem nonsense.

I suspect you cannot understand me. I have no loyalty to Muslims. As for me, I have been and continue to be forced into an identity.

Distorting facts cannot "win" any argument, but I don't think you know what my argument is. If you are interested, let me know, and I'll explain it.

Pakistan: No doubt you are aware of the endless struggles for democracy in that beleaguered nation, the recent long march in Pakistan, involving millions of ordinary Pakistanis demanding the reconsitution of the Judiciary.

I've posted on Pakistan many times, and do not want to repeat myself but I will say this. Ali Bhutoo was no saint. However, when he announced his intention to bring desperately needed socialist reform wretchedly poor, then secular, pre-Taliban Pakistan, he was warned by Kissinger.

Not too long after, OUR MAN ZIA was in control. That would be OUR MAN ZIA, who gave us the beginnings of the Pakistan we have today. OUR MAN ZIA, who took the SAUDI ARABIANS up on their offer to establish MADRASSAHS in Pakistan which OUR FRIEND SAUDI ARABIA is still supporting.

This, while my closest friend a Pakistani academic living in Islamabad is threatened by OUR FORMER FRIENDS THE TALIBAN. (NB: CCNL STRANGELOVE, SLEEP WELL AT NIGHT.)

The Pakistanis who marched are indebted to this great nation for their "support" of Musharraf.

BEing a J person has its advantages. One is sui generis, on the margins. The center is more easily viewed from that positioning.

Your posts show an alarmingly partial view of history and humanity.

Good luck. Read a bit more.

Farnaz, for atheist versions of human rights abuses provide some scholarly data from China and North Korea. Life in Iran for non-Muslims would also be a great help for those of us wanting to catch up on information from around the world. Thx.

Farnaz, to balance the act it would help if you could provide some information on honor killing of women in Pakistan; and marriages of very young girls to old men, to escape poverty of course. The practice is not rampant but the numbers might even out considering the Indian population of Hindus is over 850 *million* and there are only about 160 million Pakistanis.

Never discuss politics and religion in polite company, don't they say? It could end up unfriendly without anyone intending it.

Over and out!

Non-German Anonymous

I posted

June 23, 2008 8:11 AM

Non-German Anon:

The address is home to a scholarly article on bride burning in India.

http://www.pegasus.rutgers.edu/~rcrlj/articlespdf/lakhani.pdf

---------------

Am also thinking about female infanticide.
---------------

We'd all do well to notice the cracks in the mirror when we congratulate ourselves on our differing "identities."

Over and out.

Here's my favorite George Carlin quote -I first saw it in Richard Dawkin's Book, the God Delusion, on page 278, at the opening of Chapter 8: What's wrong with Religion? Why be so Hostile?

"Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man - living n the sky - who watches everything you do. And the invisible man has a special list of 10 things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and screen and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time... But he loves you!"

Farnaz, don't bother to discuss democracy in Pakistan either. I appreciate your loyalty to Muslims even though you are Jew who suffered because of institutionalized discrimination in Iran and had to flee overnight. We are only discussing facts here and distorted interpretations which ignore history and facts doesn't help.

Good luck!

Non-German Anon:

Ad hominem won't do it. Spent too much time in Pakistan and India.

THE DALIT?? (Spare us all the usual apologia.)

GURJARAT???

I neither admire nor respect the pompous, self-congratulatory nativism of your posts.

EXIT!

Farnaz, your knowledge of Indian history, its religions, especially Hinduism is too poor to continue a discussion.

Indian Hindus did not deserve to have their country carved up by Muslims, considering the very same Muslims had lived among Hindus for many centuries.

Farnaz, while I respect your intelligence and knowledge, not so much your confidence in portraying aspects of people and countries you seem to know very little about. Read history books about Islam in India from a Hindu perspective, the blood bath and forced conversions to Islam. Read about the history of India, how people of different religions have always lived peacefully together. Muslims as second class citizens in India? Your source of information must be poor indeed. Do you know how many politicians, including Presidents have been Muslims and still are, and yet only 12% of the population is Muslim? Eighty five percentage of Indians are Hindus. If there was the kind of intolerance you allude to, do you have an idea what the fate of only 12% Muslims could be? Christians in Pakistan supposedly have a bad time. I have only a TV program as source of information which is not much, so I wouldn't quote it as expert knowledge.

Exit!

James, nice of you to chime in with a couple of atheist jokes, although it is sad that the author of them has passed away at a comparatively young age.

Farnaz & Jihadist, even at the risk of being considered a spoilsport, I wish to mention that the lists of atrocities committed by various nations you both are posting is somehow not coming across as atheist humor to me. I wonder how others feel.

the whole idea Muslims needed another country based on their religion doesn't reflect Indian history and Hindu generosity in living peacefully with people of other faiths, until the suggestion was made for the first time in 1930 by a Muslim, which later became a demand.
----------

There are a lot of Pakistanis who would agree that partition never should have happened. However, a phrase like "Hindu generosity," does cause me to reflect. Should the US speak of its "generosity" in allowing people of different ethnicities/religions to exist here?

Then, too, when I consider the fact that the Muslims still enjoy second-class status in INdia.... True many Muslims are very well off, but that is far, far from the point.

HINDu generosity? Tell that to the dead Mulsims of Gujurat.

NONE of "us" as ethnic/religious identities, has been particularly generous.
-----------------------
Interesting to go to Pakistan and hear discussions of the Christians, with whom any number of Pakistanis equate the US and Europe. Why not? The Christians are the majority on those continents.

It's worth a trip there for Christians to hear it. Breaks the m mirror of self-congratulation.
---------------------
We all need to notice the cracks in that mirror.

Jihadist,

You are right about the rape of Nanking. As for the Korean comfort women, the Japanese have never forgiven themselves, since they remain unaware that there is an issue, despite the fact that the rest of the world does. This is often the case with the Japanese.

Ditto the Filipines. Not a problem for Japan. Not only have I read about the Filipines, I know someone who was there as an American army officer, the grandfather of a friend of mine. As a result of my obsession, some years ago, he and two former army friends spent a couple of hours with me telling me about Japan in the Filipines.

Nothing beats the rape of Nanking, only because you had such unimaginable savagery going on in the streets in a well defined area, a comparatively short period. (I was not surprised when Iris Chang committed suicide.) Spread it out and you get the Filipines. I've known a lot of Filipinos in New York. There is one remarkably understated assessment they invariably make: "The Japanese were too cruel."

But history has not been kind to the Filipines, as I'm sure you know. Not only has this country played with that beleaugered state, but its neighbors have and do, as well. I wonder if those Asian states who feel some understandable pride in Japan have ever given thought to what might have awaited them had Japan had even a partial victory.

Japan, itself, recognizes its own warring, warrior tendencies, as you know, and tries to keep itself as little armed as possible. In that they are an example for us all.

Atheist George Carlin has died. Here are two of his jokes for atheists:

Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

AND

Welcome to Hell

A guy dies and wakes up to find he is in hell. He's really depressed as he stands in the processing line waiting to talk to an admittance counselor.

He thinks to himself "I know I lead a wild life but I wasn't that bad. I never thought it would come to this." Looking up he sees that it is his turn to be processed into hell. With fear and a heavy heart, he walks up to the counselor.

Counselor: What's the problem, you look depressed?

Guy: Well, what do you think? I'm in hell.

Counselor: Hell's not so bad, we actually have a lot of fun. Do you like to drink?

Guy: Sure, I love to drink.

Counselor: Well then, you are going to love Mondays. On Mondays we drink up a storm. You can have whiskey, rum, tequila, beer, whatever you want and as much a you want. We party all night long. You'll love Mondays. Do you smoke?

Guy: Yes, as a matter of fact I do.

Counselor: You are going to love Tuesdays. Tuesday is smoke day. You get to smoke the finest cigars and best cigarettes available anywhere. And you smoke to your heart's desire without worrying about cancer because you are already dead! Is that great or what? You are going to love Tuesdays. Do you do drugs?

Guy: Well in my younger days I experimented a little.

Counselor: You are going to love Wednesdays. That's drug day. You can experiment with any drug you want and you don't have to worry about overdoses or getting hooked because you are already dead. You are going to love Wednesdays. Do you gamble?

Guy: Yes, I love to gamble.

Counselor: You are going to love Thursdays because we gamble all day and night -- black jack, craps, poker, slots, horse races, everything! You are going to love Thursdays. Are you gay?

Guy: Uhh...no.

Counselor: Oh , you're gonna hate Fridays...

An atheist joke from the Internet to close it with

An inscription for an atheist's gravestone:

"All dressed up and nowhere to go"

O come on atheists. No more jokes about atheists?

I declare this thread closed!

The Reality Challenged and Obfuscating Jihadist wants to know what we have learned from history. We have certainly learned that until the koran is deflawed, all mosques "febrezed" and all Shiites and Sunnis pacified, no one is safe!!!!

And Jihadist, the unstitching of the Turkish Muslim Ottoman Empire in Europe - which if you recall correctly were independent countries before the Turks decided to expand their national borders - cannot be compared to the partitioning of India to create two countries for Indian Muslims, namely Pakistan and Bangladesh. Islam is not indigenous to India. The Muslims who brought the religion to India were foreigners. Hinduism remained the religion of the majority even when Muslim minority ruled some parts of India for nearly three hundred years. So the whole idea Muslims needed another country based on their religion doesn't reflect Indian history and Hindu generosity in living peacefully with people of other faiths, until the suggestion was made for the first time in 1930 by a Muslim, which later became a demand.

BTW Jihadist, I AM very impressed with your knowledge of world history and your interpretations. I was merely throwing in my own tidbit from a different angle.

"Divide and rule" is an ancient political maxim. Sometimes the mathematics of it can go wrong, that is why kingdoms and empires have come and gone. That is the stuff world history is made of. Three hundred years from now people would be discussing world politics differently commenting about our present, which to them would be history, in ways we cannot foresee.

testing

Back to atheists who would share jokes about themselves.

Jihadist, a footnote on Iraq's stitching by the British you mentioned. Saddam Hussein, a Sunni, the minority group in Iraq compared to Shia Muslims, was quite happy to carry on ruling Iraq as stitched up by the British. Shia, the majority Muslim community, were not amused by Saddam Hussein.

Jihadist, this is hardly the place to go into a lengthy discussion of world history.

It should however be kept in mind that to every Muslim perspective you present there is a non-Muslim perspective. This is particularly true of Europe which had adopted Christianity as its official religion long before the birth of Islam. Similarly to everything Indian there is a Hindu perspective and Hinduism is nearly three and a half *thousand* years older than Islam. Hindus do not accept the Muslim version of how Islam was introduced into India.

Hindus were *always* the majority in India even when Muslims established a rule in a large area in the North for about tchree hundred years of India's long long history. The separate country for Muslims at independence in 1947 came at the expense of Hindus who had leave everything behind and flee with the clothes on their back from areas which were designated to become Pakistan, including the present day Bangladesh. There was a kind of religious cleansing in the process in which over three million are supposed to have died.

India is considered a subcontinent with many languages, religions and cultures. Hindi and English are both used as official languages at the national level. Hindi is spoken for all official occasions at national level. States use their own languages, many of which are different from Hindi, in addition to English. India is far too complex for a simplistic analysis. We should not even go there in this thread. I added my $ 0.02 merely to convey the idea that there is also a different to the one you present as a Sunni Muslim from Malaysia with your interesting background and ancestory.

Over.

Non-German Anonymous

Hello Anonymous,
(the non-German non-Muslim one)

As for "schimpfed", what in the world is that word? Is it akin to the Yiddish "schmuck"?

And what is this with the ongoing German language kampf, crusade, jihad with another poster?

Anschlag! Schtop!

Cheers and out.

"J"

June 21, 2008 2:58 AM

****************************************

Jihadist, I dropped by to say, better use the German word "HALT" if you *mean* "shtop." The word "Anschlag" - as a lone word - to mean stop is a very strange usage and I have never heard it. Anschlag - as a lone word - to my language sense conveys a meaning quite the opposite of stop. Use the word Anschlag - as a lone word - to mean "shtop" by all means, but *only if* you are acting as an extra in a Hollywood WW II movie.

Btw, I'm not used to communicating in a language I do not know by merely picking up words from a dictionary.

Over.

Hello Anonymous,
(the non-German non-Muslim one)

As for "schimpfed", what in the world is that word? Is it akin to the Yiddish "schmuck"?

And what is this with the ongoing German language kampf, crusade, jihad with another poster?

Anschlag! Schtop!

Cheers and out.

"J"

June 21, 2008 2:58 AM

****************************************

Jihadist, I dropped by to say, better use the German word "HALT" if you *mean* "shtop." The word "Anschlag" to mean stop is a very strange usage and I have never heard it. Anschlag, to my language sense conveys a meaning quite the opposite of stop. Use the word Anschlag to mean "shtop" by all means, but only *if* you are acting as an extra in a Hollywood WW II movie.

Over.

Pat Condell is a funny atheist-

http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=y9dXGJ2rYdA

Hello Farnaz,

Re your post on "comfort women" and the war, China and South Korea the Philippines were most infuriated by the Japanese lack of real contrivance and apology for the behavior of their troops during World War II.

I've discussed this sometime back in another thread. The Filipinos were more irked by the comfort women issue actually. But China and South Korea have a longer history of conflicts with Japan than any other Asian countries and the underlying mistrusts are still there.

Nothing beats the "Rape of Nanking" in China by the Japanese troops during World War II in Asia for atrocious and cruel behavior of civilians. The worst case of wanton rape, pillage and murders. Not that the Chinese, in their own history don't do such to their own people.

Regards and out of here.
"J"

Hello Non-German Anonymous,

All these stitching of states. All these breaking up of states.

What do we learn from history? And always a pleasure to go into history and historical perspectives with you and then some dashes of this and doses of that too thrown in.

The Ottoman Empire is a case of a supra-multinational state broken up in the late 19th and early 20th century for specific reasons by western powers. Calling it the “Sick Man of Europe” is good enough reason to “cure” it by breaking up parts of it to save Turkey from dying or infecting the world with overstretched, effete, outdated outmoded governance disease?

We are not talking about destitching of states here as in the breaking up of the Ottoman Empire, but the stitching up of states for any given reason that is of current interests as these stitched up states are nation-states in current forms.

And, right. Your point taken on India. I should have elaborated that India, Iraq, Indonesia and Malaysia etc were being stitched up in its present state of states by the colonialists.

Indian rulers pre-British rule did try to stitch up the Indian states, but not as well as the British. Today, there are still diversified languages in India, and English is the de facto lingua franca for business and governance in India. The biggest selling authors there are PG Wodehouse and Agatha Christie.

Chinese rulers have been stitching up China for over two thousand years. They imposed Mandarin as the administrative language and laced it up with hefty doses of Confucianism. China was never colonised.

The difference between why India was colonised and China was not? India has many Maharajas till the time of the British coming in there, and China has one Emperor thought most of the respective countries' history.

The more the kingdoms and/or chiefdoms and peoples (different languages and religions) war against one another, the easier for the colonialists to take over, to "divide and rule", thus makes their rule indispensable for keeping political peace and social order. By guns in the former, and by maintaining local rulers in “ruling” as figureheads while they are really in charge of the countries.

As for India, same for Indonesia and Malaysia. In the days of pre-western colonisation, some rulers tried to stitch together as many states as possible into supra kingdoms - Srivijiya, Majapahit, Malaccan sultanate etc. Likewise the Thai kingdom, but lost to the French and English some territories.

Indonesian and Malaysian sultanates were easy for the Dutch and British respectively to take over. The sultanates either invited the Dutch or British to assist them in fighting against other sultanates (at a price of course), or lost in fighting against the Dutch or British. The locals have no guns. Not very effective to use knives or swords to fight against guns.

Oh, there is a saying in Indonesia too. “Like the Dutch asking for land.” It is said that the Dutch in asking for land from the locals, would say they want a patch of land no bigger than a piece of cloth they had in their hand. About a yard in length and breadth. Given assent by the locals, the Dutch then pulled the tread of the cloth one by one and take the individual strings to measure the land they are taking.

In reading the history of Southeast Asia, the Dutch, French and Spanish were worse colonialists than the British in administration and treatment of locals who dissented against their rule, bar India. They send over less British administrators per population than they did for Malaya (now Malaysia). The Dutch tried to come out with “ethical policy” in 1900 in their administration, but….. As for the French in Indochine, well.

Anyway, you do know about the Dutch East India Company and the English East India Company that first initiated colonisation of India, Burma, Indonesia and Malaysia first for trading rights and then to take over. Both companies are long gone, but a Malaysian clothing outlet business calls itself East India Company and another clothing outlet company calls itself British India.

There was an advertising tagline by British India that goes, “British India. A time of oppression, suppression and great clothes” accompanying a period picture of English sahids and memsahaibs dressed up in late 19th century European tropical clothes with funny hats sitting down and surrounded by Indian servants fanning them. Malaysians did not blink, but some British tourists do wince. They don’t use that advertisement anymore.

Regards
“J”

**************************************************

Hello Farnaz,

You : “ Humor, Jihadist? Material for satire?
PS. I'm not the enemy.”

That is the second time you stated, “I’m not the enemy” to me. Whatever gives you the idea?.
Humour and satire. I may be in hell for them. Not the afterlife hell, but temporal hell in these threads from those sans sense of humour, or think I have a bad sense of humour. Humour is a human minefield.

How’s about these two tepid and lukewarm ones regarding history and conflicts that may be seen as politically incorrect by some.

- The Greek Cypriots should return to Greece. The Turkish Cypriots should return to Turkey. The whole island of Cyprus should be given to the Palestinians.

- The sayings of Mao is complied into a little Red Book called, “The Thoughts of Mao Zedong”. After the Cultural Revolution, there is a little Blue Book out called,” The Second Thoughts of Mao Zedong.”

Regards
“J”

Farnaz - I'm an atheist and I posted some atheist jokes. So did some others. I think Chris Everett made up a few.

Dear Pam -

I agree with you about TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ.

To paraphrase Churchill: never has so little been said with so many big words to benefit a few.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ,
There is so much wrong with the way you think that it's flabbergasting - and beyond addressing in this forum - so I'll content myself with just one small point that you might consider:

The USA is not, nor was it ever intended to be, a pure democracy. It is set up as it is, with the three branches, and all the attendant encumbrances to passing laws expediently, so that a simple majority is far less likely to trample on the rights of minorities. Do give that some thought.

TTWSYFAMDGGAHJMJ has the final and immutable definition of:

1. Truth
2. Malice
3. Feeling
4. Freedom
5. Faith
6. Reason
7. Common Good
8. Decency
9. Bigotry
10.Morality-Amorality
11. Depravity
12. Rogue
13. The will of the people
14. Probity
15. Duty of the State
16. Social order
17. Human Nature
18. Natural Right
19. Substance
20. Forethought.

Wow!

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SUSAN JACOBY
“FREEDOM OF SPEECH”

IRT:
"Many … religious believers would …prefer that … Congress shall make no law "abridging the freedom of speech ...except when the exercise of that freedom hurts other people's feelings or challenges their faith."

ANS:
Baloney, it is not their feelings that are hurt but their moral integrity is being impugned. If speech is so opprobrious that it challenges one’s faith not with reason but with malice, a faith that is not destructive to the common good, then there is no right to such freedom.

There are no rights to repugnant mockery against our neighbor? When speech serves no social benefit but is a detriment to the social order and the common good, it is not free, it is costly. Therefore, it is not a right to injure another with audacious behavior and vituperative bigotry.

Consequently, if a family is entering a Church on a day of worship and a bunch of iconoclast are in front of the Church cursing them, as happens and there was no reprisal; that crosses the line, and should be a violation proscribed by law.

There are laws of decency whether the Court recognizes them or not. Spiritual people want freedom of speech but not the unequivocally obnoxious speech that offends the community's sense of decency, and is disgraceful and debilitating to the whole of all societies. At one point, there is a line that shouldn’t be crossed.

The problem is determining that line. Do we want five unelected Supreme Court Justices telling Americans when saluting the Flag can't say “One nation under God?” Isn't that the prerogative of the people? Is it the prerogative of the people or five justices telling us the Ten Commandments are proscribed from the Public Square because they may infect the minds of little children?

Does America want the people or an amoral majority of Justices telling America that burning the Flag, a Flag that we honor our fallen heroes in war with, is freedom of speech? Is nothing sacred when it comes to speech?

Does America want the Court interfering in our political debates, telling American what and when they can advertise or can and can't spend on their campaigns? Isn't that the providence of the people?

Freedom of speech is not a license to say anything you want, nor is it a license for a majority Court telling Americans what they can and can’t say. That is the domain of the voices of Americans.

The problem is who decides. Is it the unelected Court or Americans? The solution is that certain major speech issues should be debated in the public forums and be put to the people by vote, and not determined by an oligarchy Court that has no sense of the people. Namely, the principle of subsidiarity should be the rule for all government.

“The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism. It sets limits for state intervention. It aims at harmonizing the relationships between individuals and societies.

“In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, neither the state nor any larger society should substitute itself for the initiative and responsibility of individuals and intermediary bodies.”

Such things as pornography, as well as all graphic sexual exhibitions of moral depravity, should be tempered by the voice of the people, not amoral Justices. Even though the people speak out, a rogue Court has, at times, abused its judicial powers by silencing the will of the majority and usurping the powers of the Legislature.

The Court once called the right to decency “community standards.” Today, the Court has even obscured that meaning. Now, the freedom of speech can mean whatever the Court wants it to mean. The whimsical fiat of the Court’s majority has done so without substance or forethought, irrespective of the voice of the people, stare decisis, or past precedence.

This piggery is understandable from a Court's majority that mocks and defies our Judeo-Christian moral standards that are the essential steadfast principles that stabilize and maintain our social order.

Violations of the freedom of speech are a transgression of Truth, and are an assault on human nature.

A State that allows such transgressions of moral probity is derelict in its duty to preserve the social order. No society should tolerate such scurrilous turgidity and pompous embellished language that impugns the hearts and minds of society.

Truth is the food of the intellect, and man, therefore, has a natural right to seek the truth. Hence, speech that hinders man's inalienable right to seek and find the truth is not a right of free speech but a right to its detriment.

Therefore, free speech is not a right to malign, confuse, or to undermine the Truth. To the contrary, "free speech" is as an envoy sent on a mission to seek the truth. When the envoy's mission is obstructed then the right to seek the truth is obstructed.

It is written; fear not, the truth for the truth will set you free. Hence, true freedom of speech is expounding the truth, not obscuring it with ignominious iniquity.

To reiterate:

On occasion we have to stop laughing and analyze the current dangers of the world. Islam of course is one such danger that needs analysis. The analysis is summarized in that famous quote,

Until the koran is deflawed, all mosques are "febrezed" and all Shiites and Sunnis are pacified, no one is safe!!!!"

A German translation from altavista.com:

Bis das koran deflawed, sind alle Moscheen " febrezed" und alle Shiites und Sunnite werden beruhigt, keine ist sicher!!!

Other notes,

The USA ranks fourth in world oil production, 11 th in proven oil reserves, and first in oil use.
(CIA World Fact book)

Ronald Reagan chose to fight the terrorism and aggression of the Communists wherever, whenever and by any means. This included helping Iraq defeat Iran and Afghanistan defeat the USSR. The strategy worked.

Farnaz,

OK. I'll check back here, now that I know where you are.

I've got to go.

Amro

Amro,

Well, mostly it's atheists vs. believers, but sometimes takes a turn for poetry, which I think you'd like.

As for Muslims, there's only one problem I can think of offhand, CCNL Strangelove. (I added the Strangelove.) But usually he just posts lists.

Generally, I post here when I post. A lot of the people are very smart, sometimes hilariously funny.
I think you'd like it.

Farnaz,

I was looking for you. Is this where you normally post? Is it friendly to Muslims?

Amro,

How did you wind up on this of all threads?

Everything's fine. We opened another business, and it was rough going for awhile. Then, what with the economy it got rougher and we thought we'd have to take a loss.

Fortunately, things are turning around. Still don't have much time for blogging though. I've been following this thread. It's something that the only person to raise a significant question is an atheist. It gives me pause.

The creole word "schmuck" (to extend the meaning of "creole" depending on the opinion of a linguist) is used in American slang. (See Leo German-English dictionary, where it is referred to both as Yiddish, of course, and as slang, "creole" missing for whatever reason).

Otherwise: Thanks for the information.
Many words in their evolution are associated with the meaning of a different, similar or even identical word, inspite of their real origin. There are tons of examples in German.

Not important, lol!

Oh my God, Amro! What happened to you? I kept looking for you on the main thread, on Kahn's, on Patel's....

Even when I wasn't posting. Is everything okay?

Hi Farnaz,

Long time. How are you?

ANd the moral of the story has been provided by Tim:

It matters who's speaking.

Oh my. Almost forgot the Belgians. And, then, there was the US supported murder of Patrice Lumumba.

Well, that paved the road for Kasavubu. Not much obvious humor there....

Humor, Jihadist? Material for satire?

PS. I'm not the enemy.

Non-German,

Partition: JUst one of England's crimes against humanity. The list goes on. For example, how about cutting off the thumbs of INdians/Pakistanis so they couldn't sew?

How about cutting off their hands and tying them around their necks?

The Boer War. England introduced the first Concentration camps to the world.

England fired on and murdered refugees fleeing from Germany who were trying to dock in Israel. Why? The Oil Emirates. Egypt, etc. BRITISH PETROLEUM.

Let us venture over to Africa, where the English and the French had much fun.

Gerry,

Re: Schmuck

Yiddish is a creole, not slang. (There are other German creoles. English, from one prominent linguistic perspective.) There are several varieties of Yiddish, and schmuck has two derivations. One refers to "penis" and from thence to idiot, or fool.

The other refers to jewels, or ornaments, also used in Yiddish, but has a different etymology. Some think both usages derive from and are consistent with the German Schmuck.

The unstitching of India, mentioned by Jihadist, forced on India by a Muslim minority wanting a separate country ---

"Partition of India was accompanied by the largest and most rapid population transfer in history, with 17.9 million people leaving their homes. Of these, only 14.5 million arrived, suggesting that 3.4 million went "missing."...

End of $ 0.02 clarification.

Gerry,

There are atheist jokes on the web. They've been posted on this thread, but by believers. Non-German Anon would like some posted by Atheists.

Would you mind? The Guillotine joke is great.

Non-German Anon,

You might also look for a film title: "Thirst." That is, since you are interested in India. It is good for the world to know what it is doing to India and what India is doing to itself. One often thinks of the Dalit. One cannot help it. Here they are and they're writing.

Then try your hand at the Pakistani Christians. Who are they?

Atheists make fun of themselves in myriads of ways. Atheists have the same features, qualities, deficiencies as members of any brand of religion. They are just as human as any believer. They love, eat, read, play, talk, write, fight, sulk, err, teach, learn etc. etc., and on each of this fields - you name it, we have it! - we make incessantly fun of ourselves.

However, the attempt to make fun at the "atheist conviction" of a person, by himself or by others, is a bit analogous to asking a person to "by no means imagine a pink elephant".

Our brain simply does not process negatives, ask any brain neurologist. A golf player who decides that the ball may by no means fall into the water will land it in the water.

A-theism (again, tsk, tsk!), thus, is no "positively" describable and therefore "mockable" feature of a person, "mockable" by both believers or atheists themselves. To once again mobilize the old "stamp collector": How do you mock a guy for not collecting stamps?

Btw., Atheists are no group, unless considered statistically, which doesn't mean much and doesn't come close to a definition of their personalities.

As to the "schmuck" discussion: I don't think the slang expression "schmuck" has an etymological relationship with the German word "Schmuck".
Google: http://www.mtannoyances.com/?p=219 for a surprise!

rate Muslim country was first suggested in 1930 by a Muslim, Allama Iqbal. (Google partition of India.) Twelve percent of the current Indian population (some 140 million) after partition is still Muslim
-----------
Thank you. We are duly edified. Now, do google Gujarat and tell us what happened there just a few years ago and how it has been handled.

Jihadist ---

The worst thing about colonisation is that they stitch up different states, peoples and cultures into an 'artificial' nation. See Iraq, see India (split into India and Pakistan, and Pakistan subsequently split into Pakistan and Bangladesh)

June 22, 2008 3:13 AM

*******************************

For the benefit of readers not quite into history as Jihadist is, a bit of clarification now that I noticed a different perspective.

India was first "stitched up" into an empire by Emperor Ashoka. (if curious, google term Emperor Ashoka)

India, which included present day Pakistan and Bangladesh, was "stitched up" by the British for two hundred years of colonial rule. The idea of a separate Muslim country was first suggested in 1930 by a Muslim, Allama Iqbal. (Google partition of India.) Twelve percent of the current Indian population (some 140 million) after partition is still Muslim. Google the word India to find out details of its long (past and present) history of diversity in ethnic groups, religions, cultures, languages etc. Indians had known the art of stitching themselves up long before the British arrived.

That's better. It got more interesting again here.
-------
See All Quiet on the Western Front.

There are a couple of Pakistani film-makers who've made riotously funny films, which, of course you've seen, and they are making fun of themselves.

Then, too, there are those endless German and Japanese films in which the Germans and Japanese spoof their own WWII soldiers. Can't think of them at the moment. Please supply titles.

Also, which Muslim group would you suggest Hollywood or Bollywood parody? This is a crowded theatre, is it not? Look at your own country. Look at Sobia's post on Kahn's thread. Take a trip to Gujurat.

Satire? Sure, but it matters who is speaking as Tim posted several times. SOoooo.....when one looks at English cartoons of the Irish famines, well, one gets that sick and nauseated feeling, one has experienced before and will experience again.

What matter who is speaking. It matters. It matters all the time. It matters in every context. It matters for each and every one of us.

Jihadist ---

The worst thing about colonisation is that they stitch up different states, peoples and cultures into an 'artificial' nation. See Iraq, see India (split into India and Pakistan, and Pakistan subsequently split into Pakistan and Bangladesh)

June 22, 2008 3:13 AM

*******************************

For the benefit of readers not quite into history as Jihadist is, a bit of clarification now that I noticed a different perspective.

India was first "stitched up" into an empire by Emperor Ashoka. (google)

India was stitched by th

n seeing that Japan can fight against the west thought it lost the war, Asian states in Southeast Asia, South Asia and Africa were emboldened to fight for their independence after World War II against the colonialist nations of their countries.
======
Yes. However, the Chinese of Shanghai and the Filipinos had and have a certain take on the Japanese, which, oddly enough is still not positive. Then, too, one has the Korean comfort women and their take on the Japanese, also not less than commendatory or encouraging. Of course, one has sixty years of fall out in Japan, but the Japanese and the US have a way of letting bygones be bygones, so long as a buck is involved and no history need be studied. In this way, despite vastly differing cultures we all join together to hasten the Apocalypse. Et moi? I'm off to Jerusalem to get converted so's not to slow things down.

Non-German Anon
The 100,000 Iranians gassed by Saddam, the US friend, were mainly Muslims. The original context was war for mention of said victims was war. Later, CCNL raised the wisdom of Ronald Reagan in supporting said mass murderer. My last response was to him.

CCNL STRANGELOVE: See you at Armageddon.

No need for apologies Jihadist, none at all. You are not the first one who has mistaken me for a male atheist. I take that as a compliment for two reasons - it is a sign I communicate without sexual overtones and do not come across as a religious fundamentalist. On a blog that concerns itself with ideas only ideas matter. Ideas are neutral, no need to package them with gender and particular religious affiliations, unless the idea itself cannot be conveyed without such clarification.

Keep your ideas about atheists coming.

Best,

Non-German Anonymous

Non-German Anonymous,

Before I get off, just to say I confused you with Merry Anonymous who said this in Andy Bachman's thread:

"I think there may not have been a "census." Btw, I'm not Jewish, am atheist, was raised Christain in a serious way."

Sorry again.

Regards and out

"J"

Non German Anonymous,

Oh. Sorry then, even if I am pre-emptively forgiven by you for thinking you're an atheist and not a female Christian.

Thanks for the additions on why atheists don't joke. A few more?

- jokes has been discovered by scientists to be bad for one's sanity as proof of human insanity

- jokes are found to be shared by humans and not animals thus putting into question man are evolved apes

- jokes have no redeeming factual value

- jokes cannot be footnoted

- jokes cannot be cross-checked for authenticity

..........and it has been a pleasure.

Cheers and out.

"J"

- jokes are

To all my final words ---

The last time I checked, i.e. a millisecond ago, I was still a Christian and still a female.

And Jihadist, sorry to disappoint you. It is not the first time I have been mistaken for an atheist!

To err is human...

You have been forgiven!

Hello Jihadist!

Before I sign off, your ten reasons for why atheists don't joke about themselves is good.

Here my $ 0.02 worth

There is no empirical proof why atheist jokes should be considered humor in the first place.

There is no empirical proof that atheist jokes, whether their own about themselves or by others, provides an evolutionary advantage.

There is no empirical proof that it is essential to laugh at oneself when laughing at others will do nicely.

Over to you and have fun with the rest!

Non-German Anonymous,

Come now. I appreciate your posts sharing your perspectives as a former Christian now atheist here for this very reason you stated :

"It was important to give a universal perspective on rights and wrongs."

I agree with and share your sentiments, but the reality is that, we are still faced with differences globally on any given issues in politics, economics, social values and religions. And more. Even on humour.

Cheers
"J"

Jihadist

"I see Non-German Anonymous is giving some perspectives on history, lessons on lingusitic lessons and on words from dictionaries."

June 22, 2008 3:13 AM

**********************

No need to fear that I was encroaching on your territory knowing you are widely read and multi-lingual. It was important to give a universal perspective on rights and wrongs. As one who objected visibly against the invasion of Iraq, the only time I ever got interested in any activity remotely connected to politics, it is proof of my stand about human rights and equality for all.

As to "words from Dictionaries," it was Mr Mark who first came up with a poem addressed to me adding a German word "echt" and that is how it got started. I responded to your questions about some German words. I have no need to display my knowledge of German on this thread for I speak the language, although non-German, like a native with a native accent. I can express the limited ideas I may have without the aid of a German dictionary.

Rest assured I wasn't competing with your language skills by a long shot!

10 reasons why atheists don't make jokes :

1 - jokes are irrational in content

2 - jokes are illogical in construction

3 - jokes are not based on facts

4 - jokes are not to be made about logical and rational people

5 - jokes are only to be directed at morons and idiots

6 - jokes are only for the shallow minded

7 - jokes are not great

8 - jokes cannot be verified as true, therefore they are untrue

9 - jokes are the opium of masses.

10 - jokes poisons everything.

By all means, do add more reasons.......

FARNAZ, I didn't notice we had gone from discussing humor and religious history and wars to discussing current US foreign policy and its impact on Jews.

Change of topic far too fast for my poor stupid brain to keep up with.

I want Jews to be safe no matter where they live, Israel, Iran, anywhere. No-brainer really. No need to discuss US foreign policy in that context.

Ende! (Exit)

That's better. It got more interesting again here.

--------------------------------------------------

On stereotypes:

Perhaps some are missing my point on Hollywood stereotyped potrayals in its movies. I did say this before going on into Hollywood stereotypes of German troops:

"Oh, so why not on German troops as characterised and potrayed in Hollywood movies:"

Very telling on what some think can be joked about and what cannot be joked about. Hollywood perpetuates stereotypes, even of German troops during World War II. Mike Myers perpetuating Hindu guru stereotypes in his "Love Guru"?

Should anyone go into Hollywood stereotypes of American troops during the Vietnam War as potrayed in "The Deer Hunter" "Platoon", "Apocalypse Now", "Full Metal Jacket" et al?

Would that be really be politically incorrect and insensitive?

Funny and humourous if directed at "them", but not funny and humourous if directed "us"? Becuase we have relatives who died during wars as soldiers and civilians and they don't?

Soldiers dying in wars can't material for humour or ridicule because they are fighting for freedom and fatherland or whatever the reason given regardless of how many they killed?

Victims who died during natural disasters can be material for humour if they believe in deities who inflict disasters on them?

--------------------------------------------------

On World War II :

I see Non-German Anonymous is giving some perspectives on history, lessons on lingusitic lessons and on words from dictionaries.

From the perspective of colonised nations in Asia, World War II has it's positives. It weakened Britain and France after the war.

In seeing that Japan can fight against the west thought it lost the war, Asian states in Southeast Asia, South Asia and Africa were emboldened to fight for their independence after World War II against the colonialist nations of their countries.

As for comparing Indonesia to the Netherlands, consider these small points for a start:

- all the colonised countries were not quite considered as sovereign states by the colonising European states;

- all the countries in Europe occupied by Germany were and are considered as sovereign states; Britain and France colonised more countries than Germany;

- not all nationals of the colonised countries by Britain and France in Africa and Asia were really displeased to see Germany in a war with both during WW II knowing it would weaken both after the war.

The best thing about colonisation is that they stitct small and sometimes warring states into bigger modern nations in most cases.

The worst thing about colonisation is that they sticth up different states, peoples and cultures into an 'artificial' nation. See Iraq, see India (split into India and Pakistan, and Pakistan subsequently split into Pakistan and Bangladesh)

More on history from different perspectives and written differently in the books of various nations, but we are digressing too much here?

And what has this got to do with humour? Plenty. As in, did you hear about a Russian, an Englishman and a Frenchman etc?

Don't forget the cartoons/caricatures before and during World War II re enemy countries and peoples as well as individuals, even within the same side of the fight to entertain, to mock, to ridicule and especially to infuriate and to outrage.

--------------------------------------------------

Non German Anonymous : "Could we now have some self-mocking atheist humor please?"

Obviously, they don't and can't and don't care for. A frank and earnest lot who only see "absurds" in religions but not atheism.

Also, there are no atheist jokes or self-mocking expressed by Harris or Hitchens. No self-confidence to do so? Or just afraid to do so lest no one would take them seriously? After all, both don't have PhDs like Dawkins or Dennett or Russell.

Cheers

"J"

FARNAZ, you are barking up the wrong tree. No Jew, no Gentile, no caste, no creed, no race...

That is what Jesus Christ calls His followers to be.

Sure there is racism, imperialism, divides along ethnicity, class, creed... and policies arising from them.

Even if there no policies *some* people are trapped in their attitudes stemming from them and behave in accordance with them.

What has that got to do with humor anyway?

CCNL, we are reaping what Reagan and others befoe him sowed, "officially," beginning with the first WT bombing, followed by the second. Now, we have the worst elements of Iraqi and Iranian society becoming friends. Hands across....
-----------
Ahmadinejad? Hard to say. Buffoonery distracts Iranians who want jobs, but distracts them only so much. THey need jobs. One can only beat up and arrest so many, among those who continually demonstrate. (Quiet, as it's kept.) He may have to put his money where his mouth is.

Sleep soundly, secure in US foreign policy.

Farnaz

FARNAZ, you are barking up the wrong tree. No Jew, no Gentile, no caste, no creed, no race...

That is what Jesus Christ calls His followers to be.

Sure there is racism, imperialism, divides along ethnicity, class, creed... and policies arising from them.

What has that got to do with humor anyway?

Non-German Anon

FARNAZ, you work yourself into a real trap if you classify people into black and white based only on the criteria: those who did the Jews and those who didn't do the Jews.

I think not. This research is part of my work on identity and the number of the former so far exceeds the latter that there is no contest.

What concerns me at present is the freedom with which gentiles say what they will about J people and are irate when called on it. Odd, since they, excepting CCNL, on this thread, don't allow themselves this privelege when it comes to any other "demographic." Further, no matter who tries to explain the faulty reasoning behind demographics, statistics, etc., in terms of who draws them, who is included, excluded, no one seems to understand. Same goes for "examples."

Now, here I am, exricating myself from a decision-making process that began with a chronic antisemitic "joke," told in NYC and environs for at least twenty years. We guessed the receiver didn't understand the demographic nature of the joke; i.e., since it was said to him in front of others, our thinking was that it was a public utterance directed at a concrete entity. (I mean no offense, here. It's just that one runs out of ways to put things.)

So, it is not merely a question of "who did and who didn't." It's also a question of who does, ranging from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards who murdered Ismael in front of my child face to the milder sort of stereotypers who will not reflect.

We still haven't established who "the Jews" are btw. The same reasoning that displaces us, displaces, by extention, and will displace millions of others. We ar simply the sui generis locus classicus, the reified contradiction of identity.

Farnaz, Barely Awake

Could we now have some self-mocking atheist humor please?

I look forward to it very much.

FARNAZ, sorry, I think I misunderstood. Jews, no doubt, remain models par excellence, when it comes to remaining noble and non-violent as persecuted minorities and contributing the most when percentages are calculated of the Jewish population.

Be happy, be safe and be at peace!

FARNAZ, you work yourself into a real trap if you classify people into black and white based only on the criteria: those who did the Jews and those who didn't do the Jews.

On occasion we have to stop laughing and analyze the current dangers of the world. Islam of course is one such danger that needs analysis. The analysis is summarized in that famous quote,

Until the koran is deflawed, all mosques are "febrezed" and all Shiites and Sunnis are pacified, no one is safe!!!!"

A German translation from altavista.com:

Bis das koran deflawed, sind alle Moscheen " febrezed" und alle Shiites und Sunnite werden beruhigt, keine ist sicher!!!

Other notes,

The USA ranks fourth in world oil production, 11 th in proven oil reserves, and first in oil use.
(CIA World Fact book)

Ronald Reagan chose to fight the terrorism and aggression of the Communists wherever, whenever and by any means. This included helping Iraq defeat Iran and Afghanistan defeat the USSR. The strategy worked.

Non-German Anon,

FARNAZ, funny you should mention China the land of a billion atheists on this atheist thread. Humor?

So many starving people in the countryside may preclude humor, don't know. It never did with us J people.

Totalitarianism doesn't make for humor, though, I would agree. China, like all of us, not atheistic, since it idolizes. I include atheists and "believers" in this. In a sense, there are no atheists.

I'm scaring myself, Non-German Anon. Must go.

Best,
Farnaz

Which explains a lot, doesn't it, Arminius? Ignoring what they were up to in Pakistan while they were building Madrassahs, for instance?

If you can put the pieces of this question together, you will win whatever prize I can give you (admittedly, not a great motivator, but I'm doing my best):

Which country is the richest in oil? And....?

FARNAZ, funny you should mention China the land of a billion atheists on this atheist thread. Humor?

FARNAZ, funny you should mention China the land of a billion atheists.

Farnaz,

You: BTW, which nation is the largest oil producer in the world?

In 2003, it was Saudi Arabia, of course, followed by America (suprise! How the hell did we manage that?), then closely by Russia (no suprise).

Final Thoughts: Gassed Iranian humor

Saddam was supported in the war by the United States of America and almost every nation in the Security Council.

Non-German Anon,

I remain unaware of where you get your information from, but your sources are limited. There are volumes of letters by German parents and responses (boiler plate) by German bureaucrats
reassuring parents as to the wisdom of their decisions to "sacrifice" their finer principles.

This is no secret. Any recent textbook history includes this strange phenomenon. This is not to say that all German parents proceeded in this way, of course.

Goodnight,
Farnaz

Now we have Iraq. Humor.

100,000 Iranians gassed in last Iraq-Iran War. Neither Iraqis nor dead Iranians the subject of humor, since Saddam was US friend in the midst of said gassing. Oil speaks louder than lives for the New York Times, WaPo, etc.

Now, it speaks deafeningly. But most don't hear. No connections made yet by American consumers at gas stations. One of the world's leading oil producers out of the picture. GET it? China a minor problem.

Windfall profits must continue for oil companies, nevertheless, as must subsidies (our taxes), of said internationally incorporated entities. If there were a hell, British Petroleum would go first, followed rapidly by Exxon, etc.

On BP, and its several names, see Wikepedia. It's crimes within the US are interesting to read about.

BTW, which nation is the largest oil producer in the world?

FARNAZ: ...for the crippled children, often brought by their parents for elimination, right not to fear. A handful of leading murderers were prosecuted.

June 22, 2008 12:37 AM

-------------------------

You are probably unaware that handicapped children were identified by the Nazi regime, don't forget it is not impossible since all children attend school, and parents were asked to hand them over without any questions asked. The parents never heard from their children again and never knew what happened. It is not at all like you make it sound. Men and women had no right to ask the Nazis any question. You should know better than to think that Nazis told the parents what was to happen to the children.

Time to leave this discussion to those who consider this a good topic for humor.

FARNAZ, think Willy Brandt my father's hero, also mine.

There is no question about the suffering of the Russian Orthodox, as well as Russian minorities. That doesn't change the fact of their leaving Jews for Germans to burn, hang, etc. Russian Jews were not Russian as far as the Russians were concerned. MOre slavic irony, since the German plans for the Poles included the Russian Orthodox, the Ukrainians, etc. I'm not even going to deal with the Ukrainian Catholic murderers.

The Russians won the war against Germany, leveled Berlin to the ground with tanks. It was the Russians that the German military had feared all along, not the Americans, not the Brits, and they feared rightly. Rape, etc., followed. The Germans never feared reprisals for their slaughter of us J people, from anyone, rightly so, for the Roma, rightly so, for the crippled children, often brought by their parents for elimination, right not to fear. A handful of leading murderers were prosecuted.

For more "humor" one may also extend the discussion to the adventures of the Turkish Muslim Ottoman Empire...

It depends on how far back in history one wants to go to add more spice to the "humor."

Non-German Anon,

Not my idea of humor. Even some Ausrtians now laugh at the "Anschluss" and the conquest that didn't happen. Not so much the Poles, who were busy passing antisemitic laws while Germans massed at their borders. Hungarian resistance?

The irony re the Hungarian and Polish racists is that they were next on the list of the to-be-enslaved-then-slaughtered. Millions of Polish Catholics died.

The French national resistence is a joke to everyone but most of the French themselves. THE WARSAW GHETTO UPRISING OUTLASTED THE FRENCH NATIONAL DEFENSE. The French were busy rounding up Jews before the Germans said anything about it. On this, the Germans and the "Jews" agree.

That said, there was a viable French post-occupation resistance, neither to be glorified nor despised. The Polish resistance forgot that Jews were Polish, more often than not, and the Polish Catholics still do not consider Polish Jews to be Polish. Unsruprisingly, antisemitism continues there apace, as it does everywhere including here.

There was a viable German resistance, as well, some spectacular indviduals, mostly but not all Communists. A handful of individuals scattered among several continents cannot salvation make. REMEMBER: IT WAS A WORLD WAR.

It has been interesting for me to speak to contemporary German students. Continually, they ask the question, "Why us?" Why not the White Russians for instance? The Poles? The French?

It is of the utmost importance for them to know that it was not merely them. All of the countries I've named thus far had and have bloody hands.

On German leadership in resolving "the Jewish Problem" the Gypsy problem, the crippled children problem, etc., Adorno, Horkheimer are a good beginning.

To Jihadist whose mother is Dutch and father is native Indonesian Muslim it might be worthwhile to ask how the Dutch caught the native Indonesians by surprise.

The Native American Red Indians and Aboriginals of Australia were caught by surprise too. Only it happened a long time before WW II.

The Portuguese, the Spaniards, the Dutch, the French, the British... caught their colonies by surprise too but in a different kind of way.

Is this discussion turning into a history lesson?

Non-German Anonymous:

War is never pretty, nor funny. But sometimes humor can be found, see this link of cartoons by Bill Mauldin done on the front in WWII:

http://www.stripes.com/02/nov02/mauldin/

To Jihadist on WW II from a Dutch perspective since her mother is Dutch with Jewish and Christian background ---

World War II and The Netherlands

The beginning of WW II in Holland occurred on May 10, 1940...

Holland officially surrendered on May 15, just five days after the first German planes had appeared...

Although a sound Dutch resistance movement formed, only a small minority of the country's substantial Jewish population survived the war.

================================

Germany had prepared carefully for the war and caught other nations by surprise by invading them without a war declaration.

Allied troops were far away from home. Supplying them with the best uniforms was probably not the first priority.

The blue eyes and blond hair types used for Hollywood movies and the clear Swastika symbol on their uniforms to emphasize Hitler's Nazi Aryan theory.

Discussion of WW II anyone's idea of humor?

Farnaz:

The Eastern Front - Germany vs the Soviet Union - in WWII defies description from any perspective. The sheer scale of it was mind boggling. The brutality, on both sides, was unspeakable. Sherman's famous expression 'War is hell' doesn't even come close to describing it.

Can't resist. German troops. Not Hollywoodized, but photographed by the Actors, themselves.
SEE IT FIRST, HERE.

J Troops after fall of Salo, round up 5,000 mostly women and children Italian Catholics, lock them in a building and burn them to death.

This practice was perfected in various parts of the USSR, where the Russian Orthodox left THE Russian Jews to be slaughtered by Germans, part of the "scorched earth policy."

Some photographs remain of the burning Jews. Many more remain of Jews put to death in other ways, while these same troops were taking time out for recreation.

JUST A SMATTERING OF GERMAN REGULAR ARMY ACTIVITIES.

Thanks, Farnaz.
That gives me a glimmering of understanding already. I will look forward to more.

Jihadist,

WAY OFF TOPIC

Can't resist - a history lesson. This is from the American perspective in WWII.

J: German troops have better designed uniforms. Their enemies' uniform look like janitor's or gardener's rejects.
A: Quite true. This was commented on many times by US troops, notably by Easy Company of the 101st Airborne. See "Band of Brothers". Great book.

J: German troops are always blonde and blue eyed,
A: At Normandy, fully 1/3 of the Wehrmacht were from Eastern Europe, or even further afield. They actually had serious language difficulties. We did not.

J: German troops are always called Krauts.... and Jerrys... Their enemies are all called Joe, talk of mom and apple pie
A: True. Krauts and Jerries for the Germans. For the Dogfaces (American), Joe and Willie (see Bill Mauldin). American soldiers were very sentimental and religious. The Brits were not. I don't know about the Germans.

J: German troops, when not in battle, are lecherous, drunken louts in bars and taverns of the occupied countries.
A: All troops of every country were. One of the first things Allied troops learned on D-Day was where to find the booze in a French house.

J: German troops never won a single battle and their enemies all battles and the war too.
A: Until winter of 1941, the Germans won everything. As for the Americans, the one and only time they were soundly defeated by the Germans was at Kasserine Pass, N Africa, 1943. After that, a lot of stalemates and draws, but the Americans kept pushing them back. The best German units fought like cornered wolves. So did we at Bastogne.

Regards,

Arminius

Jihadist writes:

So, I have no idea how German troops occupied Poland. And Austria. And Belgium. And Hungary. And half of France, and.......
-----------
Neither have the nationals of those country, who claim they put up a heroic resistance. Perhaps you should speak to them. A lot of the Polish Catholics were slaughtered, however, before they could have children, which might make that enterprise difficult.
-----------

As Pseudo states, Yiddish uses "schmuck" in different ways. I"ll stop there.

Hi Pam,

All of your questions are excellent. As far as I'm concerned, and I'm far from alone in this, the beginning of understanding sui generis Jewishness (and it is sui generis) is to understand that all identity, including yours, all ways of labeling the self are fabrications, reifications, as Another Anonymous remarked.

How they came to be and why some remain entrenched are socioeconomic matters. I'm not trying to high hat it here; there just don't seem to be simpler terms that will not reduce what I'm saying to distortion.

Answering your question will take me some time. You are far from alone in your confusion; it is the confusion that has been visited upon us, as well. The occulting of Jewish identity begins in the NT and proceeds from there gathering threads with the Romans, Constantine, the conversion to Catholicism, the HOly Roman Empire, the formation of nation states, the medieval period/medievalism/commercialism, etc., etc.

Always in gentile definition, Judaism, Jews, and Jewishness had a material (i.e., physical base) that distinguished it from Catholicism, Christianity. So that when European and American apologists seek to begin the racialising of Jews in the nineteenth century, they are not proceeding in good faith.

The mix, in the minds of gentiles, of genes, transnationalism, and Jewish "intent," or particularity is, in part, what gives us our contradictory sui generis status and makes us so interesting for anyone interested in raciialism. We are the communists and the captialists, for example.

Btw., I don't mean to suggest that you are a bigot, by any means. As you no doubt saw, you were not alone in your confusion. Now, the fact that you are asking questions makes me think of you as a person of good will.

I have just started to answer you with this hasty response, and I will try, if you're interested, to post more within the next couple of days.

Ruth was the first "convert."

Best,
Farnaz

Best,
Farnaz

Jacoby : "I did go to see "The Love Guru," in the interest of research, and the movie was every bit as boring and childish as I expected anything starring Mike Myers to be."

So, the movie may be just for schmucks made by a schmuck. The meaning of "schmuck" as in Yiddish, not German.

All these kevetching on German words and meanings - "halt" or "stop" or "attention". Oh, so why not on German troops as characterised and potrayed in Hollywood movies:

- German troops have better designed uniforms. Their enemies' uniform look like janitor's or gardener's rejects.

- German troops always look clean and fresh and groomed no matter what. Their enemies always look forever in dirty scruffy uniforms, are unshaven and unbathed.

- German troops are always blonde and blue eyed, and all wear little crosses arround the neck for gallantry and bravery, presumably persnonally given by the Fuhrer. Their enemies are multi-ethnic platoons and barely even have ranks sewed on uniforms.

- German troops are always called Krauts in spite of not looking like cabbages, and Jerrys in spite of not being named such by their mothers. Their enemies are all called Joe, talk of mom and apple pie, or get dejected over "dear John" letters.

- German troops are always well-equipped, their goose-stepping are technically perfect. Their enemies never march, only ambled through the streets and countryside.

- German troops are always are steely and cold when preparing for, marching to, and in battle. The enemies seem to float around as if they are going to a barn dance or a picnic.

- German troops, when not in battle, are lecherous, drunken louts in bars and taverns of the occupied countries. Their enemies never chill out in a local tavern, bar or bistro, are never drunk, never fool around with the local girls, but are genuinely in love with them.

- German troops always attack their enemies coldly and always leave behind their dead. Their enemies are extremely valiant in putting themself in incoming bombs and missiles to save their brothers in arms, or to throw back bombs at thier enemy.

- German troops' officers always have fine food and wine when dining in a castle, chateau, mansion surrounded by fine arts and furniture. Their enemies' officers always eat mystery food from their helmets with their men, and always at night just before being fired upon by German troops.

- German troops never won a single battle and their enemies all battles and the war too.

So, I have no idea how German troops occupied Poland. And Austria. And Belgium. And Hungary. And half of France, and.......

Cheers

"J"

Hi, Pam,

If Farnaz is not here, I, a mere Christian, will try to answer your question as to Jewishness. As I understand it, if you have converted to Judaism, or have a Jewish mother, you are Jewish. No questions asked.

Farnaz, or others, feel free to correct me.

Arminius

Farnaz,
I'm addressing you with some trepidation (once bitten, twice shy), having so thoroughly - and I assure you, unintentionally - offended you earlier on the thread. However, my curiosity compels me to do so.

Please help me to understand your viewpoint - I don't know how else to learn.

If you disagree that there is any genetic/familial relationship that is shared by Jews and leads back to the Judea of Biblical times, then is it only the religion that makes one Jewish? And if this is the case, how are you both a Jew and an atheist? I ask this in the utmost sincerity.

Susan,

As I am sure you are aware, the quotation is this:

"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."
-- H L Mencken

I will take you at your word and skip that movie.

Arminius, a believer

I did go to see "The Love Guru," in the interest of research, and the movie was every bit as boring and childish as I expected anything starring Mike Myers to be. My guess is that this movie will be a commercial as well as a critical failure. (Although I could be wrong, on the premise that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.) Nevertheless, it's ridiculous that anyone, of any faith, is taking this movie seriously--either as a movie or as a commentary on Hinduism.

FARNAZ:

"What kind of work do you do?"

I write things that run in out of the way places.
But here I just try to put smiles on faces.

There's persistent rumor
That we lack good humor

That i'd like to fix
By adding a joke sometimes to the mix.

TTWS:

Please don't disappear. Can you clarify your position? What is your voice on this forum? Could you say what your handle is meant to signify?

Farnaz

To ANONOMOUS

Somehow your name got on my post. It wasn't intentional and I don't know how it got there. Sorry about that. Sometimes some of these forums operates in crazy ways.

Hi Pseudo,

Not as much fun as one would like, I think, the topic notwithstanding!

What kind of work do you do?

Farnaz

FARNAZ:

Ah Pseudo, so you are a landsperson. Askenazic, I presume?

No my friend. Just a dweller in an American melting pot city who loves languages, rich cultures, rich traditions, and the people therefrom.

Pseudo,

Wie gehts? Where have you been?

Alas Too much work, wo is me
Alack of spare time, it is don't you see

Anything fun doin' in here lately?

On occasion we have to stop laughing and analyze the current dangers of the world. Islam of course is one such danger that needs analysis. The analysis is summarized in that famous quote,

Until the koran is deflawed, all mosques are "febrezed" and all Shiites and Sunnis are pacified, no one is safe!!!!"

A German translation from altavista.com:

Bis das koran deflawed, sind alle Moscheen " febrezed" und alle Shiites und Sunnite werden beruhigt, keine ist sicher!!!

Dear Anonymous -

You're an idiot.

In which way did I use "echt" as a swear word? Here's what I wrote:

"MR MARK:
Anonymous is the "echt" type of a man,
Who belongs to that strange Christian clan,"

Substitute the English dictionary definition of echt and you get this:

"Anonymous is the "true/genuine" type of a man,
Who belongs to that strange Christian clan,"

My poem doesn't make sense unless you know that "echt" means true or genuine, ie: that he's a REAL Christian, and real in the most-pejorative sense of the word.

Typical religionist, finding offense where none exists.

Ah Pseudo, so you are a landsperson. Askenazic, I presume?

Pseudo,

Wie gehts? Where have you been?

Farnaz

Anonymous -

The word "echt" happens to be found in the English dictionary. It's a commonly used word in NYC where I spent a good many years, and where one hears Yiddish on the streets. "He's an echt New Yorker" as they say.

One doesn't need to speak German to have encountered the word in common usage, any more than one needs to be German to know what a wurst is, or where their kids are if they're in kindergarten, or what product fills a bottle labeled "bier."

Perhaps you need to get out more...get away from the heartland and visit some place interesting, like NYC.

Non German Anonymous:

"If you heard the word thousands of times as you describe it, it must be in your fantasy, for I happen to know how it is used in Germany by Germans."

The usage in your school may be as you say.
But from Yiddish it comes to us out this way.
Never once have I heard it as you have described.
Therefore my usage will not be proscribed.

FARNAZ, this conversation is suddenly turning weird. I wish to say goodbye before it gets any weirder.

NGA,

The word is used in Germany as the dictionaris show. I have been in Germany and heard it used there in that way.

You might want to calm it down a bit. This is only virtual reality.

Farnaz

Farnaz:

NGO,

You are mistaken, and Pseudo is correct. One of the meanings of "schmuck" is jewelry, although what this has to do with anything I don't know.

See any German-English dictionary.

http://www.iee.et.tu-dresden.de/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/wernerr/search.sh

June 21, 2008 11:32 AM

--------------

FARNAZ, the word is used in the way I mentioned in the Germany I happen to know. Where it is used in the way you and Pseudo know I have no way of knowing and I couldn't care less to know.

NGO,

You are mistaken, and Pseudo is correct. One of the meanings of "schmuck" is jewelry, although what this has to do with anything I don't know.

See any German-English dictionary.

http://www.iee.et.tu-dresden.de/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/wernerr/search.sh

TTWS anon,

You are the most extraordinary blogger. Could you say something about yourself?

Farnaz

Pseudo:

Anon:

"Schmuck in German commonly means jewelery or adornment (used also with other meanings in other contexts)."

Of the thousands of times I have heard the term, I have always heard it used to describe a character flaw of being mean spirited and unnecessarily harmful others. The reference being an improperly used anatomical "adornment". Not so complementary as "jewelry", by any means.

June 21, 2008 11:07 AM
----------------------

Pseudo, you should look up the dictionary before posting such rubbish. I happen to have learned German at a German University. If you heard the word thousands of times as you describe it, it must be in your fantasy, for I happen to know how it is used in Germany by Germans.

For Zion's Sake I Will Not Be Silent

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crFpZ_mkQ0Q

IN REPLY TO (IRT)
SUSAN JACOBY
“FREEDOM OF SPEECH”
IRT:
“… the First Amendment means exactly what it says--that Congress shall make no law "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press."

ANS:
No, the First Amendment, “de facto,” means what the oligarchical Supreme Court says what the First Amendment means, irrespective of the Founding Fathers and the Constitution.

Note that “freedom” does not mean a license to destroy people’s reputations by slandering them, although the Court even has obscured that aspect of speech. Even the advertisement of cigarettes has been severely restricted if not all together banned. Moreover, the oligarchical Court has intruded on the freedom of political speech.

Consequently, the Court, though banning cigarette advertising, has made it a Constitutional right to be sexually and immorally explicit and calls this explicitness a "free speech" issue.

Thus writes Justice Stevens, “that the fact that the governing majority in a State has traditionally viewed a particular practice as immoral is not a sufficient reason for upholding a law prohibiting the practice,” ante, at 17.

What has the Court done? Justice Scalia replies, “State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision [Lawrence v. Texas, because it rejects Bowers].

Scalia: “This effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation. If, as the Court asserts, the promotion of majoritarian sexual morality is not even a legitimate state interest, none of the above-mentioned laws can survive rational-basis review." Tradition moral values are not even a legitimate State interest, what profound priggery.

Moreover, the freedom of "religion clause" in the Constitution has been incongruously vitiated in the Public Square by this rapscallion Court.

Ironically, Nazis were allowed to march in the streets and proclaim the freedom of their religion, Nazism.

To the contrary, the “Ten Commandments,” the fundamental basis for our moral comport, are banned from the Public Square, including the banning of the Crèche, a symbol of a national and world holiday celebrated by governments all over the world.

What was the Court's reasoning? They thought the Commandments might CORRUPT a young child’s mind and Christmas infringed on the rights of the ten percent of the population called atheists.

With disdainful and sardonic lordliness, the high handedness of the Court banned the Ten Commandments from the Public Square though they decorate the doors of the Court's entrance and embellish the house of the Court's East pediment.

Gays can march on the street in gay parades under the protection of free speech in spite of their debaucherous behavior, but woe to you who display a Crucifix or a T-shirt displaying the word "Jesus" in a Public School, you are infringing on an atheist's rights.

Will Arlington National Cemetery, lined with crosses of our brave men who have died in battle be the next victim of the Court's sardonic lunacy?

Indecency is becoming vogue, and moral decency is taking a back seat as the Court has done by their transmogrification of the inalienable right of the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion.

But this imperial instance of the aggressive extension of authority of the Court is not inordinate for a Court that has violated the Right to Life, and redefined political speech, eminent domain, human nature, and is on the precipice of redefining Marriage.

Anon:

"Schmuck in German commonly means jewelery or adornment (used also with other meanings in other contexts)."

Of the thousands of times I have heard the term, I have always heard it used to describe a character flaw of being mean spirited and unnecessarily harmful others. The reference being an improperly used anatomical "adornment". Not so complementary as "jewelry", by any means.

Non-German Anonymous:

NGA: Vienna is in Austria.

I know that Vienna is in Austria. (I taught there on a Fulbright.) However, Hitler was born in Braunau Am Inn and did not migrate to Vienna until he was a young man.

NGO: You happen to know Germans and Austrians who live in the US. I happen to have known/know who live in Germany. Germans who emigrated immediately after WW II or heard about Nazi Germany from the outside probably still live in shame. Germans living in Germany have confronted their past head on and have moved on.

Farnaz: I know German/Austrian Christians living in the US and abroad. They (the Germans far, far more than the Austrians) have confronted their past to a point. Many nazis continued in various official governmental and professional positions post WWII. Many Germans/Austrians are not only antisemitic but racist in general. Talk to the Turks, Indians, Pakistanis.

NGA: Gerry should be able to fill in details of German Jew contribution to German culture - if he chooses to.

Farnaz: Thanks, but I don't need anyone to "fill me in." German Jewish intellectual life is among my areas of study.

NGO: In the New Testament is an incident of Jesus giving sight to a man born blind. The Jews in His day wanted to know if the man was blind for his own sins or the sins of his ancestors in accordance with Jewish belief.
----
This was neither the belief among Pharisees nor Sadducees. It is currently held that the NT writers confused the two, since nothing in the NT is consistent with contemporaneous Parisee views. Your reference, however, is not consistent with Sadducee views, either.

Christianity has held The Jews responsible for the death of Christ for two thousand years, a good "example" of collective guilt. WE are all doomed to go to hell forever if we do not convert--collective guilt.

NGO: On Israeli psychologists working with children of nazis, see Gita Sereny.

Thanks for the kind words about my chromosomal, example, and demographic self. I know you are sincere.

Best.
Farnaz

FARNAZ, since our discussion has gone way off topic I wish to stop here.

Best,

Non-German Anonymous

FARNAZ, I'd like to see a world you long for too. I would like you to feel safe and accepted in the US. You ARE equal to everyone else. Don't let anyone pull the XYZ Chromosome story on you. There is far too little difference at the genetic level. The differences lie at the level of our thoughts and conditioning, the stories people tell themselves about their "superiority."

Take care...and remember to ignore the stories people tell you. They are free to tell stories, but you don't have to buy them.

Best,

Non-German Anonymous

Correction

FARNAZ: I know not of but am acquainted with both Germans and Austrians who would gladly have chosen different ancestry.

NGA: You happen to know Germans and Austrians who live in the US. I happen to have known/know who live in Germany. Germans who emigrated immediately after WW II or heard about Nazi Germany from the outside probably still live in shame. Germans living in Germany have confronted their past head on and have moved on. WW II ended sixty three years ago. Germans who are in their late sixties and seventies were children when WW II ended. Those who are younger than sixty three were born after the end of WW II.

Best,

Non-German Anonymous

Farnaz: The contributions of German Jews to what could have been German culture is incalculable. Unfortunately, the German Christians (Protestants and Catholics) opted for Kultur.

NGA: Gerry should be able to fill in details of German Jew contribution to German culture - if he chooses to. He may not want to because this thread is about humor. A discussion about Jews in Germany is not a topic that fits the bill.

As a non-German I only know that Germans regret having lost some of the best German Jew brains (especially musicians and scientists) to the US after Hitler started to exercise his power against them.

FARNAZ: Hitler born in Austria, traveled to Vienna, then the antisemitic capitol of the world.

NGA: Vienna is in Austria.

FARNAZ: In this sickening world, notwithstanding the worst racism imaginable, their contributions to the fields of science, philosophy, psychology, literature, nascent anthropology, etc., were and are mind-boggling.

NGA: The contribution of Jews to all areas is a well known fact all over the world.

FARNAZ: I know not of but am acquainted with both Germans and Austrians who would gladly have chosen different ancestry.

NGA: You happen to know Germans and Austrians who live in Germany. I happen to have known/know who live in Germany.

FARNAZ: Jews are not Christians, and we do not hold even the children of nazis guilty of the sins of their parents.

NGA: In the New Testament is an incident of Jesus giving sight to a man born blind. The Jews in His day wanted to know if the man was blind for his own sins or the sins of his ancestors in accordance with Jewish belief.

In Christianity there is no belief about sins being passed on to the next generation. Christians believe Jesus died for all sinners and forgiveness of sins is free, one only has to repent of sins and ask for forgiveness.

FARNAZ: Israelis psychologists worked with the children of the most loathsome subhuman nazis to rid them of any sense of responsibility for the doings of their parents.

NGA: I'm not aware of such work. I'm not sure why German psychologists would not work with German children to help them.

Germans have worked consistently towards de-nazification. It is even claimed that they are exemplary in that regard, striving to keep the memory alive in order not to repeat the mistake.

I have read that some Jewish children are traumatized by what their parents or grandparents went through although they were born after the end of WW II. It is not clear whether they are traumatized by hearing about it from their parents or reading about the Holocaust.

FARNAZ: As for "German Jews" choosing to move to Germany, I know of none.

NGA: I posted some material about Jewish immigration to Germany.

(Comment FARNAZ June 21, 2008 8:15 AM )

Non-German Anon:

If you're referring to Jews from the former Soviet Block, former Yugoslavia, I may be following you.

What the other "Eastern European" are I would like to know.

Would like source.

Until he died, very recently, Simon Wiesenthals tiny office was protected by a TANK.
------------
Will also reference contemporary German/Austrian antisemitism, Rumanian, Latvian, Lithuanian, etc., if you are interested.

I'd love a world in which we all respected each other and all was well. I would give my very life to see it. It hasn't happened yet.

Best,
Farnaz

Hi Arminius,

Thanks for the kind words. I think M. Anonymous is patient and kind.

I haven't seen enough of Gerry's posts to judge. It's just that I think that the way some atheists speak to patient and kind people like you is unfortunate.

Mostly, they seem to leave Thomas Baum, whom I deeply respect, alone.

Farnaz

To FARNAZ ---

From a report in Nov 2005

...the number of Jews moving to Germany has been going up dramatically, along with accompanying efforts to help them recover a sense of Jewish identity....

It is remarkable. In the country which systematically tried to exterminate all Jews, not only is Jewish music flourishing; so is the practice of Judaism.

In the last 15 years, the number of Jews in Germany has gone from 28,000 to well over 200,000. It's all part of the country's policy to rebuild Jewish communities destroyed by the Nazis. Attracted by generous social services, many came from Eastern Europe, especially the former Soviet Union...

I think that it's objectively not difficult to be a Jew in the modern Germany.

And the renaissance of Jewish life isn't just for the older generation. At this American-run Jewish school in Berlin, enrollment has surged 400 percent -- every year...

Farnaz:

Of the non-believers, E Favorite - and you, I think you are a non-believer - are patient and kind. Mr Mark and Chris are (usually) polite and patient. I think there are others.

Arminius

The land before Hitler came into power was the land of "Dichter und Denker" (German for poets and thinkers), theologians, musicians and scientists. There were German Jews among them. There is a Germany after WW II in which Jews feel safe. A few German Jews are choosing to return to the land whose history and culture they share in the happy times before Hitler.

The contributions of German Jews to what could have been German culture is incalculable. Unfortunately, the German Christians (Protestants and Catholics) opted for Kultur. As for HItler, he was born in Austria, traveled to Vienna, then the antisemitic capitol of the world.

He was not a natural phenomenon, like a Tsunami. He was nutured educated in a virulently antisemitic context in which Jews had just recently been granted full civil rights. In this sickening world, notwithstanding the worst racism imaginable, their contributions to the fields of science, philosophy, psychology, literature, nascent anthropology, etc., were and are mind-boggling. I know not of but am acquainted with both Germans and Austrians who would gladly have chosen different ancestry.

Jews are not Christians, and we do not hold even the children of nazis guilty of the sins of their parents. Israelis psychologists worked with the children of the most loathsome subhuman nazis to rid them of any sense of responsibility for the doings of their parents. The testimony of these children is extraordinary.

As for "German Jews" choosing to move to Germany, I know of none.

PS. Y C+2. Thanks to you, I'm rereading Malloy.

Gerry,

BRIEFLY: The PSC never considered you a bigot. The PSC abominates sterotyping, bigotry, racialism, whether from atheists or "believers."

Moses BOS

Hello Anonymous,
(the non-German non-Muslim one)

What a relief is must be for some not to be both German and Muslim. Or either German or Muslim.

"J"

June 21, 2008 2:58 AM

******************

Hello Jihadist!

There was a Germany before Hitler came into power and there is a Germany after WW II.

The land before Hitler came into power was the land of "Dichter und Denker" (German for poets and thinkers), theologians, musicians and scientists. There were German Jews among them. There is a Germany after WW II in which Jews feel safe. A few German Jews are choosing to return to the land whose history and culture they share in the happy times before Hitler.

I'm not a German so I couldn't know if I ought to feel a sense of relief that I'm not. I don't know a single German who is ashamed to be German although all of them are deeply ashamed of the Nazi past in which they played no part.

Gerry, A Closer Look, Tim,

Y C+2 & Co, PSC loves atheists. Some are especially dear to Us. If Freud hadn't screwed himself with Dora and a couple of other matters, notably women, We would have been more fond of him pre mortem.

Our dissatisfaction with certain atheists concerns the incivility and bigotry that makes them indistinguishable from many believers. You are no longer among those atheists.
------
Tim, My Son,

We are impressed. Foucault understood Beckettt in the sense that Sam understood himself. Sam was a prophet, so his self-knowledge was necessarily limited. It surprises none of Us that your apprehension of him surpasses his pre-mortem own, as well as Foucault's. (Btw. Sam says hi. Ditto, J. Christ M+1, Moses BOS). It matters who is speaking.

Very truly yours,

Yahweh cream two sugars & co., PSC

DITLD:

"Of the people who post here frequently who identify themselves as Christians, only Arminius and Thomas Baum seem to have a patient and kind attitude towards atheists."

Who among the atheists demonstrate this attitude toward believers?

Jihadist asks:

"And what is this with the ongoing German language kampf, crusade, jihad with another poster?"

"kampf, crusade, jihad"

Kampf and Jihad have the same meaning.

To improve your understanding of language (and history):

CRUSADE
Function: noun
Etymology: derived from early French croisade and Spanish cruzada, both meaning literally "an expedition of persons marked with or bearing the sign of the cross" and both derived from Latin cruc-, crux "cross" --related to CROSS
1 capitalized : any of the military expeditions made by Christian countries in the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries to recover the Holy Land from the Muslims
2 : a campaign to get things changed for the better

Jihadist:

And what is this with the ongoing German language kampf, crusade, jihad with another poster?

"J"

June 21, 2008 2:58 AM

Ask Mr Mark, he started it by inserting the word 'echt' in his poem and schimpfing me with "Echt" you!

Hello Anonymous,
(the non-German non-Muslim one)

What a relief is must be for some not to be both German and Muslim. Or either German or Muslim.

Love your Mein Kampf = My Jihad

Linguistically correct. But you would not like the Mein Kampf = My Jihad of the "Islamofascists" or "Islamonazis".

As for "schimpfed", what in the world is that word? Is it akin to the Yiddish "schmuck"?

And what is this with the ongoing German language kampf, crusade, jihad with another poster?

Anschlag! Schtop!

Cheers and out.

"J"

June 21, 2008 2:58 AM

**************

Hello Jihadist,

First to the German language clarification, particularly important since I'm not German.

"schimpfed" is the past tense of the verb "schimpfen," meaning badmouth/berate/scold...

Schmuck in German commonly means jewelery or adornment (used also with other meanings in other contexts).

schmücken is a verb and means among others decorate/grace/adorn...

Schtop is NOT a German word, simply how a German would say stop. Since I'm not a German I say Schtop when I speak German and stop when I speak English. The word is spelled the same as in English.

I'm a stranger to Jiddish, so I can't tell you what it means in that language.

End of German lesson by a non-German.

You: But you would not like the Mein Kampf = My Jihad of the "Islamofascists" or "Islamonazis".

Mein Kampf = My Jihad of the Islamofascists or Islamonazis is generally not liked. It is not good for health. Even the Surgeon General has warned against it.

Best,

Non-Muslim, non-German

Hello Daniel in the Lion's Den,

I have no idea what kind of "headway" I'm making here or intended of making any. Just sharing some Muslim jokes.

Thanks for sharing that "wonderful, marvelous" joke. :)

**************************************************

Hello Arminius,

Arguing over and fighting to the death over food is not worth it except when we are both starving and have nothing to eat, no?

I found some duck and wild rice recipes. Not your though. But something to try over the weekend.

Thanks for that Russian "lost in translation".

One Asian classic is, "Ladies have fits upstairs". It is a explanatory sign of dressmaker shop.

**************************************************

Hello Anonymous,
(the non-German non-Muslim one)

What a relief is must be for some not to be both German and Muslim. Or either German or Muslim.

Love your Mein Kampf = My Jihad

Linguistically correct. But you would not like the Mein Kampf = My Jihad of the "Islamofascists" or "Islamonazis".

As for "schimpfed", what in the world is that word? Is it akin to the Yiddish "schmuck"?

And what is this with the ongoing German language kampf, crusade, jihad with another poster?

Anschlag! Schtop!

Cheers and out.

"J"

Mr Mark:

Anon -

That's the best you can do? The blog equivalent of stamping your feet and turning red in the face?

Pathetic.

BTW - that Anonymous "falsch" comment wasn't mine.

Further BTW - I speak German, so no need to mention the provenance of the words echt and falsch. But thanks for informing everybody else on the blog, the majority of whom already knew whence originated the words.

June 20, 2008 1:49 PM

*****************

Mr Mark, for someone who speaks German you should have known better than to take offense at being "schimpfed" with "Falsch you! in return for your "Echt you!"

Signed

Non-German

Mr Mark:

Anon -

That's the best you can do? The blog equivalent of stamping your feet and turning red in the face?

Pathetic.

BTW - that Anonymous "falsch" comment wasn't mine.

Further BTW - I speak German, so no need to mention the provenance of the words echt and falsch. But thanks for informing everybody else on the blog, the majority of whom already knew whence originated the words.

June 20, 2008 1:49 PM

*****************

Mr Mark, for someone who speaks German you should have known better than to use "Echt you!" as a Schimpfwort! (PS for non-Germans, Schimpfwort = swearword)

Signed

Non-German

Mr Mark:

Anon -

That's the best you can do? The blog equivalent of stamping your feet and turning red in the face?

Pathetic.

BTW - that Anonymous "falsch" comment wasn't mine.

Further BTW - I speak German, so no need to mention the provenance of the words echt and falsch. But thanks for informing everybody else on the blog, the majority of whom already knew whence originated the words.

June 20, 2008 1:49 PM

*******************************

Mr Mark, this is an international forum based in the US of A. Explaining a German word in English is an act of Anonymous kindness to people who don't understand German. There is no reason why someone who doesn't know German should even guess the word "echt" is German and for those not familiar with these languages is not one of them, e.g. French, Italian, Spanish or Chinese (written in the English alphabet).

As to stamping my feet and turning red in the face, I did that reading your responses which had me roaring with laughter.

Mr Mark:

Jihadist writes:

In German

Echt = real

Falsch = false

Achtung = stop?"

Actaually:

Achtung = attention.

Stop = anschlag

Halt = halt

Movie trivia - in "The Longest Day," a German soldier tries to stop a train manned by German soldiers from continuing down the tracks (where a bomb is about to detonate) by shouting "STOP!" in clear English. Throughout the movie, all of the various nationals speak their native tongue and are subtitled into English. He probably should have said "Halt!"

June 20, 2008 6:46 PM

**************************

Achtung Jihadist!

Achtung as attention is merely one of its many meanings.

Achtung, also = respect/caution/beware...

Re Stop = Anschlag

Anschlag meaning stop is not a very common usage.

Stop = Halt is everyday usage (halt has other meanings too)

Anschlag also = attack, attempt, strokes on a typewriter/computer keyboard

If the German soldier had cried "SHTOP" instead of STOP everyone would have understood it meant the same as HALT!

My additional $ 0.02

Signed

Non-Muslim, non-German

Anonymous:

Then does

Mein Kampf = My Jihad ??

June 20, 2008 8:41 PM

******************************

The question should be addressed to Osama Bin Laden and Muslims who believe in his style of Islamic Jihad

Is your version of Islamic Jihad = to Hitler's Mein Kampf?

Signed

Non-Muslim, non-German

This is boring. Why don't y'all just post and FAQ and get off the air until you have something new to say? Probably make your heads hurt to try that.

Dear Jihadist

That was a very cute joke you told about the Muslims peeking into the nudist camp. It was quite unexpected; that is a key ingredient in humor. This is the first time in my entire life, where I think of something relating to Islam as being cute. I think you are making some headway here.

I can tell a Christian joke:

A protestant congregaton had just built a new church, and it was the first Sunday, in which it was finished and ready, and they would be having the service in the new church. It was very modern, beautiful and high tech.

But when the people began to come into the church on Sunday morning, there was only one pew in the back of the church, and all the rest of the church was empty. So, that is where the first people to enter sat.

When the single pew in the back of the church was filled, suddenly there was the murmur of a little motor, under the floor, and the pew began to move, forward with all the people seated on it, until it was at the front of the church. And then, up through the floor, in the back of the church, a second pew raised itself up, and the next people who came in sat there. And so this happened over and over, until the church was filled with many pews, and all the people were sitting up front, and not cringing and hiding in the back.

And when the pastor came in and saw this, he clapped his hands together, and repeated in wonder, "this is wonderful, this is marvelous, this is wonderful."

They had the service. The pastor preached, and preached, and preached. Soon it was noon, and the pastor showed no signs of stopping, but continued to preach and preach and preach. Suddenly, there was the murmur of an electric motor coming from beneath the floor, and the podium where the pastor stood began to move gently downward, into the floor, along with with preacher, and in a moment, the preacher and the podium had disappeared into the floor, and the opening where they had gone closed up, and the pastor was gone.

Everyone in the congregation looked at each other in stunned amazement. And then they all began to clap their hands, and exclaimed, "this is wonderful, this is marvelous, this is wonderful."

Then does

Mein Kampf = My Jihad ??

Hi, Jihadist,

Of COURSE I forgive you for your clam chowder heresy! That got a good laugh here, thanks.

You might not find my duck recipe on the web. I'll take a look. Oh, yeah, I make a mean chili too.

Loved your Muslim jokes, especially the second one.

Lost in translation: here is my favorite, the first attempt to get a computer to translate English to Russian. The test was from the bible, "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak." Paul, I believe. Anyway, it came out "The meat is rotten, but the vodka's pretty good"!

Arminius

Hello Arminius,

Have you forgiven me of horrible clam chowder heresy?

It is. I will grant you that. The New England clam chowder bring out the flavour of the clams better than the Manhattan clam chowder. I just like a tangier and less creamy flavour of the Manhattan version. So there. That's my blasphemy.

Thanks for the tip on where Ted's Montana Grill is in New York. I usually would look it up in the phone book or ask the concierge. These fellows can find and get you anything you want.

I'm dying for your duck with wild rice recipe, but somehow, I do think some posters would not take too kindly to us exchanging recipes here.
I'll look them up in the Net myself.

Two wee Muslim jokes for you:

Imam to congregation: You have given me only 2 dinars for the victims of the recent flood.

A believer: What? Did you not just lead us in prayers to God to provide for the victims!

--------------------------------------------------

Muslims peeking through a fence hole of a nudist camp.

First Muslim : There are many naked people here.

Second Muslim : Yes, I can see that. Are they men or women?

First Muslim : I can't tell without their clothes on.

Regards

"J"

**************************************************

Mr. Mark

Thanks for that clarification - Achtung as "attention" instead of "stop".

It's like English being translated into other languages.

There is John Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath" that came out in the sixties in a Japanese translation as "The Angry Grape". Lost in translation indeed.

Some of the most hilarious English subtitles are found in Chinese movies. In "Peking Opera Blues", a group of men found a woman in a Peking Opera house (women don't perform in Peking operas then), and said, "She's a girl! Knock up up!" instead of "She a girl! Beat her up!"

And of course English movies translated into other languages are funny too. The Malay subtitles of "Roy, you got fired!" becomes, in retranslated English equivalent, "Roy you got shot!".

Regards

"J"

Jihadist writes:

In German

Echt = real

Falsch = false

Achtung = stop?"

Actaually:

Achtung = attention.

Stop = anschlag

Halt = halt

Movie trivia - in "The Longest Day," a German soldier tries to stop a train manned by German soldiers from continuing down the tracks (where a bomb is about to detonate) by shouting "STOP!" in clear English. Throughout the movie, all of the various nationals speak their native tongue and are subtitled into English. He probably should have said "Halt!"

In German

Echt = real

Falsch = false

Achtung = stop?

Mein gott! It is all German to me.

Anonymous : "There is always a danger of being misunderstood when an ultra-conservative Irish Catholic pleads for bananas to let the simians living in Ireland feast in ante-chambers of heaven for there is an Islamic version of heaven where males recline on silk cushions and feast on 72 virgins."

The orangutans and other apes love bananas. I, the neo-simian with not much body hair at all, love bananas too. Nice to go ape over bananas, and to go bananas over apes.

I'm not too sure Southeast Asian Muslims would be feasting on "72 virgins" in heaven. They would demand durians which stinks to high heaven, and would stink up heaven. Including the "72 virgins". Including the silk cushions. Including themself.

**************************************************

Daniel in the Lion's Den,

Hello. I see that you can get durians in you area. How in the world did the durians get pass US customs and health authorities? When non-smokers even choke or faith on smoke from cigarettes?

Next time the British decides to colonise Malaysia again, we'll just throw the spiky, smelly durians at them. Great natural weapons of repulsion.

My advise on eating durian? Not the imported ones. They are vacuum-packed and/or frozen or chilled and do lose a lot of its, er, taste and smell punch. Durian is best eaten just after they fell off the trees. "Best eaten" being relative of course.

And humour, mockery, comedy, parody, satire, lampoon, ridicule on faith is as stinky, spiky and thorny as durians are for some.

Cheers

"J"

Anon -

That's the best you can do? The blog equivalent of stamping your feet and turning red in the face?

Pathetic.

BTW - that Anonymous "falsch" comment wasn't mine.

Further BTW - I speak German, so no need to mention the provenance of the words echt and falsch. But thanks for informing everybody else on the blog, the majority of whom already knew whence originated the words.

"The internet is a place for words and ideas- nothing else. It won't solve one of your problems and it won't build a lasting relationship."

You make it seem like words and ideas aren't important.

And I've known several couples who have meet each other via the internet, met in real life, married, and are still going strong years later.

Spiderman

I can only think of 3 people who post here regularly, using their real names; maybe more, if I thought on it. So, everyone else is aononmyous, whether they use the name "anonymous" or not. So if you reveal "anonymous"'s fictitious idendity, then how is that "exposing" him?

I detect something more sinister here. Are you, able to tell if the other person who sometimes posts like you, is you or not? Are you sure that it is another person, but wonder sometimes if it might be you?

Are you under a doctor's care for psychiatric problems? You can answer honestly, since you are anonymous here. And this question is not intended to make fun of you or mock you, since problems of the mind can be very serious things; and I am only seeking some information about you to understand you better.

How old are you?

Spiderman

How can we know if you are anonymous, or not? There is no way to tell. If we were smart, we could tell the difference? Tell us, how, could we know the difference?

this thread was supposed to be about humor in religion. I may lack a funny bone, but the repetitive Anonymous "funny" shower never produced the slightest grin on my face. The fact that Mr. Mark is "obnoxious" to Anon can easily be regarded as a compliment for him. Well, maybe it was meant that way, and that is exactly the humor Anon was aiming at, lmao!

Have fun in real life folks.

Until Susan Jacoby's next essay.

Anonymous:

Mr. Mark, the disoriented atheist who has chosen to post under the name of the Second Gospel-

Echt you!

June 20, 2008 12:36 AM

---------------------

Anonymous:

Anonymous:

Mr. Mark, the disoriented atheist who has chosen to post under the name of the Second Gospel-

Echt you!

June 20, 2008 12:36 AM

-------------------------

Falsch you!

June 20, 2008 12:47 AM |

Anonymous:

Mr. Mark-

I'm so disappointed..

Falsch you is the best you could come up with? That wasn't snappy and it didn't come-back.

And you are so shook- you forget to type your name and posted under anonymous.

OK. I'm mildly amused.

June 20, 2008 1:04 AM

--------

How is that for Mr Mark pretending to be anonymous!

Falsch you! was addressed to Mr Mark by Anonymous in response to his Echt you!

In German

Echt = real

Falsch = false

As noted below, History and Rational thinking reduce religions to include Hinduism to the laughable relics that they are. I believe Mike Myers has sequels in the works lampooning Christianity and then Islam in these future movies. Let the laughing begin!!!

Anonymous:

Mark-

People who spend too much time on their computers repeatedly grinding the same ax concern me.

The internet is a place for words and ideas- nothing else. It won't solve one of your problems and it won't build a lasting relationship.

Its like the old SNL skit of the guy sitting in his mom's darkened basement living his life glued to the computer screen and alternately scratching his butt and dipping into a bag of chips. It was funny then. But not now.

June 20, 2008 1:28 AM

------------

Anti-theists on this thread grind the same axe.

Believers who get caught up in the game end up grinding the same axe forsaking the opportunity to discuss their religions in more constructive ways, in ways that make a real difference.

Anonymous:

Mark-

People who spend too much time on their computers repeatedly grinding the same ax concern me.

The internet is a place for words and ideas- nothing else. It won't solve one of your problems and it won't build a lasting relationship.

Its like the old SNL skit of the guy sitting in his mom's darkened basement living his life glued to the computer screen and alternately scratching his butt and dipping into a bag of chips. It was funny then. But not now.

June 20, 2008 1:28 AM

--------------

A blog is not a substitute for real life.

A blog is not the place to share one's own *original* ideas, merely to comment on the panelists' ideas.

The discussions may add insight and the insight may solve a problem...or it may not.

Blogging itself could end up being a serious problem and destroy lives.

Anon, My Child,

The "72 virgins" are better understood as Houri.
See Wikepedia, and impress fellow bloggers.

Yours and everyone else's,
Y C+2 & Co., PSC

Mark-

People who spend too much time on their computers repeatedly grinding the same ax concern me.

The internet is a place for words and ideas- nothing else. It won't solve one of your problems and it won't build a lasting relationship.

Its like the old SNL skit of the guy sitting in his mom's darkened basement living his life glued to the computer screen and alternately scratching his butt and dipping into a bag of chips. It was funny then. But not now.

Attention Milk, Cream & Sugar prophets Yahweh & Co ---

Re Sigmund Freud and Irish Catholic Mary C ?unningham on blog Mind-Body Connection

There is always a danger of being misunderstood when an ultra-conservative Irish Catholic pleads for bananas to let the simians living in Ireland feast in ante-chambers of heaven for there is an Islamic version of heaven where males recline on silk cushions and feast on 72 virgins.

Due apologies.

To: A Closer Look
Re: Women's ordination

Y C+2 passed along your recent query. Like Jacoby, Stevens-Arroyo isn't the brightest light on the block.

In this case, however, he is correct. Everything, beginning with "On this rock I build my church" has been taken with a degree of literalness that gives Mo and Me headaches, not to mention YC+2, who is so pissed off that He generally ignores the Vatican. Did want Me to remind you, however, to email the Pope and tell him that I am not Caesar. Do not render unto Popes.

Mo says don't render unto Caesar either, which, in retrospect, is a good idea.

Since Jesus was "man," priests should be men, is Moronism, heretical in the Our eyes. Both Gerry and Mr. Mark, as obnoxious as we deem the latter, are more acceptable to us than idolatrous nonsense. Remember to Whom we are related.

BTW, the other Just is proceeding as promised, left a question for someone to answer. Appreciate it if you would answer.

J. Crist M+1

Mr Mark:

Anonymous -

Why do you waste bandwidth by posting really poor rip-offs of my original poems? Obviously, you haven't a creative bone in your body, or you'd do something original, rather than engaging in what amounts to an "am not, am so" taunt.

Like a moth to the flame, you just can't keep your distance from the atheists. It must really frost your balls to watch as the non-believers run circles around your primitive mindset.

Do something original or flee the field. Better to be your pathetic self than a poor imitation of someone else.

June 20, 2008 12:51 AM |

---------------

Ad hominem attack is your best?

Original indeed!

Moth and flame analogy... yours too?

Write an original analogy. Better be your pathetic self than a poor imitation of someone else.

Mr. Mark-

I'm so disappointed..

Falsch you is the best you could come up with? That wasn't snappy and it didn't come-back.

And you are so shook- you forget to type your name and posted under anonymous.

OK. I'm mildly amused.

Mr Mark:

Anonymous -

Why do you waste bandwidth by posting really poor rip-offs of my original poems? Obviously, you haven't a creative bone in your body, or you'd do something original, rather than engaging in what amounts to an "am not, am so" taunt.

Like a moth to the flame, you just can't keep your distance from the atheists. It must really frost your balls to watch as the non-believers run circles around your primitive mindset.

Do something original or flee the field. Better to be your pathetic self than a poor imitation of someone else.

June 20, 2008 12:51 AM |

---------------

Ad hominem attack is your best?

Original indeed!

Moth and flame analogy... yours too?

Mr Mark:

Anonymous -

Why do you waste bandwidth by posting really poor rip-offs of my original poems? Obviously, you haven't a creative bone in your body, or you'd do something original, rather than engaging in what amounts to an "am not, am so" taunt.

Like a moth to the flame, you just can't keep your distance from the atheists. It must really frost your balls to watch as the non-believers run circles around your primitive mindset.

Do something original or flee the field. Better to be your pathetic self than a poor imitation of someone else.

June 20, 2008 12:51 AM |

---------------

Ad hominum attack is your best? Original indeed!

Two things, Anonymous:

1) I choose to post under my real first name, which happens to be Mark.

2) Mark was the first Gospel written, not the second. Its order in the Bible has nothing to do with when it was written and everything to do with the ignorance of the guys who put the Bible together and placed Matthew first. If you knew anything about the Bible, you'd already know that.

Anonymous -

Why do you waste bandwidth by posting really poor rip-offs of my original poems? Obviously, you haven't a creative bone in your body, or you'd do something original, rather than engaging in what amounts to an "am not, am so" taunt.

Like a moth to the flame, you just can't keep your distance from the atheists. It must really frost your balls to watch as the non-believers run circles around your primitive mindset.

Do something original or flee the field. Better to be your pathetic self than a poor imitation of someone else.

Anonymous:

Mr. Mark, the disoriented atheist who has chosen to post under the name of the Second Gospel-

Echt you!

June 20, 2008 12:36 AM

-------------------------

Falsch you!

Mr. Mark, the disoriented atheist who has chosen to post under the name of the Second Gospel-

Echt you!

Mr Mark:

Anonymous is the "echt" type of a man,
Who belongs to that strange Christian clan,
With a canned "proof of god,"
That is so very odd
That it smells like a ripe durian.

June 20, 2008 12:01 AM

---------------------

Mr Mark is the "echt" type of anti-atheist
Who belongs to that strange atheist clan
With a canned proof of no-God
With an everything from nothing science
A logic so odd
That it smells like stale cheese
And believers say sheesh.

Mr Mark:

Anonymous is the "echt" type of a man,
Who belongs to that strange Christian clan,
With a canned "proof of god,"
That is so very odd
That it smells like a ripe durian.

June 20, 2008 12:01 AM

---------------------

Mr Mark is the "echt" type of atheist
Whose only satire about atheists
Is to poke fun of beliefs
And insult believers
Recycling his boring old thoughts
Sitting in a can filled with stale durian.

Anonymous is the "echt" type of a man,
Who belongs to that strange Christian clan,
With a canned "proof of god,"
That is so very odd
That it smells like a ripe durian.

Arminius:

Anonymous, whichever one you are,

No one on this blog - and I mean no one with more than a few neurons to string together - will ever pay attention to anything posted here under that handle. Try to use a tad of imagination, and get a handle. Stop being cowards.

June 19, 2008 6:28 PM

-----------------

To Arminius who will not read this ----

Does using the handle XYZ make anyone braver or more real? How much of the real identity is revealed in a handle like CCNL for example.

Don't miss the pearls of wisdom sometimes being posted under the handle Anonymous. Ignore them at your peril.

About 5 miles from my house is a supermarket called the International Grand Market. It is about 25% Korean, 25% Hispanic, and 50% everything else. I think you could probably get anything there. It is an international supermarket, plopped down in my town.

I discovered it about 6 months ago, and decided to try all of the strange produce that I did not recognize. But fortunatley, I googled "durian" and found out all about it before I bought one. I think I havce heard of it before on TV. So, I actually have access to durians, sold in my own neighborhood, that I could try, if I had the courage. Does anyone have any recomendaitons? Should I? Shouldn't I?

Most of the "strange" produce that I have tried at the International Grand Market are just cousins of produce that I already eat. I guess, how many edible plants can there be?

All food is kind of related, isn't it?

News Flash!!!

The Mike Myers' camp has now verified that the Reality Challenged and Obfuscating Jihadist is, as suspected, a Saudi/Sunni/poor poet "wannabee" operative who lives in Brooklyn. The Jihadist owns a pork rib, BYB diner and he uses it as a front for promoting Sunni translations of the koran, Gabriel dolls, flying chariots, and polygamy. He sometimes uses the alias, "Arminius".

Jihadist,

There is a Ted's Montana Grill at the Time-Life Building, Rockefeller Center West. Courtesy of the all-powerful web.

I'll try hard to forgive you for your horrible clam chowder heresy!

Arminius

Hello Arminius,

I will look up Ted's Montana Grill specializing in bison next month in the States. Hope it's a chain and an outlet can found in the New York area.

Okay, consider me a Manhattan clam chowder adherent - a member of the heretical and blasphemous clam chowder sect as opposed to the "true" New England clam chowder denomination:)

*************************************************

Hello E Favorite,

Good and prudent decision to avoid durians. Being in the presence of durians' smell for too long made me feel queasy too. And not polite to eat them while holding one's nose.

Best regards and out of here.

"J"

Arminius:

Anonymous, whichever one you are,

No one on this blog - and I mean no one with more than a few neurons to string together - will ever pay attention to anything posted here under that handle. Try to use a tad of imagination, and get a handle. Stop being cowards.

June 19, 2008 6:28 PM

-----------------

To Arminius who will not read this ----

Does using the handle XYZ make anyone braver?

Peace loving Anonymouses squeal with pain when hatred spewing Anonymouses do their rounds in their name. Enduring such pain and still sticking to the handle Anonymous requires a lot of selfless courage.

Jihadist!

One last post on food.

First, I don't want to offend vegetarians; usually they are resigned to us carnivores. My daughter is a vegetarian, as is my best friend. I consider vegans to be a cult.

Can send my duck recipe if you wish. Bison is better than beef. If you're ever here in the States, find Ted's Montana Grill, specializing in bison.

We just came close to open warfare here. (Beware of hyperbole!) Manhattan 'clam chowder' is an abomination, a most foul heresy! If you want proof, read 'Moby Dick'. When I first read Melville's description of New England clam chowder in that book, I set down the book, went at once to the grocery, bought the ingredients, cooked a wonderful meal of clam chowder, and resumed reading that incredible novel.

Hey, we're here to learn about each other, how we live, what we like and don't like, what we believe or don't. No apologies here.

Arminius

Jihadist - I think I will avoid durians - which, gratefully, has been effortless, so far.

Hello Arminius,

I don't know if we are going to upset vegetarians and vegans in talking about our relish and enjoyment of dead animals.

Ah, duck and wild rice! Sounds really good! I've never had bison before. Some say it is better than cow meat, just as many South East Asians would say, and I agree, water buffalo meat is better than cow meat.

Oh, squids, octopuses, shrips, prawns, oysters, lobsters, crabs, groupers, pomfrets, swordfish, the list is endless. New England clam chowder? Manhattan clam chowder is great too.

It's a pleasure to talk on food, but we may just irate some who want to talk on humour, ridicule, mockery, irony, satire, parady, lampooning and such that makes us laugh or don't and why.

**************************************************

Hello E Favorite,

The food street stalls of Tokyo are great aren't they? All those grilled seafood, vegetables, tofu, chicken and liver teriyaki...

Best regards

"J"

Jihadist – thanks for the global culinary tour. I feel so worldly for already knowing much of what you wrote. As I said – I did not take the advice of my family to avoid strangers and their odd ways. One of my fondest travel memories is walking down the streets of Tokyo eating grilled octopus on a stick that I got at a curbside kiosk. My companion, usually also very adventurous, was practically heaving at the sight.

Chris E: “The reason I'm saying this is because I'm an atheist. Atheists think they know these kinds of things”

Mmm, Baby, turn me on.

Hi, again, Jihadist!

No, no, not a culture/culinary war. My hyperbole. Long live the differences!

Well, as a happy carnivore and Christian, I cheerfully devour just about any animal. Lots of pork, lots of chicken, cheap. I love duck, and can cook a really good duck meal with wild rice. Beef rib roast with Yorkshire pudding must, I'm sure, be served regularly in heaven. Also, bison is very good. Not to mention lamb... oh, my... slobber....

Oh, good Lord, do I like seafood! I feel guilty about eating it, because it is so overfished. But I adore squid and octopus, and could cheerfully consume raw oysters for breakfast. And New England clam chowder is a feast for the gods. Not to mention a good piece of grouper - can't afford it, it costs twice as much as beef. Overfished.

Your account of durians had me laughing! Thanks. I'm not sure how I could handle them things.

As my father often said, "I only regret that I have but one life to give to my stomach."

Arminius

SUSAN JACOBY:

Actually, the old Reader's Digest jokes did have a context, which is why we all liked them as children. They were based on bland, middle-class, middlebrow innofensiveness, edited and selected precisely so that they could be understood by people of all ages and would be unlikely to upset anyone. I loved these jokes when I was ten. I still love many of the things I loved when I was ten, but Reader's Digest humor is not among them.
Context is cultural as well as specific.

I'm astonished at the humorless literal-mindededness evident in some of these comments. So, I'll try to spell it out again.

Ans. Susan, I don't feel defensive, so I'm not going to be. I keep wondering if you really don't understand what some of us have been telling you, or you feel compelled not to engage us (me, in this case) and keep repeating what you have said.

You do not engage any of us. You read like a DVD that keeps getting replayed.
----------
This began with the idea of examples. As Farnaz amply demonstrated with the respondents to her inquiry, Jews are "sui generis." Not, therefore, good as an "example." Perhaps, you can define Catholics, Protestants, etc. in the same terms. Do they have Q R S Chromosomes?

No, I don't have to literally know who your grandfather was to enjoy a joke with you. But a general sense of cultural background, including race, ethnicity, and religion, does matter in humor.

PRECISELY: This is also the case when choosing "examples." CLEARLY, YOU DON'T GET THE CONTEXT AND PROBLABLY NEVER HAVE. How about using WASPs as an example next time? Or more generally "Protestants"? Looked at your past essays, and you do seem to have a lot of "Jewish examples." Funny coming from somebody who uses words acronyms like OT, funny as in ironic.

Susan: None of this has a thing to do with religion or with atheism

Tim: JESUS C H R I S T. YES IT DOES. Make your point to Ismael.

Tim: "Bless the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, who did not know that antisemitism did not include them, and murdered Ismael in the street."
(Posted by Farnaz June 18, 2008 2:09 AM)

PS. I wonder. Are there libraries in uptown, Manhattan?

Hello Arminius,

I was not really going into a "culture war" . Only to elaborate a bit on cultural differences.

Actually, slurping soup do make sense. It cools off the soup before actually getting swallowed. A bit more gauche than discreetly blowing a spoonful of soup, but more a more hearthy expression of eating.

I know, shark fin soup and bird's nest soup are now among the most expensive dishes in Chinese cuisine for the reason your gave - endangered species. Uncomfortable jokes of better for man to eat sharks rather than sharks to eat man.

Thanks for the gracious invitation for fried chicken and barbecued ribs - pork or beef. I'll take beef short ribs. To be honest, I am really a seafood aficionado, and the only four hoofed animal and fowl meat I really like are lamb, duck and quail. Even that, if there are any kind of seafood on the menu, seafood it is cooked in anyway. I would even eat baby octopuses.

The not eating rice is during formal Chinese banquets. In reality, how can we live without rice here! I've come away from formal Chinese banguest and have fried rice or breads to fill that "unfull" feeling of having a meal without starch.

As for durians, it is a spiky fruit about the size and shape of an American football. Indigenous to Southeast Asia. The flavour is like rich and sublime custard or delicately caramelized sweet rich cream depending on durian types. But the smell! It stinks like a public restroom. Hence the saying, "taste like heaven, smells like hell." The smell would not go away for days sometimes and seem to stick on everything.

It's considered a "heaty" fruit and can give blisters inside the mouth if you don't wash your mouth off properly and really properly to get the smell off after eating it. And never eat durians with any alcohol, not even light beer. The combination will knock you out.

Oh, there also the saying, "when the durians come down, the sarongs went up". Makes one heaty and horny after eating it. So it is claimed. In fact, it makes one drowsy after eating them too much. So rich are these durians.

Cheers
"J"

Hi, Jihadist,

Let's see what I can do with one western view of this culinary culture war!

Slurping soup is a no-no in the west. I always thought it was a good idea, and have been known to do it in a Chinese restaurant.

Alligator tail is relished here by those who know (includes me). Alligators are a pest in Florida and elsewhere, so no problem. I don't know about crocs over there. I object to shark fin soup, because the world population of sharks is imperiled.

Hey, I live in the South! Fried chicken is the great dish here, and if you do not eat it with your hands, you won't be invited back! Same with barbecued ribs (usually pork, but beef are good too). By the way, barbecue is close to a religion here, and local rivalries can get furious.

We try to clean our plates here. The host will inquire if we want more.

Absolutely fascinating about not eating rice during a 12 course Chinese meal. I cannot even begin to imagine a 12 course Chinese meal! I have had a 6 course, and we ate rice between courses.

Shoes generally worn indoors here. I think your custom is better. I generally go barefoot around the house anyway.

I, and all of my family, can use chopsticks well.

Anybody who does not like cheese needs to see a doctor. I can eat my weight in blue cheese. With a good red wine, it is heaven.

What the hell are 'durians'?

Thai, Chinese, Japanese, Indian food I consider wonderful.

With respect,

Arminius

Hello E Favorite,

On "funny food" and "funny customs".

Well, there are "funny food" and "funny customs" in Asia to non-Asians.

It is proper to slurp up soups in Japan and China from the bowl and I do so with relish. I have to remember to sip my soup in the west or in western meal. I am passed flinching eating braised chicken feet, sea slugs (sea cucumbers), crocodile tail, shark fin soup, bird's nest soup and find them really delicious.

It is proper to eat with your hands in Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent and the Middle East.

It is not proper to eat your plate clean of food or your host or hostess will keep piling food on your plate or to insist you have some more. Leaving some food in your plate is to indicate you have enough.

It is not proper to eat rice during a full Chinese banquet of at leat 12 courses, as eating rice from the bowl as a side is telling your host that you are still hungry and he has not fed you enough.

It is not proper to wear shoes inside an Asian home unless you see they do. Leave the shoes outside or just inside on the shoe rack.

Breaking wind is considered ruder than belching or burping in Asia. Asians don't quite find all the fartings and farting jokes now in some Hollywood movies funny.

Chinese and Japanese do find so many untensils used during a western dinner (soup spoon, knives for meat and fish, desert spoons and all that) unnecessary. Only a pair of chopsticks and a soup spoon is enough to get through a multicourse Chinese or Japanese dinner.

Offal fetch higher prices than meat in Asia. Fish head curries are so loved in some places. The eyeballs of some animals are valued as delicacies. Southeast Asians would not touch cheese saying they are stinky but not seeing that they durians they love so much and call it the "king of fruits" are regarded as stinky by westerners, and amused to find westerners are put off by durians.

"Funny food" and "funny customs" indeed. The list is endless. But to whom? Depends on where you live and grow up like you indicated in your post. Actually, people are more adventurous about food. Or there won't be lots of Japanese, Thai, Moroccon, Chinese, Indian restaurants in the west and elsewhere in the world.

It is only certain food, or rather animals, animal parts, plants and vegetables that people won't eat for any health, religious or allergic reason. Or just simply hate some food or certain flavours - too hot, too spicy, too saltish, too sweet, too bitter, too "smelly" etc.

....and did you hear of a new Japanese/Chinese diet?

Eat all you want, but use only one chopstick.

Cheers

"J"

Anonymous, whichever one you are,

No one on this blog - and I mean no one with more than a few neurons to string together - will ever pay attention to anything posted here under that handle. Try to use a tad of imagination, and get a handle. Stop being cowards.

The truth about Einstein:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvR_iwn9DtI

How interesting. I threw in some Muslim jokes here shared around Ramadan Iftar which got belly laughs to see how they "translate" to non-Muslims.

Fascinating to read comments by "Anonymous" on the desperate Muslim and the Catholic shopowner. For Muslims, the funny part is the desperate for a job Muslim not knowing Catholic priests and nuns don't marry, thus giving away his lie that he is a Catholic to get the job.

We are laughing at ourself in not knowing the differences between Christian churches/denominations, or confusing Catholic clergy with those of other Christian churches/ denominations who can marry. Muslims even thought the LDS/Mormons are Christians even if many mainstream Christians don't.

Like I said, humuor is a cultural minefield. What is funny to one group is unfunny to others. As Ms Jacoby said" nothing is less universal, or universally understood, than humor--even though the capacity for humor is a universal human trait".

American comedies that are are most understood are those that relates to family and friends. Not on specific references or specific Americanisms. "Friends" is more understood than "Seinfeld".

The most globally, universally popular, loved and understood humour/comedy is Rowan Atkinson's "Mr. Bean" - his TV series especially. Precisely because "Mr. Bean", as Ms Jacoby stated, goes for the "lowest common denominator" of consumers everywhere.

My kids love Mr. Bean. I too can't help but laugh at the predicaments of Mr. Bean, even when he is navigating his Mini into a parking space. He is a master of the absurb human physical actions and reactions to things and situations. A latter day Charlie Chaplin.

As for Monty Python's movies, most Asians don't get the jokes, humour, satire contained as Asians don't quite have the same cultural/religious background to "get" them. "Wag the Dog" is better understood. Political satires do translate better as politics, politicians and bureaucrats are universal in their venality, stupidy, incompetence, arrogance and what have you. That British series, "Yes, Minister" and "Yes, Prime Minister" are still popular in Commonwealth countries.

And for heaven's sake, some athiests are now justifying why they find nothing funny in atheism and athiests and why beliefs and believers are so absurb and thus can be joked about?

Come now, I do find the statements such as "Religion poisons everything" to be absolutely hilarious but held as "evident truth" by atheists.

He who can't laugh at himself....

Cheers

"J"

Chris,

Re your good comments on old Albert - you added at the end, "The reason I'm saying this is because I'm an atheist. Atheists think they know these kinds of things"

Oh, horse poop, and LOL! A few of us believers know it too! Grant us some dignity here!

Arminius

Fate,

You say of Einstein, "His belief overwhelmed the scientific evidence of quantum mechanics with Einstein saying "God would not play dice with the universe" as quantum mechanics describes."

As everyone will surely tell you, Einstein was using the term "God" metaphorically (Mr. Mark's "ball of wax" analogy is apt, and funny). What Einstein believed in was a deterministic universe, one in which the outputs of experiments are completely determined by the initial conditions. But the experiments that were being done at the time displayed randomness in the outputs. Quantum mechanics accepted this randomness as a characteristic of nature. Einstein felt that the randomness must be due to "hidden variables" that hadn't been accounted for yet. He thought quantum mechanics was "incomplete", and wrote a very short, easy to read, seminal paper on it (the "EPR Paradox" paper). I recommend it.

Einstein's belief did not overwhelm the evidence; it was a question of interpreting the evidence. It wasn't until the 60s that an experimental basis for deciding one way or another was discovered, and it wasn't until the 80s that an experiment proved Einstein wrong.

The reason I'm saying this is because I'm an atheist. Atheists think they know these kinds of things.

I don't think that Spidey and (evil) Anonymous are one and the same. Spidey has always seemed to me to be mentally ill. Anonymous is just rude and nasty.

I know that one post about soil turning to brain had an Anonymous header, but Spidey often forgets to type in his handle in his eagerness to get his drivel posted.

Daniel ITLD - I think people realized you didn't make up your definitions - you did such a great job of honing them that it sparked conversation.

Mr Mark - I think you're right about the "funny food" - show's what a difference a generation can make.

Maybe the same thing will happen with religion! maybe it already is!

Daniel in the Lion's Den writes:

"I think Spiderman is a boy, 12 or 13 years old. His Mom is probably home-schoolin' him."

If so, then we're looking at incontrovertible proof of Richard Dawkin's assertion that the religious indoctrination of children is nothing less than a form of child abuse.

Dear Fate -

Everybody wishes to claim Einstein as one of their's, but a firm believer in god? I don't think so. There are too many quotes from him that say quite the opposite, and in no uncertain terms.

It's interesting that the Einstein quotes used to support the contention that he believed in god come from his earlier years. Einstein indeed used the word "god" quite often, but it was his unique use of the word as a place holder for the mystery in the universe that has been misinterpreted. Averring that Einstein believed in a god based upon his use of the word would be akin to saying he believed the universe was made of wax had he ever referred to the universe as "the whole ball of wax."

In his later years, Einstein became more-precise and more vocal in his pronouncements about his non-belief in god. Perhaps he learned from the past, especially his own past, where his words were twisted to mean something quite apart from what he intended.

I'll leave it to others to provide the usual dueling Einstein quotes on this one.

I think Spiderman is a boy, 12 or 13 years old.

His Mom is probably home-schoolin' him. I think alot of the home-schoolin' people are influenced by Beverly and Tim Lahaye, who teach children to think like Spiderman thinks.

I have a few specific reasons for thinking this, based on a few things Spiderman has said over the past few months. But, I am right, aren't I, Mr Spiderman?

Tell us, how old are you?

Fate,

Spidey did a cut-and-paste on Complexity's post which had that list as recognized non-believers. Spidey lied.

As for Einstein. I would judge him as a deist, not a real believer. Be prepared to take some flak on this.

Arminius, a believer

Mr Mark wrote: "it take quite a bit of chutzpah to call the likes of Einstein, Hawkins, Pinker, Gould and a host of other undisputed brainiacs, "idiots that have been identified as stupid," "

I'm more interested in where spidy got the list, a list that was probably compiled by someone who spidy admires. Its sad that when you thinkk you have God on your side, anything is justified.

I would point out that Einstein was a firm believer in God's existance. His belief overwhelmed the scientific evidence of quantum mechanics with Einstein saying "God would not play dice with the universe" as quantum mechanics describes. But it seems God does play the dice. Just another example of religious belief interfering with truth so plain it cannot be denied, yet is. Spidy denies evolution, not on its merits but on its disagreement with the bible. This is what happens when people confuse faith with truth. They are not the same no matter how hard you believe.

Mr Mark,

I don't think that Spidey is just 'kidding' us. I think that if he were that smart, his grammar would at least be better, and his arguments better presented. But what do I know about madmen? Either way, the dude's got problems. Let's let him roll, at least he's a convenient moving target, and, better, makes us think.

Arminius

"Tim, my question continues to be on this atheist blog, why can't atheists make fun of themselves and why can't they take a joke that is directed at them. Read PAM's posts. If that is an atheist response to jokes, then God have mercy!"

I can a take a joke just fine - nothing that has come from you has been a joke - just ugliness and untruths.

I posted a joke making fun of atheists - it did not equate atheists with scientists. You have consistently ignored that.

BTW - there is no need to capitalize all the letters of my name. It is Pam. WaPo capitalizes all the handles, in case you hadn't noticed. But suit yourself.

Is it possible we're all misreading Spidey/Anon? Is it possible he simply has a sick sense of humor?

After all, it take quite a bit of chutzpah to call the likes of Einstein, Hawkins, Pinker, Gould and a host of other undisputed brainiacs, "idiots that have been identified as stupid," especially when surrounding such a statement with numerous misspellings, typos (even more than I usually offer!), bad grammar and the litany of nonsense that passes for Spidey's considered opinion.

Whaddaya think?

So Mr (Evil) Anonymous (aka Spiderman)

This is a list of stupid people? But they are all so accomplished and smart, that if you think they are stupid, then wouldn't that make you stupid?

I don't think Spiderman is a grown-up man; I think he still has some years to go before he is all grown up.

Maybe he is being home-schooled, and his Mom is not really keeping up with his antics. I hate to think of the alternative, that he is a crazy old guy, wasting away somewhere, in his increasing dementia.

"Anonymous" wrote: "They are all liars who think soil turns to brain but can't explain it."

Yup, that's spidy's favorite line. I wonder what christians say about misidentifying yourself when you speak. Sort of a form of lie some would say. Spidy, why do you feel you need to hide your identity. Its not like you're the comic superhero spiderman.

As for how soil turns to brain, recent experiments indicate that the first life forms may have been based on fats and RNA, and experiments show these and other compounds can easily be made in an old-earth atmosphere when lightening is added. It was done back in the 1950's.

So spidy, what will you do when those scientists shake a beaker and out of it comes cells never seen before? "Cells From Soil" will be the headline. And once you have cells, evolution indicates how you get to brains. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming.

I have to wonder what those who will never shake their belief in a Genesis derived world will do when faced with the facts of life's creation. It must be like the flat earthers seeing the earth from space. My guess is they will do what they did when the evidence for evolution was overwhelming: close their eyes and ears and make museums to what they believe to be true so they can imagine it is true. Facts will just be ignored, until they get sick, then science is what is sought out and used and praised, as miracles of course. What a delusional way to think.

Pam: welcome back. I tend to go to bed early too.

Doug: it is painfully obvious that spidey knows nothing about what the Bible really teaches. He is to be pitied.

"All your anonymous defenders are so obviously you as to make reading them an embarassment."

Sorry, but you're wrong. My last post was at 12:25 AM - unlike you vampires, I sleep at night. I have never posted as anyone but myself.

Spidey,
How would you know? Biblical teachings are worlds apart from where you seem to come from. I think perhaps you've read some pretty biased commentaries from some pretty biased people. But your wisecracks put you in a class by yourself, IMO. It's a crying shame. Sheesh.

Yep, Arminius, Anon is Spidey.

"Soil turns to brain" is his version of, "thank you, sir! May I have another?" A dead give away if there ever was one.

E Fav -

I wonder if any American still resorts to "they eat funny food" as an excuse for their bigotry? Seems unlikely in a country obsessed with pizza, tacos, beef lo mein, hamburgers, frankfurters, imported beer and croissants.

That settles it, Anonymous is Spidey.

Here's a brief list of idiots that have been identified as stupid. They are all liars who think soil turns to brain but can't explain it. We can find similar lists of famous idiots from all walks of life except intelligent who understand the Bible and prophecy of immanent doom.

Peter Atkins (1940–): English chemist, Professor of chemistry at Lincoln College, Oxford in England.

Julius Axelrod (1912–2004): American Nobel Prize winning biochemist, noted for his work on the release and reuptake of catecholamine neurotransmitters and major contributions to the understanding of the pineal gland and how it is regulated during the sleep-wake cycle.

Sir Patrick Bateson FRS (1938–): English biologist and science writer, Emeritus Professor of ethology at Cambridge University and president of the Zoological Society of London.

Sir Edward Battersby Bailey FRS (1881–1965): British geologist, director of the British Geological Survey.

Patrick Blackett OM, CH, FRS (1897–1974): Nobel Prize winning English experimental physicist known for his work on cloud chambers, cosmic rays, and paleomagnetism.

Susan Blackmore (1951–): English psychologist and memeticist, best known for her book The Meme Machine.

Hermann Bondi (1919–2005): Anglo-Austrian mathematician and cosmologist, best known for co-developing the steady-state theory of the universe and important contributions to the theory of general relativity.

Paul D. Boyer (1918–): American biochemist and Nobel Laureate in Chemistry in 1997.

Sean M. Carroll (1956–): American cosmologist specializing in dark energy and general relativity.

Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar (1910–1995): Indian American astrophysicist known for his theoretical work on the structure and evolution of stars. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1983.

William Kingdon Clifford FRS (1845–1879): English mathematician and philosopher, co-introducer of geometric algebra, the first to suggest that gravitation might be a manifestation of an underlying geometry, and coiner of the expression "mind-stuff".

Frank Close OBE (1845–1879): British particle physicist, Professor of Physics at the University of Oxford and a Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford, known for his lectures and writings making science intelligible to a wider audience, for which he was awarded the Institute of Physics's
Kelvin Medal and Prize.

Francis Crick (1916–2004): English molecular biologist, physicist, and neuroscientist; noted for being one of the co-discoverers of the structure of the DNA molecule in 1953. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1962.

Sir Howard Dalton FRS (1944–2008): British microbiologist, Chief Scientific Advisor to the UK's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs from March 2002 to September 2007.

Richard Dawkins (1941–): British zoologist, biologist, creator of the concepts of the selfish gene and the meme; outspoken atheist and popularizer of science, author of The God Delusion and founder of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science.

Arnaud Denjoy (1884–1974): French mathematician, noted for his contributions to harmonic analysis and differential equations.

Paul Dirac (1902–1984): British theoretical physicist, one of the founders of quantum mechanics, predicted the existence of antimatter, and won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1933.

Albert Einstein (1879–1955): German-born theoretical physicist, best known for his theory of relativity and recipient of the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics.

Albert Ellis (1913–2007): American psychologist who in 1955 developed Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy. Ellis described himself as a probabilistic atheist, meaning that while he acknowledged that it is impossible to be certain that there is no god, he believed that the likelihood that a god exists is so small that it was not worth his (or anyone else's) attention.

Leon Festinger (1919–1989): American social psychologist famous for his Theory of Cognitive Dissonance.

Richard Feynman (1918–1988): American theoretical physicist, best known for his work in renormalizing Quantum electrodynamics (QED) and his path integral formulation of quantum mechanics . He won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1965.

Sigmund Freud (1856–1939): Father of psychoanalysis.

Erich Fromm (1900–1980): renowned Jewish-German-American social psychologist, psychoanalyst, and humanistic philosopher, associated with the Frankfurt School of critical theory

Christer Fuglesang (1957–), Swedish astronaut and physicist.

Vitaly Ginzburg (1916–): Russian theoretical physicist and astrophysicist who was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2003. He was also awarded the Wolf Prize in Physics in 1994/95.

Stephen Jay Gould (1941–2002): American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science, one of the most influential and widely read writers of popular science of his generation.

Susan Greenfield, Baroness Greenfield, CBE (1950–): British scientist, writer and broadcaster, specialising in the physiology of the brain, who has worked to research and bring attention to Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease.

Jonathan Haidt (c.1964–): Associate professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, focusing on the psychological bases of morality across different cultures, and author of The Happiness Hypothesis.

E. T. 'Teddy' Hall (1924–2001): English archaeological scientist, famous for exposing the Piltdown Man fraud and dating the Turin Shroud as a medieval fake.

Sir James Hall (1761–1832): Scottish geologist and chemist, President of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and leading figure in the Scottish Enlightenment.

Beverly Halstead (1933–1991): British paleontologist and populariser of science.

G. H. Hardy (1877–1947): a prominent English mathematician, known for his achievements in number theory and mathematical analysis.

Stephen Hawking CH, CBE, FRS, FRSA (1942–): British theoretical physicist, Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, known for his contributions to the fields of cosmology and quantum gravity, especially in the context of black holes, and his popular works in which he discusses his own theories and cosmology in general, including A Brief History of Time.

Peter Higgs (1929–): British theoretical physicist, recipient of the Dirac Medal and Prize, known for his prediction of the existence of a new particle, the Higgs boson, nicknamed the "God particle".

Lancelot Hogben (1895–1975): English experimental zoologist and medical statistician, now best known for his popularising books on science, mathematics and language.

Nicholas Humphrey (1943–): British psychologist, working on consciousness and belief in the supernatural from a Darwinian perspective, and primatological research into Machiavellian intelligence theory.

Sir Julian Huxley FRS (1887–1975): English evolutionary biologist, a leading figure in the mid-twentieth century evolutionary synthesis, Secretary of the Zoological Society of London (1935-1942), the first Director of UNESCO, and a founding member of the World Wildlife Fund.

Frédéric Joliot-Curie (1900–1958): French physicist and Nobel Laureate in Chemistry in 1935.

Steve Jones (1944–): British geneticist, Professor of genetics and head of the biology department at University College London, and television presenter and a prize-winning author on biology, especially evolution; one of the best known contemporary popular writers on evolution.

Harold Kroto (1939–): 1996 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry.

Alfred Kinsey (1894–1956): American biologist, sexologist and professor of entomology and zoology.

Richard Leakey (1944–): Kenyan paleontologist, archaeologist and conservationist.[55]
Félix Le Dantec (1869–1917): French biologist, noted for his work on bacteria.

Sir John Leslie (1766–1832): Scottish mathematician and physicist best remembered for his research into heat; he was the first person to artificially produce ice, and gave the first modern account of capillary action.

H. Christopher Longuet-Higgins FRS (1923–2004): English theoretical chemist and a cognitive scientist.

John Maynard Smith (1920–2004): British evolutionary biologist and geneticist, instrumental in the application of game theory to evolution, and noted theorizer on the evolution of sex and signalling theory.

Ernst Mayr (1904–2005): a renowned taxonomist, tropical explorer, ornithologist, historian of science, and naturalist. He was one of the 20th century's leading evolutionary biologists.

Sir Peter Medawar (1915–1987): Nobel Prize-winning British scientist best known for his work on how the immune system rejects or accepts tissue transplants.

Jonathan Miller (1934–): British physician, actor, theatre and opera director, and television presenter. Wrote and presented the 2004 television series, Atheism: A Rough History of Disbelief, exploring the roots of his own atheism and investigating the history of atheism in the world.

Peter D. Mitchell (1920–1992): 1978-Nobel-laureate British biochemist. Atheist mother, and himself atheist from age 15.

Jacques Monod (1910–1976): French biologist who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1965 for discoveries concerning genetic control of enzyme and virus synthesis.

Desmond Morris (1928–): English zoologist and ethologist, famous for describing human behaviour from a zoological perspective in his books The Naked Ape and The Human Zoo.

Fritz Müller (1821–1897): German biologist who emigrated to Brazil, where he studied the natural history of the Amazon rainforest and was an early advocate of evolutionary theory.

Hermann Joseph Muller (1890–1967): American geneticist and educator, best known for his work on the physiological and genetic effects of radiation (X-ray mutagenesis). He won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1946.

PZ Myers (1957–): American biology professor at the University of Minnesota and a science blogger via his blog, Pharyngula.

Paul Nurse (1949–): 2001 Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine.

Linus Pauling (1901–1994): American chemist, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry (1954) and Peace (1962).

John Allen Paulos (1945–): Professor of mathematics at Temple University in Philadelphia and writer, author of Irreligion: A Mathematician Explains Why the Arguments for God Just Don't Add Up (2007.

Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936): Nobel Prize winning Russian physiologist, psychologist, and physician, widely known for first describing the phenomenon of classical conditioning.

Francis Perrin (1901–1992): French physicist, co-establisher the possibility of nuclear chain reactions and nuclear energy production.

Massimo Pigliucci (1964–): Professor of Ecology and Evolution at the Stony Brook University and is known as an outspoken critic of creationism and advocate of science education.

Steven Pinker (1954–): Canadian-born American psychologist.

Norman Pirie FRS (1954–): British biochemist and virologist co-discoverer in 1936 of viral crystallization, an important milestone in understanding DNA and RNA.

Frank P. Ramsey (1903–1930): British mathematician who also made significant contributions in philosophy and economics.

Richard J. Roberts (1943–): British biochemist and molecular biologist. He won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1993 for the discovery of introns in eukaryotic DNA and the mechanism of gene-splicing.

Steven Rose (1938–): Professor of Biology and Neurobiology at the Open University and University of London, and author of several popular science books.

Oliver Sacks (1933–): United States-based British neurologist, who has written popular books about his patients, the most famous of which is Awakenings.

Carl Sagan (1934–1996): American astronomer and astrochemist, a highly successful popularizer of astronomy, astrophysics, and other natural sciences, and pioneer of exobiology and promoter of the SETI.

Robert Sapolsky (1957–): Professor of Biological Sciences and Professor of Neurology and Neurological Sciences at Stanford University.

Amartya Kumar Sen (1933–): 1998 Nobel Laureate in Economics.

Claude Shannon (1916–2001): American electrical engineer and mathematician, has been called "the father of information theory", and was the founder of practical digital circuit design theory.

Michael Smith (1932–2000): British-born Canadian biochemist and Nobel Laureate in Chemistry in 1993.

Richard Stallman (1953–): American software freedom activist, hacker, and software developer.

Victor J. Stenger (1935–): American physicist, emeritus professor of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Hawaii and adjunct professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado. Author of the book God: The Failed Hypothesis.

Eleazar Sukenik (1889–1953): Israeli archaeologist and professor of Hebrew University in Jerusalem, undertaking excavations in Jerusalem, and recognising the importance of the Dead Sea Scrolls to Israel.

Leonard Susskind (1940–): American theoretical physicist; a founding father of superstring theory and professor of theoretical physics at Stanford University.

Raymond Tallis (1946–): Leading British gerontologist, philosopher, poet, novelist and cultural critic.

Frank J. Tipler (1947–): American mathematical physicist and professor at Tulane University.[97]
Linus Torvalds (1969–): Finnish software engineer, creator of the Linux kernel.

Alan Turing (1912–1954): English mathematician, logician, and cryptographer; often considered to be the father of modern computer science. The Turing Award, often recognized as the "Nobel Prize of computing", is named after him.

Matthew Turner (d. c.1789): chemist, surgeon, teacher and radical theologian, author of the first published work of avowed atheism in Britain (1782).

W. Grey Walter (1910–1977): American neurophysiologist famous for his work on brain waves, and robotician.

James D. Watson (1928–): 1962-Nobel-laureate co-discover of the structure of DNA.

Steven Weinberg (1933–): American theoretical physicist. He won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1979 for the unification of electromagnetism and the weak force into the electroweak force.

David Sloan Wilson (1949–): American evolutionary biologist, son of Sloan Wilson, proponent of multilevel selection theory and author of several popular books on evolution.

Lewis Wolpert CBE FRS FRSL (1929–): developmental biologist, author, and broadcaster.

Steve Wozniak (1950–): co-founder of Apple Computer and inventor of the Apple I and Apple II.

Elizur Wright (1804–1885): American mathematician and abolitionist, sometimes described as the "father of life insurance" for his pioneering work on actuarial tables.

Victor Weisskopf (1908–2002): Austrian-American theoretical physicist, co-founder and board member of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

E Favorite

The other day, Friday, I think, I posted definitions for religion, philsophy, and science. To my suprise, there was quite a reaction, and a number of comments. But these definitons were not my original thinking; I looked up several sources, and cobbled together the definitions.

Reading these definitions, and then writing them down made me think a little and gave me some insights.

Religion is just handed to you. It is all based on theology, written down by other people, from other times.

Philosophy is conscious speculation. You can read it in books, or make up your own, creatively.

Speculation about the nature of existence, is a parrticular interest that some people have, and others do not. If you don't have this interest, then you are likely to be a standard believer of some sort; because it is just too much trouble to work out your own thoughts, and then to try and persuade others, and then to find your own niche, that may be culturally unacceptable.

But if you have a bent towards philosophical speculation and exploration, you are sure to end up with a reputation, at the very least, of a "Bohemian" free-thinker, but maybe even worse, as a God-less atheistic threat to national security.

So, I think people are pretty much fixed in their religious views, as either being of a religous nature, or of a philosophical nature. And very few are the people who can be both, at the same time.

Well, the reviews are coming in for "The Love Guru" and they're pretty bad.

Alonso Duralde (film critic at MSNBC) opens his review with this broadside:
"Mike Myers, the star-producer–co-writer of “The Love Guru,” should seriously consider sending a muffin basket to the makers of “Strange Wilderness,” because without that hideous, barely-released film, “Guru” would be the hands-down worst comedy of 2008 so far."

And he's just one of what looks to be a unison chorus.

I like Mike Myers. I thought the Austin Powers flicks were very entertaining. The Wayne's World schtick was fine...for it's time.

That said, Myers doesn't have a lot of range as a comic actor. By that, I mean that he resorts to the same mannerisms and schtick for all of his characters. Example: his "I'm verklempft!" bit/mannerisms as the Long Island Jewish Yenta on SNL's "Coffee Talk" find their way into Austin Powers, Dr Evil, Fat Bastard, The Cat in the Hat, Wayne and most of Myer's other characters. While these bits may be intended to remind us all that, "hey! It's Mike Myers doing what we've all laughed at before!" I see it as an unimaginative default to a schtick to be used in the absence of developing new characters and new schtick.

Well, no one belts a thousand. Myers may be hitting the SNL character wall that's been hit in the past by Dana Carvey and others, ie: the point where the audience has finally had their fill of the once-unique schtick that originally propelled the star to his apex.

Hi, Mr Mark, you said,

"....were we atheists the horrible people Anon/Spidey says we are, and were I to get a chance to wring Anon/Spidey's neck, and were said wringing to effectively get Anon/Spidey to shut the hell up, then I have no doubt that more than a few believers would join the Amen Chorus and offer me a healthy round of approval for my "hateful...and just plain mean-spirited" actions."

Well said. Like you, I don't want to wring anon/spidey's neck, or even make him shut up. He insulted people I respect, and that pissed off this old Scots-Irish warrior. I will defend me and mine.

Arminius

Daniel ITLD - THANK YOU - Your last "essay" was one of your best!

Mr Mark, Chris E, Anon - those reasons to avoid certain types of people remind me of what I heard from some of my older family members growing up. They were all very good people, but they were very distrustful of strangers. Many people still are, though it's harder these days, when people are so much less isolated than before.

I remember that most of the warnings I got backfired - they aren't like us, they eat funny foods, they have funny customs, they don't know anything about you -- sounded exciting to me. I simply didn't believe the other stuff - they're dishonest, they don't care about you, you won't be happy - I figured they were talking from their own, untested fears of the unknown.

And I was right.

Arminius -

Thanks for the kind words in defense of this atheist.

That said, were we atheists the horrible people Anon/Spidey says we are, and were I to get a chance to wring Anon/Spidey's neck, and were said wringing to effectively get Anon/Spidey to shut the hell up, then I have no doubt that more than a few believers would join the Amen Chorus and offer me a healthy round of approval for my "hateful...and just plain mean-spirited" actions.

:0

Anonymous said:

"Has anyone else noticed how many atheists who write popular books have jewish ancestors?"

Well, now that you have mentioned, I must say,

NO! I hadn't noticed it.

Here's a brief list of scientists that have been identified as atheists - according to anonymous, all are apparently liars as well. We can find similar lists of famous atheists from all walks of life.

Peter Atkins (1940–): English chemist, Professor of chemistry at Lincoln College, Oxford in England.

Julius Axelrod (1912–2004): American Nobel Prize winning biochemist, noted for his work on the release and reuptake of catecholamine neurotransmitters and major contributions to the understanding of the pineal gland and how it is regulated during the sleep-wake cycle.

Sir Patrick Bateson FRS (1938–): English biologist and science writer, Emeritus Professor of ethology at Cambridge University and president of the Zoological Society of London.

Sir Edward Battersby Bailey FRS (1881–1965): British geologist, director of the British Geological Survey.

Patrick Blackett OM, CH, FRS (1897–1974): Nobel Prize winning English experimental physicist known for his work on cloud chambers, cosmic rays, and paleomagnetism.

Susan Blackmore (1951–): English psychologist and memeticist, best known for her book The Meme Machine.

Hermann Bondi (1919–2005): Anglo-Austrian mathematician and cosmologist, best known for co-developing the steady-state theory of the universe and important contributions to the theory of general relativity.

Paul D. Boyer (1918–): American biochemist and Nobel Laureate in Chemistry in 1997.

Sean M. Carroll (1956–): American cosmologist specializing in dark energy and general relativity.

Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar (1910–1995): Indian American astrophysicist known for his theoretical work on the structure and evolution of stars. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1983.

William Kingdon Clifford FRS (1845–1879): English mathematician and philosopher, co-introducer of geometric algebra, the first to suggest that gravitation might be a manifestation of an underlying geometry, and coiner of the expression "mind-stuff".

Frank Close OBE (1845–1879): British particle physicist, Professor of Physics at the University of Oxford and a Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford, known for his lectures and writings making science intelligible to a wider audience, for which he was awarded the Institute of Physics's
Kelvin Medal and Prize.

Francis Crick (1916–2004): English molecular biologist, physicist, and neuroscientist; noted for being one of the co-discoverers of the structure of the DNA molecule in 1953. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1962.

Sir Howard Dalton FRS (1944–2008): British microbiologist, Chief Scientific Advisor to the UK's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs from March 2002 to September 2007.

Richard Dawkins (1941–): British zoologist, biologist, creator of the concepts of the selfish gene and the meme; outspoken atheist and popularizer of science, author of The God Delusion and founder of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science.

Arnaud Denjoy (1884–1974): French mathematician, noted for his contributions to harmonic analysis and differential equations.

Paul Dirac (1902–1984): British theoretical physicist, one of the founders of quantum mechanics, predicted the existence of antimatter, and won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1933.

Albert Einstein (1879–1955): German-born theoretical physicist, best known for his theory of relativity and recipient of the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics.

Albert Ellis (1913–2007): American psychologist who in 1955 developed Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy. Ellis described himself as a probabilistic atheist, meaning that while he acknowledged that it is impossible to be certain that there is no god, he believed that the likelihood that a god exists is so small that it was not worth his (or anyone else's) attention.

Leon Festinger (1919–1989): American social psychologist famous for his Theory of Cognitive Dissonance.

Richard Feynman (1918–1988): American theoretical physicist, best known for his work in renormalizing Quantum electrodynamics (QED) and his path integral formulation of quantum mechanics . He won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1965.

Sigmund Freud (1856–1939): Father of psychoanalysis.

Erich Fromm (1900–1980): renowned Jewish-German-American social psychologist, psychoanalyst, and humanistic philosopher, associated with the Frankfurt School of critical theory

Christer Fuglesang (1957–), Swedish astronaut and physicist.

Vitaly Ginzburg (1916–): Russian theoretical physicist and astrophysicist who was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2003. He was also awarded the Wolf Prize in Physics in 1994/95.

Stephen Jay Gould (1941–2002): American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science, one of the most influential and widely read writers of popular science of his generation.

Susan Greenfield, Baroness Greenfield, CBE (1950–): British scientist, writer and broadcaster, specialising in the physiology of the brain, who has worked to research and bring attention to Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease.

Jonathan Haidt (c.1964–): Associate professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, focusing on the psychological bases of morality across different cultures, and author of The Happiness Hypothesis.

E. T. 'Teddy' Hall (1924–2001): English archaeological scientist, famous for exposing the Piltdown Man fraud and dating the Turin Shroud as a medieval fake.

Sir James Hall (1761–1832): Scottish geologist and chemist, President of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and leading figure in the Scottish Enlightenment.

Beverly Halstead (1933–1991): British paleontologist and populariser of science.

G. H. Hardy (1877–1947): a prominent English mathematician, known for his achievements in number theory and mathematical analysis.

Stephen Hawking CH, CBE, FRS, FRSA (1942–): British theoretical physicist, Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, known for his contributions to the fields of cosmology and quantum gravity, especially in the context of black holes, and his popular works in which he discusses his own theories and cosmology in general, including A Brief History of Time.

Peter Higgs (1929–): British theoretical physicist, recipient of the Dirac Medal and Prize, known for his prediction of the existence of a new particle, the Higgs boson, nicknamed the "God particle".

Lancelot Hogben (1895–1975): English experimental zoologist and medical statistician, now best known for his popularising books on science, mathematics and language.

Nicholas Humphrey (1943–): British psychologist, working on consciousness and belief in the supernatural from a Darwinian perspective, and primatological research into Machiavellian intelligence theory.

Sir Julian Huxley FRS (1887–1975): English evolutionary biologist, a leading figure in the mid-twentieth century evolutionary synthesis, Secretary of the Zoological Society of London (1935-1942), the first Director of UNESCO, and a founding member of the World Wildlife Fund.

Frédéric Joliot-Curie (1900–1958): French physicist and Nobel Laureate in Chemistry in 1935.

Steve Jones (1944–): British geneticist, Professor of genetics and head of the biology department at University College London, and television presenter and a prize-winning author on biology, especially evolution; one of the best known contemporary popular writers on evolution.

Harold Kroto (1939–): 1996 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry.

Alfred Kinsey (1894–1956): American biologist, sexologist and professor of entomology and zoology.

Richard Leakey (1944–): Kenyan paleontologist, archaeologist and conservationist.[55]
Félix Le Dantec (1869–1917): French biologist, noted for his work on bacteria.

Sir John Leslie (1766–1832): Scottish mathematician and physicist best remembered for his research into heat; he was the first person to artificially produce ice, and gave the first modern account of capillary action.

H. Christopher Longuet-Higgins FRS (1923–2004): English theoretical chemist and a cognitive scientist.

John Maynard Smith (1920–2004): British evolutionary biologist and geneticist, instrumental in the application of game theory to evolution, and noted theorizer on the evolution of sex and signalling theory.

Ernst Mayr (1904–2005): a renowned taxonomist, tropical explorer, ornithologist, historian of science, and naturalist. He was one of the 20th century's leading evolutionary biologists.

Sir Peter Medawar (1915–1987): Nobel Prize-winning British scientist best known for his work on how the immune system rejects or accepts tissue transplants.

Jonathan Miller (1934–): British physician, actor, theatre and opera director, and television presenter. Wrote and presented the 2004 television series, Atheism: A Rough History of Disbelief, exploring the roots of his own atheism and investigating the history of atheism in the world.

Peter D. Mitchell (1920–1992): 1978-Nobel-laureate British biochemist. Atheist mother, and himself atheist from age 15.

Jacques Monod (1910–1976): French biologist who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1965 for discoveries concerning genetic control of enzyme and virus synthesis.

Desmond Morris (1928–): English zoologist and ethologist, famous for describing human behaviour from a zoological perspective in his books The Naked Ape and The Human Zoo.

Fritz Müller (1821–1897): German biologist who emigrated to Brazil, where he studied the natural history of the Amazon rainforest and was an early advocate of evolutionary theory.

Hermann Joseph Muller (1890–1967): American geneticist and educator, best known for his work on the physiological and genetic effects of radiation (X-ray mutagenesis). He won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1946.

PZ Myers (1957–): American biology professor at the University of Minnesota and a science blogger via his blog, Pharyngula.

Paul Nurse (1949–): 2001 Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine.

Linus Pauling (1901–1994): American chemist, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry (1954) and Peace (1962).

John Allen Paulos (1945–): Professor of mathematics at Temple University in Philadelphia and writer, author of Irreligion: A Mathematician Explains Why the Arguments for God Just Don't Add Up (2007.

Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936): Nobel Prize winning Russian physiologist, psychologist, and physician, widely known for first describing the phenomenon of classical conditioning.

Francis Perrin (1901–1992): French physicist, co-establisher the possibility of nuclear chain reactions and nuclear energy production.

Massimo Pigliucci (1964–): Professor of Ecology and Evolution at the Stony Brook University and is known as an outspoken critic of creationism and advocate of science education.

Steven Pinker (1954–): Canadian-born American psychologist.

Norman Pirie FRS (1954–): British biochemist and virologist co-discoverer in 1936 of viral crystallization, an important milestone in understanding DNA and RNA.

Frank P. Ramsey (1903–1930): British mathematician who also made significant contributions in philosophy and economics.

Richard J. Roberts (1943–): British biochemist and molecular biologist. He won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1993 for the discovery of introns in eukaryotic DNA and the mechanism of gene-splicing.

Steven Rose (1938–): Professor of Biology and Neurobiology at the Open University and University of London, and author of several popular science books.

Oliver Sacks (1933–): United States-based British neurologist, who has written popular books about his patients, the most famous of which is Awakenings.

Carl Sagan (1934–1996): American astronomer and astrochemist, a highly successful popularizer of astronomy, astrophysics, and other natural sciences, and pioneer of exobiology and promoter of the SETI.

Robert Sapolsky (1957–): Professor of Biological Sciences and Professor of Neurology and Neurological Sciences at Stanford University.

Amartya Kumar Sen (1933–): 1998 Nobel Laureate in Economics.

Claude Shannon (1916–2001): American electrical engineer and mathematician, has been called "the father of information theory", and was the founder of practical digital circuit design theory.

Michael Smith (1932–2000): British-born Canadian biochemist and Nobel Laureate in Chemistry in 1993.

Richard Stallman (1953–): American software freedom activist, hacker, and software developer.

Victor J. Stenger (1935–): American physicist, emeritus professor of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Hawaii and adjunct professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado. Author of the book God: The Failed Hypothesis.

Eleazar Sukenik (1889–1953): Israeli archaeologist and professor of Hebrew University in Jerusalem, undertaking excavations in Jerusalem, and recognising the importance of the Dead Sea Scrolls to Israel.

Leonard Susskind (1940–): American theoretical physicist; a founding father of superstring theory and professor of theoretical physics at Stanford University.

Raymond Tallis (1946–): Leading British gerontologist, philosopher, poet, novelist and cultural critic.

Frank J. Tipler (1947–): American mathematical physicist and professor at Tulane University.[97]
Linus Torvalds (1969–): Finnish software engineer, creator of the Linux kernel.

Alan Turing (1912–1954): English mathematician, logician, and cryptographer; often considered to be the father of modern computer science. The Turing Award, often recognized as the "Nobel Prize of computing", is named after him.

Matthew Turner (d. c.1789): chemist, surgeon, teacher and radical theologian, author of the first published work of avowed atheism in Britain (1782).

W. Grey Walter (1910–1977): American neurophysiologist famous for his work on brain waves, and robotician.

James D. Watson (1928–): 1962-Nobel-laureate co-discover of the structure of DNA.

Steven Weinberg (1933–): American theoretical physicist. He won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1979 for the unification of electromagnetism and the weak force into the electroweak force.

David Sloan Wilson (1949–): American evolutionary biologist, son of Sloan Wilson, proponent of multilevel selection theory and author of several popular books on evolution.

Lewis Wolpert CBE FRS FRSL (1929–): developmental biologist, author, and broadcaster.

Steve Wozniak (1950–): co-founder of Apple Computer and inventor of the Apple I and Apple II.

Elizur Wright (1804–1885): American mathematician and abolitionist, sometimes described as the "father of life insurance" for his pioneering work on actuarial tables.

Victor Weisskopf (1908–2002): Austrian-American theoretical physicist, co-founder and board member of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

One interesting thing about this blog is that it can be viewed as a microcosm of group dynamics, IMO. There are "insiders" and "outsiders" (of which I would be one of the latter). Susan occasionally becomes a moderator, which is refreshing. The "insiders" become somewhat a "support group" for each other, thus sharing a level of "intimacy" because they have learned to trust each other and to not get offended by the ups and downs of the interactions. Humor becomes an important part of those relationships.

I quoted from Susan's comment earlier because IMO people need many levels of intimacy to gain optimum health and longevity in their lives. George Burns, Lucille Ball, Bob Hope, Bill Cosby among many were successful comedians because they bridged common everyday shared life experience with the humor of it all, reminding us all to be light-hearted, especially in our intimate relationships.

Darian's serene lifestyle including the humor and relationships that she wrote about were reminders to me that those aspects of life can not only bring serenity--they can also boost the body's systems and energy levels to live longer and healthier than might otherwise be the case.

I wrote this because I've thought about these aspects of this blog for quite a while, and wanted to share some of this before signing off (also to sort of defend myself in that I had re-quoted Susan). Sincere best wishes, all.

Has anyone else noticed how many atheists who write popular books have jewish ancestors?

Is this a trend- "ajudaism"?

Well, Anonymous/Spidey, perhaps it is time to take you to task.

I, a Christian, have come to know and like three atheists here on these blogs: Mr Mark, Chris, and E Favorite. I consider them all honest and honorable, and have never caught them in anything like a lie. I certainly don't always agree with them, but I respect them.

You, on the other hand... lying? A lie is speaking/writing/whatever something that the author knows is false. Mr Mark, Chris, and E Fav do not do this. Oddly, neither do you. I am sure that you firmly believe that your twisted, tenuous hold on reality is 'true'.

Whoever/whatever you are, you are no true American. Else, you would respect another person's point of view, so long as it is not threatening. Apparently you, as Spidey, believe that these three, and also yours truly, are threats because we disagree with you. Shall we all look forward to your OT Christian Taliban burning us at the stake to sate your hatred? Be prepared for one hell of a fight.

Anonymous wrote: "Lets be real, the majority of Atheist are not trustworthy people. They lie and then lie on top of lies. They lie by saying that they are not liars. They say they have "good morals" and are decent people but I personal can attest to knowing serveral Atheist that are hateful, liars, back-stabbers, very unforving, unforbearing, and just plain mean-spirited."

You have just decribed most of the high level officials in the Bush administration. Wow, and they say they are christians. I guess this shows that what you call yourself, or say you believe in has nothing to do with the type of person you are. Like MLK I like to judge people on the content of their character, not their stated religion, and your character spidy leaves much to be desired.

So, Anonymous says atheists are everything bad one could imagine.

But only 33% of the world's population are Christians, and that includes every sect. 16% are atheists, and the rest of humanity believes in what the Xians aver are false gods. Hmm? Unless Anon thinks that believing in false gods is better than not believing in any gods...which would make non-Xian religious people sort of OK.

But if we take it that belief in any god besides the Biblical god is a form of atheism, then 67% of the world's population "are not trustworthy people. They lie and then lie on top of lies. They lie by saying that they are not liars. They say they have "good morals" and are decent people but [they] are hateful, liars, back-stabbers, very unforving, unforbearing, and just plain mean-spirited.

The only time they are kind is if they want something from you. So watch yourself around them, for the most part they cannot be trusted. They do not or can not love others, they are a self-centered and selfish type of people."

How does one go through life believing such things?

Yes Anonymous sounds like Spiderman. "Evil-Anonymous" would be a better name, so that we can tell him from all the other anonymous's.

And why a disguise for someone already anonymous?

Your reply to me was just silly.

I didn't get it.

So, maybe you should try again.

Spidey, of course, loves others, as can easily be seen by his latest rant on atheists! (For safety's sake, as an "undercover agent", as another "Anonymous"!) And how come he "knows" so many atheists? Does he ask everybody "are you a believer"? And if they hesitate or even say "no" or "I don't know", his bias mechanism snaps into place like a mouse trap. 99 % of his residual brain power will then work frantically to corroborate his bias, and sweesh, he has another proof!

A fine specimen of the evolution of fundamental bigots who gradually disintegrate into this sort of "idiots savants" (dead end of an evolutionary branch, Dennett)! Their brain drying up for lack of "humor" (=humidity", lol!). We have to be patient, but common sense will finally prevail, through its sheer results.

We can not really discuss with him; instead we must look at him from an almost scientific sociological vantage point, as in an anatomy class, to learn how and why an organ fails. Thus, we can even profit from him!

"You are NOT the Messiah, you are a very naughty boy."

Chris, was that really you? LOL!

Arminius

Arminius,

You are NOT the Messiah, you are a very naughty boy.

Substitute "Blacks", "Christians", "Irish", "Jews", "Italians", "Muslims", etc, for "Atheist" in Anonymous' most recent post:

"Lets be real, the majority of Atheist are not trustworthy people. They lie and then lie on top of lies. They lie by saying that they are not liars. They say they have "good morals" and are decent people but I personal can attest to knowing serveral Atheist that are hateful, liars, back-stabbers, very unforving, unforbearing, and just plain mean-spirited.

The only time they are kind is if they want something from you. So watch yourself around them, for the most part they cannot be trusted. They do not or can not love others, they are a self-centered and selfish type of people."

What, if anything, makes one substitution acceptable and another heinous? It's a serious (and interesting) question.

And PLEEEEEEEEASE, let's not have any Black, Christian, Italian, Jewish, or Muslim hammers drop, OK?

Anonymous is sounding a lot like Spidey.

Chris,

Thanks for the reply. Here are mine:

Movie: "Monty Python and the Holy Grail". "Dr Strangelove" might be in 2nd place, tied with "Life of Bryan".

Play: Aristophanes' "Lysistrata", by a mile. And one of the most anti-war plays ever done, too.

Comic: Abbott and Costello in "Who's On First?". I have played that for people who have no use for baseball, and they invariably laugh hysterically. It is a masterpiece of comedic timing. Cosby is pretty good, though.

Arminius

Anonymous: "CE, you just don't understand how funny it is when atheists pretend they are all scientists by mere virtue of being atheists and how in their jokes they always portray themselves as the scientists."

Maybe what you perceive as "science" is just plain common knowledge among atheists. An atheist worldview channels natural human curiosity towards REAL THINGS, i.e. nature. I'm sure you're equally knowledgeable, but about FAKE things like messiahs, prayer, heaven, hell, creationism, god and all that kind of nonsense.

BTW, who here, who is not a scientist, portrays themselves as a scientist?

DDILD, " do not see anything bad in atheists. It is just a BIG LIE to say that there is fundamentally something wrong with atheists. If you go around telling a BIG LIE, then don't expect people to trust or believe you on other matters; trust is earned by truthfulness and "good faith" and trust is squandered by BIG LIES and "bad faith.""

Lets be real, the majority of Atheist are not trustworthy people. They lie and then lie on top of lies. They lie by saying that they are not liars. They say they have "good morals" and are decent people but I personal can attest to knowing serveral Atheist that are hateful, liars, back-stabbers, very unforving, unforbearing, and just plain mean-spirited.

The only time they are kind is if they want something from you. So watch yourself around them, for the most part they cannot be trusted. They do not or can not love others, they are a self-centered and selfish type of people.

This is my personal opinion.

Arminius,

Of course, a "most funny" list is constantly changing, but here's mine now:

Movie: "Dr. Strangelove" by a longshot
Play: none jump out, but "Letting Go of God" is a contender
Comic: Sketch comedy: Monty Python. Standup: Cosby and Pryor

How about you?

Daniel in the Lion's Den, speak for yourself. Let the others speak for themselves.

I wrote a long thing earlier about belief and unbelief, and how those words bother me. And I wrote a long thing about the word "faith" and about how that word, used in a relgious context, bothers me. (I write alot of long things).

So, I won't go over all of that again.

But, I would like to say, that now-adays, "unbelief" is politically incorrect, even more so than in the past, because in the past, when I was a boy, for example, people didn't question each others' beliefs, and did not judge each other by such things, as they do today.

Of course, I don't think people have any more "faith" now than they did then, and I do not think there are any more "believers" now, nor that "belief" is stronger or deeper now, than it was then. It is all just a political pose, just a cultural test, to see who is right-thiniking and who is wrong-thinking.

In this context, people who call themselve "believers" have a mighty sense of entitlement, and they have an exclusionary sense towards "unbelievers." Just what is covered by this "belief" and "unbelief" is not clear, and could be just about anything; mainly, God, and his "perfect" son, Jesus, but definitely not anything complicated like the "virgin birth" or the "trinity;" the simpler, actually, the better.

This "belief" is simple, uncomplicated, pompous, and humorless.

And so what is considered "unbelief?" Any kind of philophical questioning, that deviates from orthodox, standard, common, or folk relgious belief; but some people just have a philosophical take on things; that is how they are made; and such people are going to question the religion that the previous generation hands to them; and this questioning will lead them towards various modes of philophical specualtions, which go away from religion and may conflict with religion. But this kind of speculation just happens in some people, and such people come to be known as "free thinkers."

Free thinkers have a difficult time in a world in which it is politically incorrect to be an unbeliever. Atheists are such free thinkers, and religious people look down with contempt and scorn, on atheists. Christians, for them most part, do not even pretend to love atheists; they often falsely pretend to love others, but for atheists, the do not even pretend.

They do not try to understand atheists, but simply mock them and belittle them. This thread is proof of that. So, if atheists, in their frustartion react and push back, I do not think anyone should wonder why.

Of the people who post here frequently who identify themselves as Christians, only Arminius and Thomas Baum seem to have a patient and kind attitude towards atheists. Almost all of the other Christians who post here have no more credibilty than a horse's fetlock.

I do not see anything bad in atheists. It is just a BIG LIE to say that there is fundamentally something wrong with atheists. If you go around telling a BIG LIE, then don't expect people to trust or believe you on other matters; trust is earned by truthfulness and "good faith" and trust is squandered by BIG LIES and "bad faith."

Anon- I am not a scientist and have not portrayed myself as one. I came to atheism by reading history and archeology – “actual books” as Susan would say. I also took Christian education classes at the Episcopal church I was attending.

Hi, Chris,

Your definition of easy humor as religion is, I believe, over-simplistic. Good humor does pull from many of the things you mentioned, but it can be quite subtle too.

Questions:
- What is the funniest movie you ever saw?
- What is the funniest play you ever saw/read?
- What is the funniest stand-up comic act in your book?

Just curious.

Arminius

I think I am going to start skipping posts by "anonymous" since there are several of them, all talking at cross-purposes, which has become more than confusing.

CE, you just don't understand how funny it is when atheists pretend they are all scientists by mere virtue of being atheists and how in their jokes they always portray themselves as the scientists. Believers are reminded of the billion scientists in China and the millions of scientists in the former Soviet Union.

A further note on humor on-line – that internet group I mentioned that eventually met in person? Humor was one of the best parts of getting together. We already knew each other’s sense of humor from the forum. Live conversation was just another way to express it.

It is easier to find humor in absurd, desperate, childish and simpleminded beliefs than in the lack thereof.

It is easier to find humor in the practice of ineffectual, bizarre, primitive ritualistic behavior than in the lack thereof.

It is easier to find humor in the pomposities, pufferies and vanities of false yet absolute self assurance than in the lack thereof.

Believers are a comedian's dream come true. Atheists just don't provide the same raw comic material.

Susan, you say the web provides “false intimacy.” I think of it, at its best, as providing a different kind of relationship, that can even be intimate at times, just as people have had intimate conversations with strangers on a train or formed strong correspondence friendships. I think most of us have found ourselves in situations where we open up more among strangers than among close friends and family. It’s different from face-face communication, but there’s nothing false about it, unless the people involved are actually being dishonest.

A lot of the people who’ve come to “know” me here in terms of attitudes and personal style, didn’t even know my gender for a long time. I have no idea where a lot of the people here live or what they look like, but I know how they think and probably know more details about their attitudes on religion than their close friends do. This forum has been incredible, unsurpassed, in facilitating conversations on religion among people of differing beliefs. I doubt anything like this could happen in “real” life – at least not in our current society.

Years ago, I met a group of people I’d been chatting with on an internet forum. I was amazed at now much their personalities had come through on-line. Chatting with them in person was totally comfortable and predictable based on the relationships we had formed online. We’re still friends and have visited when passing through each other’s towns.

There are many different worthwhile forms of human relationships, Susan. Please don’t write off all internet discussion as “false intimacy.”

Nothing is less universal, or universally understood, than humor--even though the capacity for humor is a universal human trait. Anyone who has ever studied a foreign language knows that the capacity to tell and understand jokes in another language is the highest level of achievement. To "get" jokes in a foreign language, you must understand the culture.

One reason why comedies, particularly American comedies, are understood in many parts of the globe is that the culture of infotainment, including the Web, is still driven by American entertainment conglomerates. (This may be less and less true in the future.) To some extent, lowest common denominator American infotainment appeals to lowest common denominator consumers everywhere.

Most definitely there has been humor on the atheists blogs on WaPo on faith forum too. Now believers are waiting for satire about themselves from atheists because of the topic for discussion this week on humor and religion, which should rightly include humor in atheism.

Doug:

The recent discussion here has been interesting reading. Thanks. I loved Susan Jacoby's superb insight, which can be thought about all day:

"The down side of the Web is that it substitutes false intimacy based on anonymity for the real intimacy that underlies both friendship and humor."

---------

Doug, you are comparing apples and oranges. Who talked about intimacy here, leave alone decide whether it is real or false? We are not discussing humor among friends either.

Every author communicates with their readers without friendship and intimacy with the reader.

On the atheist blog I mentioned there was plenty of subtle humor without intimacy or friendship among complete strangers of different cultural backgrounds.

The recent discussion here has been interesting reading. Thanks. I loved Susan Jacoby's superb insight, which can be thought about all day:

"The down side of the Web is that it substitutes false intimacy based on anonymity for the real intimacy that underlies both friendship and humor."

That's what I've tried to tell my children for a long time. Thanks for the added insight.

Ms Jacoby, on this thread some of us wanted a display of atheists making fun of themselves. It has to do with atheism.

Ms Jacoby, many thanks for getting back once again. For reflection: the Dalai Lama is known to have a great sense of humor. People of all races, cultures, ethnicities understand his sense of humor immediately. There is plenty of humor that is universally understood, how could movies possibly make money worldwide if it wasn't?

Humor that resonates with me -tells a truth that is not usually spoken.

Maria Shriver's story made me laugh when she revealed Tim's concern that she might not have the connections to get her child into Boston College and as a Kennedy she questions his veracity. He does try to help her daughter get into BC--- but her daughter is waitlisted.... and is going to USC as a result..

Its a wonderful complex story- still makes me smile.

Actually, the old Reader's Digest jokes did have a context, which is why we all liked them as children. They were based on bland, middle-class, middlebrow innofensiveness, edited and selected precisely so that they could be understood by people of all ages and would be unlikely to upset anyone. I loved these jokes when I was ten. I still love many of the things I loved when I was ten, but Reader's Digest humor is not among them.
Context is cultural as well as specific. I'm astonished at the humorless literal-mindededness evident in some of these comments. So, I'll try to spell it out again.

No, I don't have to literally know who your grandfather was to enjoy a joke with you. But a general sense of cultural background, including race, ethnicity, and religion, does matter in humor. And whether we're telling jokes on ourselves or ridiculing others certainly does matter in a private social, as distinct from a public legal, context.

None of this has a thing to do with religion or with atheism.

Tim, I stayed on much much longer than I intended to. I was quite mad when your Muslim bashing jokes began, that is why I chose to stay to hear your side of the story. Thanks for sharing.

Tim, thanks for sharing. I do understand how some things can hurt in ways not intended by the one trying to be funny. I remember a long long time ago, when I lived far, far away and knew very little about WW II, I called a young German who was visiting a Nazi and was quite surprised that he nobt only didn't understand my joke but was mad as hell. Luckily he could accept my complete ignorance as genuine and we became good friends.

So Jewish jokes can be quite painful to someone who has suffered unimaginable horror because of their ethnic identity. Quoting the US Constitution would be useful in a court of law, but it is going to hurt people's feelings anyway. As Gerry once mentioned, the communication is judged by the one at the receiving end.

But here we are practicing atheist humor!

Sure atheists and believers can be friends and communicate well as long as there is mutual respect and mutual desire to communicate.

Anon:

RE: Atheists telling jokes about themselves
-----------
M. Anonymous continually writes about the way atheists show arrogance to believers. I think there may be one or two others who have done the same.

If you scroll down, you'll find that a believer posted atheist jokes and he said he'd always loved one of them. That's the closest I've seen on this thread to what you'd like to see.
----------
My particular concern is not with atheism, per se, but with something else.

From the brilliant Samuel Beckett: "What matter who's speaking" (I.e., it does matter.)

Michel Foucault took up this line in "The Order of Things."

I've got to go. It's been good chatting. Hope you stick around.

Tim

Ms Jacoby I do agree that there is a kind of humor that is culture specific with subtlties and can be understood only by people of that culture or who are well acquainted with the culture. But there is plenty of humor that requires no specialized knowledge.

Anon:

All atheists are culturally embedded, culturally enmeshed. My mother was a practicing Catholic, my father a nominal Protestant. I was not much into religion and wasn't pressured about it.

Culturally, I'm a Christian atheist. I don't know if that makes sense to you. Farnaz, who is very interesting to read is a Jewish atheist who escped from Iran. I knew next to nothing about MIddle Eastern Jews until I started reading her posts. I did some research and learned much more than I could ever have wanted to know about ongoing antisemitism in this world.

In light of my background, it won't surprise you to know that Jewish jokes were not foreign to me.
Contra Susan, it DOES MATTER WHO TELLS THE JOKES, regardless of whether they're Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, etc. In other words, there are no bstract "examples."

I don't post here often. MOstly, I just read. This particular essay and the attempts to explain to Jacoby moved me, and in an unusual move for me, I decided to get involved.

Also, on the last thread I read an exchange between Thomas Baum, a Christian, an evangelist of sorts, and Merry Anonymous, an atheist, who describes himself as "a former captive of Christianity." The chat was so moving, so promising of what real communication between believers and atheists can be, I started to feel more like I might want to participate.

Tim

Tim, my question continues to be on this atheist blog, why can't atheists make fun of themselves and why can't they take a joke that is directed at them. Read PAM's posts. If that is an atheist response to jokes, then God have mercy!

What do other contexts have to say about why atheists can't make jokes about themselves and can't stand being ridiculed. Atheists are not averse to making fun of believers all the time.

Tim, the atheists on the blog I referred to were supremely self confident and respected others. I couldn't keep up because every line of mine was taken seriously by one moderator and responded to very seriously. My popping in on an impulse every now and then with a gap of a few days was not just conducive to an ongoing conversation. I still treasure the wonderful memories. I learned a lot from atheists there, as surely I have learned here too from some who have been equally smart and kind and fun.

Anon:

Tim, I'm not a Muslim. Muslims have been taking non-stop hammering for nineteen months on this forum. There is no need to add Muslim bashing jokes to continue bashing.
____________

Absolutely final post on this: I AM not concerned about Muslims, Catholics, Christians, Hindus, etc.

THERE IS A LARGER AND MUCH MORE IMPORTANT POINT AT ISSUE.

REREAD SUSAN'S ESSAY. THEN SCROLL DOWN TO NEAR THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE. READ FARNAZ, PAM, ET AL, ON JEWISH IDENTITY AND THE USE OF JEWS AS AN "EXAMPLE." READ M. ANONYMOUS. READ MY RECENT COMMENTS.

IF YOU STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND, I'M SORRY. I CAN SEE THAT WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS NOT EASY TO COMMUNICATE ON THIS THREAD.

IF YOU DO UNDERSTAND, COULD YOU PLEASE LET ME KNOW.

TIM

A religious joke told to me, probably about 10 years ago, which was funny enough for me to remember all this time, so I will pass it on here:

A priest and a nun were on a business day trip, attending a conference. When they were driving home that evening, it became very stormy, and then the car broke down. But they had just passed a hotel, so they got out and walked back to it.

At the hotel, they asked the clerk if he had 2 rooms for the night. The clerk responded that he only had one room left, but it had 2 beds. The priest protested that they could not stay alone together in a hotel room over night and he insisted on 2 separate rooms. But there was nothing the clerk could do; there was only 1 room left.

Finally, the nun said, "we're adults; the room has 2 beds; we can each sleep separately in the 2 beds; at least we will be in out of the rain; we can handle it; the room with 2 beds will be fine."

Later, after they got moved into the room, and settled into bed, the priest turned off the light. After a few minutes, in the dark, the nun complained quietly and tentatively, "I'm cold."

The priest turned on the light, got up, went to the closet, got an extra blanket, and laid it over the nun. Then he got back into his bed and turned out the light.

After a few more minutes, the nun said again, in a quiet, plaintive voice, "I'm still cold."

Once again, the priest turned on the light, got up, went to the closet, got an extra blanket, and laid it over the nun. Then he got back his into bed and turned out the light.

After a few more minutes, the nun said again, "I'm still cold." Then hesitatingly, she said, "Couldn't we, just for tonight, pretend like we're married?"

The priest, answered, "ok."

Then after a brief pause, he continued in a harsh tone, "Get your own damn blanket!"

Tim, I'm not a Muslim. Muslims have been taking non-stop hammering for nineteen months on this forum. There is no need to add Muslim bashing jokes to continue bashing.

Ms Jacoby,

It was nice of you to pop in and add your views on what humor with a context is all about. However I must add knowing who my grandparents were won't get you very far with understanding my sense of humor, not even for that matter who my parents are. Context is important only for jokes that are made up on the spot for an occasion, which the one you mentioned was re the Kennedy family.

What about all the best sellers with only jokes in it? Even as a child, I was an avid reader of the Reader's Digest jokes and enjoyed them although I did not know the grandparents of anyone who contributed the jokes.

The atheists are yet to learn how to make fun of themselves. It's really that simple. But nothing is impossible. It can be learned. It could begin here.

Susan Jacoby:

I am scrolling down to near the bottom of the page. Can you use the "Jewish Z Y Z Cromosomes" Farnaz refers to?

Can you leave your "block, upper west side" that M. Anonymous refers to?

Can you understand what at least three bloggers have been trying to tell you?

Anon and SUsan Jacoby:

Tim, come off it; you used stuff out of Islam that cannot be transported to other religions. It was specifically Muslim bashing jokes and you posted at least four of them
-----------------
Precisely. Scroll down. Earlier, I did the same with Christian and Catholic jokes. Judging from Susan Jacoby's last comment, she still hasn't put the pieces together.

Re: Her Jewish example critics, of whom, in an indirect and not so indirect way, I have tried to be one.

"Examples" are not interchangeable. In response to her critics on her use of Jews as an example, she said she could have used any other group.

However, she did not. Further her past "examples" have also been Jews. She writes that her family told Catholic jokes at home. So did my mother's family. Why did she not use Catholics as an "example"?

She also shows evidence of not having seriously read her critics on this blog. RE: There is no such thing as an anti-Semite or a philo-Semite, as there are no Semites nor have there ever been.
Hence, the terms used now are "antisemites" and "philosemites," the latter absurd and oxymoronic.

Do you understand yet, Susan Jacoby? Your use of Jews as an "example" both lacked and has "context," a tragic historical context.

Tim

Anon:

Re: Your good time on atheist blogs

Atheists can be fun if like believers they don't take themselves too seriously and become arrogant and obnoxious as I had been known to be.

There is an atheist on this blog who has some humility and has helped me to be less of a jerk.

Tim, come off it; you used stuff out of Islam that cannot be transported to other religions. It was specifically Muslim bashing jokes and you posted at least four of them.

Actually, I find most of the jokes on this thread fairly strained. I think this is probably because real humor (about religion, atheism, or anything else) tends to emerge within a natural context, and working very hard to construct jokes about any particular group, on the Internet or anywhere else, tends not to produce anything really funny.

I'll give you an example of what I mean. Yesterday at the public memorial for Tim Russert televised from the Kennedy Center, Maria Shriver recounted that her friend Russert, upon learning that her daughter planned to apply to Boston College, was full of helpful advice. It wasn't enough to have good grades, Russert informed Shriver--who is, of course, a granddaughter of Rose and Joe Kennedy. You needed to know people in Boston. You needed to know people in the church, if your kid was to have any hope of getting into that school. Yes, yes, replied Maria. The hook in the story was the very funny idea that a Kennedy would need help from anyone with contacts in Boston or the church. The audience roared with laughter. Context is everything.

Context is exactly what a lot of the jokes on this thread lack, and I must say that this is true of a lot of the so-called jokes transmitted endlessly on the Internet. We're not sitting around having a few drinks. I don't know what your background is, who your grandparents are, whether you're making fun of yourself or of someone else. The down side of the Web is that it substitutes false intimacy based on anonymity for the real intimacy that underlies both friendship and humor.

Earlier, I believe it was Susan who asked, "What is truth?"

But there is another question to ponder;

"What is humor?"

What makes something funny, and what makes us laugh? Alot of the jokes that have been posted here as religeious humor or as atheistic humor are not really funny, at least to me. They do not even make me smile, in even a vauge recognition of humor.

Alot of humor comes from witty, organic social interaction, by which I mean, that humor often "just happens." And then also, you know when you hear a funny story or joke, because you laugh, and then you want to tell it yourself, and so there is a sort of viral quality to jokes that are really funny. But I am not sure where they come from.

I do not think it is very easy to just sit down, and dream up funny jokes off the top of your head. Some of the jokes posted here might be considered cute or clever, but that is not the same thing as being funny.

Btw Tim I must admit I had a really wonderful experience on an atheist blog. The atheists were really smart and very kind and great fun. I couldn't keep up the conversation only because I am not a regular blogger.

Anon:

Sure, sure Tim. Believers should really stick to googling and not bother to turn up here.
--

NOt at all. If you are a believer, why should you not turn up here? What I'm saying is that there are plenty of atheist jokes on the web. Why not google some, and paste them here?

Anon:

Re: "Muslim bashing"

LAst post on this: These jokes are not bashing anyone. They are "examples." See Jacoby's essay, her response to critics on Jewish "examples."

Like her, I could have used any example. I am merely being consistent with her view that all groups--Jews, Christians, Catholics, Muslims, Hindus, et al--are fair game.

One cannot argue that only one "example" should be considered "bashing"....or can one?

Is that not what Susan's critics regarding her Jewish "example" were trying to point out? That a decontextualized, ahistorical, pre-postmodern view of "examples" is not culturally healthy?

Sure, sure Tim. Believers should really stick to googling and not bother to turn up here.

Anon:

Again you "miss the point entirely." Suggest you scroll down. Read earlier posts on Jacoby's use of Jewish "example" in her essay, and response to comments.

A number of atheist jokes have been published on this thread. There are plenty more on the net.

Suggest you do a bit of research if you would like to see more of them.

Realist, and that was supposed to be joke *about* an atheist. It was a joke about God(in that sense it is truly an atheist joke)...

Typical atheist! Don't even know the meaning of making a joke about themselves. Sigh, sigh, sigh...

Forget it. What a horrible waste of time...

OK Here's one I've turned into an atheist joke:

A priest was playing golf with a doctor who was an atheist. The doctor was not much of a golfer and kept missing the ball altogether.

Each time he missed he swore: "Jesus Christ! I missed!". The priest cringed each time he heard the blasphemous curse.

After a while the priest got mad and said to the doctor, "Look if you keep cursing with the Lord Jesus' name like that, God will strike you down!"

But of course the doctor, being an atheist, just ignored the priest and kept on cursing. At the 18th hole, the atheist was teeing off. He was losing badly, he swung and completely missed the ball and again swore "Jesus F...... Christ, I missed!" Then there was a flash of lightning and an almighty roar of thunder, and all that was left of the priest was a smouldering pair of golf shoes. The doctor was shaken, he couldn't understand what had happened. Then a loud voice boomed down from the heavens: "Jesus Christ! I missed!"

Tim, you should share some really good jokes about atheists so that everyone can enjoy. This is an atheist blog. We have had enough Muslim bashing and some Muslims have shown a truly admirable response. Self criticism from atheists is sorely lacking.

Anon:

"The Muslims bashers are here! Take to the hills!"

Don't be ridiculous! You read Jacoby's essay and comment. The Muslim jokes are just examples. To use the words of her comment, you "miss the point entirely."

I could have used "any other group." There all interchangeable, no historic difference among them.

As she says, "Enjoy!"

PS. Sorry about omitting handle. Left it out in my rush to "publish."

The Muslim basher is still at it at 8:00 AM!

Run for cover!

I was referring to the Anonymous Muslim basher at 19 June 08 7:34, 7:40 & 7:48 AM.

M***mmed heard one of his wives was leaving him, so he rushed home, she was on the carpet in front of the tent with her belongings, he sat beside her and said “I heard you were planing to leave me” she said “yes, I heard your other wives saying you were a pedophile” so he thinks for a minute or so and then he responds “that is a mighty big word for a six year old”……

Aisha was his brothers daughter whom he took at age six, but tried to take much younger, so maybe inc'st needs to be added into this joke.

If the shoe fits, wear it…..

The Muslims bashers are here! Take to the hills!

This was meant to have atheists prove their capacity for self satire. But we are not going to see that any time soon, unless one thinks their atheist- always-the-scientist jokes are funny.

Gerry came up with an exception. Can't take that joke apart now for

I'm outa here for good...

A M*slim girl says to her mommy, "After Abdul blows up, can I have his room?"

PAM:

All your anonymous defenders are so obviously you as to make reading them an embarassment.

Is this thread all you have to boost your ego?

Q How can you recognise a well-balanced M*slim?

A He's got chips on both shoulders.

Nine year old Aisha and her kid brother Ahmed are talking about Mohammed. Aisha said "Last night Uncle Mo came to me and told me I had the gates of paradise between my legs and he had the key between his"

Thia one takes the cake HAHAHAHA!

Mohammad:
This is me:

(|| >: ->( >

Death to me!

Susan Jacoby: Public legality, of course, has nothing to do with what is acceptable in private. At a party, one is well-advised not to make any jokes about religion or ethnicity--unless all of the people at the party are members of one faith or one ethnic group.

------------------

This rule may well hold when believers make jokes about atheists making jokes about believers. PAM has proved the point.

One is well advised not to make fun of atheists, not even their ridiculous way of ridiculing believers.

Gerry:

Anonymous 5:13, thanks, I posted (5:00) as an answer to Anonymous 3:20.

If you have to stick to the handle "Anonymous", for the sake of clarity please at least add a number, like "Anonymous1", or Anonymous2". to avoid misunderstandings in the discussion.

June 19, 2008 5:46 AM

Gerry:

...you actually admit that you are fundamentally inclined to be an atheist (welcome!)...

--------------

See I was mistaken for an atheist...
September 17, 2007 11:06 AM

Gerry, I'm not Anonymous 19 June 08 3:20. I will have to take the chance of being mistaken for number of Anonymii. But what the heck. I just noticed that some of my posts of last year have since disappeared although I thought I had managed to acquire a distinct identity. So much for identity and posts. No point in investing a lot of thought in sharing profound thoughts. So an Anonymous username will do and an occasional flippant comment is enough too. I must warn you though that I am not the one you might take me to be, since I mentioned I have been mistaken for an atheist. I'm *not* J who has also earned that distinction.

Gerry:

Anonymous,

you forgot the other option you have for feeling a lot better: Stop despising all atheists! It will bring you much closer to your religion!

June 19, 2008 5:00 AM

---------------------------------

Wasted good advice Gerry. I have no hatred for anyone including you even though you wrote such a lousy joke. ;)

Anonymous 5:13, thanks, I posted (5:00) as an answer to Anonymous 3:20.

If you have to stick to the handle "Anonymous", for the sake of clarity please at least add a number, like "Anonymous1", or Anonymous2". to avoid misunderstandings in the discussion.

Gerry, I have even been mistaken for an atheist by atheists! I'm an extremely liberal believer. A bit of real mental fencing is good for health knowing I have no hatred for atheists of any stripe.

To PAM ---

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 18.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Pam:

"This thread is to mock atheists as atheists have been mocking believers."

Because you say so? My, you do have delusions of grandeur, don't you?

June 19, 2008 12:25 AM

To PAM ---

I believe in freedom of speech and equality. Since this is an international forum: ever read the UN Charter of Universal Human Rights? It is my favorite document because it holds good for all UN member countries. I learned it at school when I was only eleven years old and it left a lasting impact on me.

Since many Anonymouses have posted on this thread, for my part I can say that I feel no hatred for atheists, nor have I expressed any. I made it a point to emphasize that only *some* anti-theists on this thread would be an embarrassment to serious good willed atheists who form the majority.

I took PAM and Mr Mark on with as much humor as I was capable of without insulting them as persons in any way, merely ridiculing them about the way they humiliate believers.

Anonymous,

you forgot the other option you have for feeling a lot better: Stop despising all atheists! It will bring you much closer to your religion!

-------------------------------

Yesterday's televised dispute between the non-rabbit-breeding society and the non-guinea-pig-breeding society was so fierce that they almost got at each others' throat.

The dispute ended through the intervention of the treasurer of the non-white-rat-breeding society, who suggested the ecumenical foundation of a non-small-animals-breeding association.

Anonymous,

It seems to me that people are more apt to show their true colors when they think that no one knows who they are. When posting comments on a public site, one ought to attach one's post. This has the wonderful effect of discouraging one from writing things that he would not want his mother to read.

J

My advice to believers based on my exchange with PAM and whoever responded to the post addressed to PAM, LEAVE THEM ALONE. Apparently they believe in the right of free speech only for themselves, in their right to ridicule religions and believers, but seem to get quite nasty when believers exercise it in relation to atheism and atheists. Not a fun crowd to hang out with. Move on.

Anonymous:

Anonymous responded to a comment addressed to PAM.

OK. Warning about what awaits believers who dare make fun of anti-theists this "GET A LIFE ADDICT" - is that your very best?

Believers are looking for some real humor from anti-theists, some real satire about *themselves.* Insulting and threatening believers doesn't count as self satire when anti-theists do it.

Try again.

NO THANKS, I HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO.....AND JUST GOT DONE DOING IT.............AND, WELL..WOW!~

June 19, 2008 3:26 AM

-----------------

That reads like smug satisfaction about having done something *against* believers. Thus you admit you can't take satire *about anti-theists* although you expect believers to take insults.

Get yourself a real sense of humor, in case that is not what you just did.

Anonymous responded to a comment addressed to PAM.

OK. Warning about what awaits believers who dare make fun of anti-theists this "GET A LIFE ADDICT" - is that your very best?

Believers are looking for some real humor from anti-theists, some real satire about *themselves.* Insulting and threatening believers doesn't count as self satire when anti-theists do it.

Try again.

NO THANKS, I HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO.....AND JUST GOT DONE DOING IT.............AND, WELL..WOW!~

Anon, "Anti-theists could learn if they wanted to."

If I wanted to learn it wouldn't be from an Antheist, it would be from someone with intelligence, not someone sprewing hatred, revenge, paybacks, and unforgiveness.

No thanks to all of there're dark heartedness and what they have to offer, I am done with their negative hateful mentality, they can shove it where the shine doesn't shine and keep it there!

I despise all Atheist and feel the world would be better off without them just as I would be.

Arminius, Arminius, Arminius,

Are you sure your "netting" gal friend, the Reality Challenged and Obfuscating Jihadist, lives in Malaysia? For all we know she could be a Saudi/Sunni/poor poet "wannabee" operative who lives in Brooklyn.

Or maybe she is Gabriel's brother sent to Earth to clean up Mohammed's mess??

And you should be ashamed of yourself wanting to delete my e-mails!!! Now you got your gal friend all upset.

And if The Jihadist is who she says she is, Mike Myers was apparently impressed with her "pork rib" munching ability i.e. not one drip of barbecue sauce got on her hajib.

Merry Anonymous, with due respect, is that a real name? Just asking since you want all Anonymous to post under their real names.

"You are merely getting a taste of your own medicine. Sometimes medicine can be bitter. Think of all the poor taste some anti-theists have displayed on this forum and you have contributed your share."

REMEMBER WHAT YOU PREACHED WHEN IT IS YOUR TIME TO GET YOUR MEDICINE, ET A LIFE ADDICT!

BITTER ENOUGH FOR YOU?

June 19, 2008 12:31 AM

------------

Anonymous responded to a comment addressed to PAM.

OK. Warning about what awaits believers who dare make fun of anti-theists this "GET A LIFE ADDICT" - is that your very best?

Believers are looking for some real humor from anti-theists, some real satire about *themselves.* Insulting and threatening believers doesn't count as self satire when anti-theists do it.

Try again.

Farnaz:

RE: My last post to you

Trust you understand that when I say "pedagogically useful," I mean as a negative example, an example of "single-system thinking" (Wellesley group).

Best,
M. Anonymous

Farnaz:

If you're still having meetings over the cafeteria incident you reference, why not email or distribute Jacoby's essay and her reply to her Jewish "example" critics: June 18, 2008 12:41 PM.

I'm only half joking. If any of your colleagues have crossed the road, they may find Jacoby pedagogically useful in discussions.

Good luck with that awful business.

M. Anonymous

Anonymous:

"You are merely getting a taste of your own medicine. Sometimes medicine can be bitter. Think of all the poor taste some anti-theists have displayed on this forum and you have contributed your share."

REMEMBER WHAT YOU PREACHED WHEN IT IS YOUR TIME TO GET YOUR MEDICINE, ET A LIFE ADDICT!

BITTER ENOUGH FOR YOU?

June 19, 2008 12:31 AM

--------------------

Not to worry, believers have a lot of experience on this forum swallowing the bitter medicine handed to them by some anti-theists. Now it is their turn to accept some. Sadly they are showing such poor taste and no grace at all. Believers set a good example for months. Anti-theists could learn if they wanted to.

Jihadist's Muslim vs Catholic joke:

A long out of work Muslim desperately looking for a job in a Catholic-owned shop.

Catholic shopkeeper : I only employ Catholics.

Muslim : I am a Catholic! Born of true faith Catholic parents who were married by a bishop in a church. In fact, my mother is a nun and my father is a priest.

--------------------

* Catholics are long known to set up charitable institutions for all people irrespective of religious affiliation; Muslims less so.

* No Catholic bishop would marry a nun and a priest in a Church. Bastards as products of a relationship between a nun and priest are possible but not as a lawful child.

The Muslim was either bluffing to get a job or was a bastard neglected child of nun and priest out of wedlock who had converted to Islam.

It is a funny joke about a Muslim.

Anonymous:

Is it 2042 yet?

June 19, 2008 12:02 AM

Pray tell us about the magical number

why of course, "Atheists have 2 a**holes, one behind and the other is there're mouth because they speak is bullsh*t!"

Voices of the Other:

Though an atheist, am very fond of Beruriah, whom I've begun studying seriously. As you may know, there is now "Beruriah Studies."

Will you be posting more on her? Her pronouncements, etc.? Will you explicate?

Respectfully,
M. Anonymous

Atheists have 2 a**holes, one behind and the other is there're mouth because they speak is bullsh*t!

"You are merely getting a taste of your own medicine. Sometimes medicine can be bitter. Think of all the poor taste some anti-theists have displayed on this forum and you have contributed your share."

REMEMBER WHAT YOU PREACHED WHEN IT IS YOUR TIME TO GET YOUR MEDICINE, ET A LIFE ADDICT!

BITTER ENOUGH FOR YOU?

Anonymous:

Is it 2042 yet?

June 19, 2008 12:02 AM

Pray tell us about the magical number.

"This thread is to mock atheists as atheists have been mocking believers."

Because you say so? My, you do have delusions of grandeur, don't you?

An atheist bails out of his failing aircraft over the Pacific Ocean. He has the misfortune to land on an Island inhabited only by cannabalistic primitives. He spots them coming for him and sees a shaman type cheering the others on from the back of the mob.

Thinking "Awe just a bunch of religious primitives. This should be easy." He quickly pulls his butane lighter out of his pocket and as the mob closes in he lights it. The mob stops and begins cheering.

I'll be the atheist mutters under his breath these religious types are so gullible I'll have 'em eating out of my hand in no time.

Just then the shaman makes his way to the front of the mob and snatches the lighter out of his hand. And producing another one from a pouch about his neck throws it on the ground and places the atheists lighter in it and says something to the crowd in what passes for language among his people then he turns back to the Atheist and says in broken English. Thanks a heap Mac you get use to those things lighting a fire the old way is a royal pain in the keester.

The Atheist, taken aback, stammers, "What did you tell the crowd?"

Told 'em fine joke Dinner brought the fire with which to cook it.

To PAM ---

This thread is to mock atheists as atheists have been mocking believers.

You are merely getting a taste of your own medicine. Sometimes medicine can be bitter. Think of all the poor taste some anti-theists have displayed on this forum and you have contributed your share.

Christian Anonymous:

RE: Dennett

Thanks! I have to say that in my view, Dawkins is brilliant, but is out of his element here.

As for Dennett, needless to say, he doesn't have a lot of time. If you could email him as well, that might be helpful.

M. Anonymous

From Mr Mark's selection:

During the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution, one morning's executions began with three men: a rabbi, a Catholicpriest, and a rationalist skeptic.

The rabbi was marched up onto the platform first. There, facing the guillotine, he was asked if he had any last words. And the rabbi cried out, "I believe in the one and only true God, and He shall save me." The executioner then positioned the rabbi below the blade, set the block above his neck, and pulled the cord to set the terrible instrument in motion. The heavy cleaver plunged downward, searing the air. But then, abruptly, it stopped with a crack just a few in heches above the would-be victim's neck. To which the rabbi said, "I told you so."

"It's a miracle!" gasped the crowd. And the executioner had to agree, letting the rabbi go.

Next in line was the priest. Asked for his final words, he declared, "I believe in Jesus Christ the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost who will rescue me in my hour of need." The executioner then positioned this man beneath the blade. And he pulled the cord. Again the blade flew downward thump! creak! ...stopping just short of its mark once more.

"Another miracle!" sighed the disappointed crowd. And the executioner for the second time had no choice but to let the condemned go free.

Now it was the skeptic's turn. "What final words have you to say?" he was asked. But the skeptic didn't hear. Staring intently at the ominous engine of death, he seemed lost. Not until the executioner poked him in the ribs and the question was asked again did he reply.

"Oh, I see your problem," the skeptic said pointing. "You've got a blockage in the gear assembly, right there!"

-------------------------------

* If the atheist had noticed the blockage in the gear assembly and knew that it was the real reason for the "miracle," he would not have considered it the ominous engine of death. All he had to do was invent an invention to prove he could stop the machine with his own power without the help of the gods. But our atheist was not imaginative.

* By pointing to the technical error the atheist was making sure the executioner would do his task thoroughly of getting the atheist executed; not the wisest thing he could have done for himself. Never mind the others may have got their miraculous deliverance revoked.

* What if the believers had noticed the same error and pretended they didn't know about it and in their wisdom prayed in their hearts the executioner would let them off without noticing the error attributing the whole thing to a miracle.

* The "scientist" atheist in this case was too clever for his own good.

NOW THAT IS THE REAL ATHEIST JOKE IN CASE ANYONE MISSED IT!

What is truth?

There is no clear answer.

There is an art to visualizing truth; and there is an artistic predisposition among some people, to the art of truthful visualization.

Little bits of information and chunks of knowledge, scattered accross the landscape of human experience, gathered up, randomonly, or hunted for with curiousity and excitement, and then arranged in our minds, to make something sensible, if not coherent, if not beautiful.

Is it 2042 yet?

Ah, getting a wee more interesting here with CCNL whining about deleting my posts. Talk about CCNL's advocacy of freedom of thought, freedom of of religion and freedom of expression! LOL

**************************************************

Mr. Mark,

How does an atheist know the “truth”?

* He reads four books written by atheists he considers geniuses of physics, theory of relativity, evolutionary biology and/or who wrote and articulate better what he thinks but can’t write as well and quote from them over and over and over and over again, even from Karl Marx....

How does an atheist gets his knowledge?

* See above on how atheist know the “truth”:)

**************************************************

Young imam : Mother, I am in love with a lovely atheist lady.

Young imam's mother : But you must convert her first. What will people say, for your children to be raised as heathens.

Young imam : I will try then.

Several weeks later.............

Young imam's mother : Son, you look sad and dejected. I though your efforts to bring her closer to God is going on well.

Young imam : Yes mother, too well. She decided to be a Catholic nun to surrender herself completely to God and do God's work with complete love and selflessness.

*************************************************

A long out of work Muslim desperately looking for a job in a Catholic-owned shop.

Catholic shopkeeper : I only employ Catholics.

Muslim : I am a Catholic! Born of true faith Catholic parents who were married by a bishop in a church. In fact, my mother is a nun and my father is a priest.

**************************************************

What is truth?

What we see.
What we know.
What we understand.
What we believe in.

Do we see everything?
Do we know everything?
Do we understand everything?
Do we believe in everything?

Cheers and out

"J"

ANONYMOUS:
And my joke, posted at 5:19? You have a problem with that one, too? No atheist "portrayed as scientist", putting the lie to your assertion.

BTW, haven't heard any from you, making fun of religion. Turn about is fair play, you know.

In one day on this thread, you have made 4 completely fallacious statements, to wit:

"Atheists who claim science and atheism are synonyms are clowns who do not understand science."

"Atheists who claim believers do not understand science are pathetically ignorant."

"Some atheists would have believers believe that atheism in itself makes scientists of them and belief in God makes believers incapable of understanding science."

"Believers must have more than a sense of humor for anti-theists would like to abolish all religions altogether."

Not only are your statements false, but they are presented in the nastiest spirit possible. If you and Spidey are examples of Christianity, I'll stick with Atheism.

Merry Anonymous, I appreciate your attempt to get Daniel Dennett to post more often on this forum. Thank you.

Anti-theists like Sam Harris, Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens must be an embarrassment to serious, good willed atheists, as the hatred preaching fundamentalist Christians are an embarrassment to the vast majority of serious, real Christians.

Anon:

Re: Guillotine joke

Though an atheist, I always loved that joke. Do you have a handle you ordinarily use? If so, why not use it?

-----------------
Observer12:

Re: "How many lightbulbs does it take to change an atheist?"

Never heard that one before. Very smart. Doesn't appear to be on the web. Does it originate with you?

Spidey,

There is really no use in replying to you, so bound as you are in your self-made straitjacket of hatred that you cannot listen to Christ's message.

You said: "Open rebuke is greater than secret love."

Jesus preached OPEN love, and said it was better than anything else, including rebuke. Where does that leave you? In a bitter desert of self-made sorrow and loneliness, with no one that will listen to the thorns and thistles of your words of despite.

But then, you don't know about the Gospels, do you? You are to be pitied. With your attitude, I am convinced that you would have given vinegar to our Lord on the cross, when He thirsted.

Reread the joke selected by Mr Mark about a "Christian" psychiatrist and an atheist patient.

There is no such profession as Christian psychiatry, but our clever atheist invents one since he is a scientist and inventor by mere virtue of his atheism. Now even the psychiatrist of his own invention canNOT match his knowledge of psychiatry for the mere act of being an atheist makes him an expert in all the sciences.

NOW THAT IS THE REAL ATHEIST JOKE IN CASE ANYONE MISSED IT.

Reread the joke selected by Mr Mark about a "Christian" psychiatrist and an atheist patient.

There is no such profession as Christian psychiatry, but our clever atheist invents one since he is a scientist and inventor by mere virtue of his atheism. Now even the psychiatrist of his own invention can match his knowledge of psychiatry for the mere act of being an atheist makes him an expert in all the sciences.

NOW THAT IS THE REAL ATHEIST JOKE IN CASE ANYONE MISSED IT.

More from Mr Mark's collection of atheist "jokes" which proves atheists are scientists by virtue of their atheism alone

A Jew, A Catholic, and an atheist are rowing in Lake Erie when their boat springs a huge leak. The Jew looks skyward, and says “Oh, Adonai, if you save me, I promise I’ll sail to Israel and spend the rest of my days trying to reclaim the land you gave us.” The Catholic looks skyward, and says, “Oh, Jesus, if you save me, I promise I’ll fly to the Vatican and spend the rest of my days singing your praises.” The atheist says, “Oh, guys, if you pass me that one life preserver, I promise I’ll swim to Cleveland.” “And how will you spend the rest of your days?” the Jew and the Catholic ask. “Well,” says the atheist, “I’m not sure, but I can tell you one thing: I’ll never go rowing with other atheists.”

How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?
Two. One to actually change the bulb, and the other to videotape the job so fundamentalists won’t claim that god did it.

An atheist goes to a Christian psychiatrist, who hands her an inkblot and says, “Tell me what you see.” The atheist says, “I see Jesus on the cross.” The psychiatrist hands her a second inkblot, and says, “Now tell me what you see.” The atheist says, “I still see Jesus on the cross.” The psychiatrist hands her a third inkblot, and says, “What do you see now?” The atheist says, “It’s Jesus on the cross again.” The psychiatrist says, “Hmmm. Obviously you’ve got Jesus on the brain.” The atheist replies, “Me? I only read the captions you wrote.”

Atheist: What’s this fly doing in my soup?
Waiter: Praying.
Atheist: Very funny. I can’t eat this. Take it back.
Waiter: You see? The fly’s prayers were answered.

How can you tell if an atheist lives in your refrigerator?
You find a copy of The God Delusion hidden in the cream cheese.

An atheist buys an ancient lamp at an auction, takes it home, and begins to polish it. Suddenly, a genie appears, and says, “I’ll grant you three wishes, Master.” The atheist says, “I wish I could believe in you.” The genie snaps his fingers, and suddenly the atheist believes in him. The atheist says, “Wow. I wish all atheists would believe this.” The genie snaps his fingers again, and suddenly atheists all over the world begin to believe in genies. “What about your third wish?” asks the genie. “Well,” says the atheist, “I wish for a billion dollars.” The genie snaps his fingers for a third time, but nothing happens. “What’s wrong?” asks the atheist. The genie shrugs and says, “Just because you believe in me, doesn’t necessarily mean that I really exist.”

Two cannibals are eating an atheist, and one says to the other, “Can you believe the way this guy tastes?”

Knock, knock.
Who’s there?
God.
Who?
God.
Who?
God.
Must be the wind.

During the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution, one morning's executions began with three men: a rabbi, a Catholicpriest, and a rationalist skeptic.

The rabbi was marched up onto the platform first. There, facing the guillotine, he was asked if he had any last words. And the rabbi cried out, "I believe in the one and only true God, and He shall save me." The executioner then positioned the rabbi below the blade, set the block above his neck, and pulled the cord to set the terrible instrument in motion. The heavy cleaver plunged downward, searing the air. But then, abruptly, it stopped with a crack just a few inches above the would-be victim's neck. To which the rabbi said, "I told you so."

"It's a miracle!" gasped the crowd. And the executioner had to agree, letting the rabbi go.

Next in line was the priest. Asked for his final words, he declared, "I believe in Jesus Christ the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost who will rescue me in my hour of need." The executioner then positioned this man beneath the blade. And he pulled the cord. Again the blade flew downward thump! creak! ...stopping just short of its mark once more.

"Another miracle!" sighed the disappointed crowd. And the executioner for the second time had no choice but to let the condemned go free.

Now it was the skeptic's turn. "What final words have you to say?" he was asked. But the skeptic didn't hear. Staring intently at the ominous engine of death, he seemed lost. Not until the executioner poked him in the ribs and the question was asked again did he reply.

"Oh, I see your problem," the skeptic said pointing. "You've got a blockage in the gear assembly, right there!"

June 18, 2008 2:54 PM

Mr Mark:

More atheist jokes:

Why did the atheist cross the road?
He thought there might be a street on the other side, but he wouldn’t believe it until he tested his hypothesis.

Why did the atheist throw her watch out the window?
She wanted to see if it was designed intelligently enough to evolve into a bird.

A minister, a priest, a rabbi, and an atheist meet in a bar at 10:00 a.m. The bartender asks the minister what he’ll have, and the minister orders a martini. The priest also orders a martini, as does the rabbi. When the bartender asks the atheist what he wants, the atheist says he'd like a cup of coffee. “Why aren’t you having a martini like those guys?” asks the bartender. “Oh,” says the atheist, “I don’t believe in martinis before lunch.”

Mr Mark's idea of an atheist joke as posted June 18, 2008 5:43 PM

* Anyone who opens their eyes becomes an atheist

* A Christian preacher is the biggest liar of them all

NOW THAT IS THE ATHEIST JOKE, WHAT THEY CONSIDER AN ATHEIST JOKE!

Atheists and Religious Adherents:

With due respect to Susan Jaoby, Sam Harris, on this blog, the only sriously learned, culturally literate atheist is Charles Dennett, whom I have the pleasure to know and who does not publish here frequently.

An admitted "bright," Dennet nevertheless recommends that children be educated in all relgions.

I have emailed him and asked him to consider writing more frequently for this blog. Suggest you look at his essays in the archives and, if you agree, email him with the same request.

In the atheist world of Mr Mark and PAM et al, all atheists are Thomas Alva Edison. It is hard to miss their atheist "jokes" where every atheist is portrayed as a scientist.

datdamwuf:

Dam, you are right there are no decent jokes about Atheists. A shout out to the poster with the Unitarian joke, it was great! That's why Atheists go to their "church", it is really a social place with no pressure. Of course that is what all churches are but in all the others you have to be "one of them" to attend.

On a more serious note, this article points to something that deeply disturbs me. Susan said: "That said, religious groups, including minorities, have enormous power (far too much power, in my opinion) to dictate positive images of their faith to the mainstream print and broadcast media."

And she is right, far too much power. And no where is it more obvious than in the willing suppression of free speech by mainstream media when it comes to any cartoon, or other ridicule of the religion of Islam. Fear has made our media less free, our own government has been complicit in this. The media treats the Muslim religion with kid gloves and those that have the temerity to publish anything that makes fun of or censors Islam is usually terrorized to the point that they stop. I cannot remember any time when our media would self censor due to religious pressure or from atheists. Can you?

The fact is that no religious or ethnic group should be able to suppress the media. I'm not sure how to fix it when the people threatening are not pursued and prosecuted.

June 18, 2008 4:36 PM

---------------

In a world where the majority are believers Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher et al have been selling books by the millions and are being honored with interviews and public debates with prominent theologians. Believers must have more than a sense of humor for anti-theists would like to abolish all religions altogether.

Gosh, CCNL, that is great news. I would like very much to meet Jihadist, and have a long conversation with her over coffee or tea or whatever she drinks. I hope she brings her husband, I'd like to meet him too. I don't suppose you could forward the air fare to Malaysia to me? (BTW, I don't have the remotest desire to meet you.)

Arminius,

The Reality Challenged and Obfuscating Jihadist is calling. Please hurry home!!!

On death:

Babylonian Talmud, tractate Berachoth 10a*

It once happened that Rabbi Meir was sitting and lecturing in the house of study on Sabbath afternoon, and his two sons died. What did their mother [Beruriah] do? She laid the two of them on the bed and spread a sheet over them. After the departure of the Sabbath, Rabbi Meir came home from the house of study. He said to her, “Where are my two sons?" She said, "They went to the house of study.'' He said, "I was watching the house of study, and I did not see them." She gave him a cup for havdalah, and he recited the havdalah prayer. He again said, ''Where are my two sons?" She said to him, "They went to another place and will soon come." She set food before him, and he ate and blessed.

After he blessed, she said, "I have a question to ask you." He said to her, "Ask your question." She said to him, "Some time ago a man came and gave me something to keep for him. Now he comes and seeks to take it. Shall we return it to him or not?" He said to her, "Daughter, whoever has an object in trust must return it to its owner." She said to him, "Master, I would not have given it to him without your knowledge." What did she do? She took him by the hand and led him up to the room. She led him to the bed and removed the sheet that was on them.

When he saw the two of them lying dead on the bed, he began to cry and say, "My sons, my sons..." At that time she said to Rabbi Meir, "Master, did you not say to me that I must return the trust to its master?” He said, "The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord" (Job 1:21).

Midrash (Proverbs), 31:10

*While the above is haggadic (legend as exegesis), Beruriah was an actual historical figure of the 2nd century. Her reasoning and Midrash (a form of exegesis) are presented in both the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds.

R. Meir, her husband, was one of the Tannai'm, third generation of Mishnah writers.

All terms can be googled.

April 1 News Flash:

The Reality Challenged and Obfuscating Jihadist has agreed to enter the Five Point Program for Deflawing her 45.3456780 years of Islamic brainwashing.

a closer look:

Well, a conspicuous lack of humor can be a funny thing in itself. Certainly ethnic and racial humor is based almost exclusively on stereotyping, which in turn is based on myth (in the pejorative sense) and confabulation - but why it's ok for folks to make fun of themselves on this basis and yet take offense when 'outsiders' do it is kind of a mystery. Apparently self-deprecation at least for some, is just part of the 'we're all in it together' self-identity thing. Any theories?

On the other hand, humor as an attitude seems to be as universal as religion.....hard-wired indeed!

Atheist humor is rare, because it's hard to make fun of the lack of belief in a supernatural reality - well, it's got to be way more challenging anyway. Is there any substance to be had in non-belief? You could always go after the scientific orientation that many atheists subscribe to. But what's funny about empiricism?

Probably atheists would be best at atheist humor anyway - needless to say, religionists would not be welcome to participate! You lack the requisite identity.

I presume you would have to go after a stereotypical atheist attitude, rather than the vacuum of non-belief - as Susan points out, comedic genius is probably up to the task.

Do we have any here?

June 18, 2008 10:09 AM

---------------

There is a particular brand of anti-theists some of whom made their appearance on this forum who make believe atheism makes scientists out of them. Just the fact of being an atheist gives them the qualification to teach science to believers.

Some of us happen to know there are a billion scientists in China and many millions more in the former Soviet Union all by mere virtue of being atheists. Now if atheists on this forum don't think that is funny... Funnier still is how they feel a compulsion to teach science to all believers even fully trained scientists.

CCNL, your village is calling too. Please hurry home.

Spidey,

Whatever 'religion' you belong to, whatever twisted cult, it is not Christianity. I have read many of your outpukings of hatred, and there is nothing of Jesus there. Remember Jesus, called the Christ? That's where Christians get their name. Remember 'love your neighber'? I don't think that ever registered with you.

Oh, by the way, your village keeps calling - their idiot is missing. Time for you to go home.

What a pity that we don't get these blog posts as emails so we could instantly delete Arminius and his girl friend The Reality Challenged and Obfuscating Jihadist!!!!!!

Fidel Castro dies. The old man meets Peter, who says: "Fidel, you perfectly know where you are going, so good by and burn for ever"

Fidel walks down to hell. Satan welcomes Fidel and lead him to the hottest room.

After two months complains from sinners in the hottest room start escalating. Satan feels the pressure and yells: "What happen with you stupid sinners, you were quiet just months ago and now all is protests, menace of strikes and want to form an union". The comrade Fidel steps forward and replays: "It's the right of the people, freedom and equality for all!"

Satan goes to the telephone and calls heaven. A warm voice answers: "This is Peter in the celestial palace, how in the heaven may I help you". "Hello Peter, this is Satan, I need a favor. This old man Fidel is a pin in you know where. He has instigated the sinners and they may start bombing the hell or who knows what. This is not good for the hell nor for you gays in heaven. I may even quit, unless you give me a break for a while. I'm sending Fidel to heaven for a couple of weeks so I can control the rest of the sinners in the hottest room".

A week pass and Satan decides to call Peter to see how things are in heaven. An strident voice answers the phone: "People's Republic of Heavens, this is comrade Peter, what in the hell is your problem". Astonished Satan realized that something very ugly is happening up there, then decides that he better talks directly with one of the bosses: "Hello Peter, may I talk with God". Then Peter yells: "God does not exist, religion is the opiate of the masses"

Peace and fun to all,

JAC

Susan Jacoby,

But did the historic Jesus really say "What is truth?" No he did not according to most of the historic Jesus exegetes on the On Faith panel, i.e. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredricksen.

http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/180_Pilates_Questions

A Chasidic Parable

A man came to a Teacher (rabbi, sage, very learned person) and said, "Teacher, my friend has told me "There is no God. What should I do?"

Teacher: "Act as if you agree with him and that you are the only one who can help him."

17th century

There is a similar Sufi parable.

Susan,

Thanks for the reply, I am complimented. Yes, you are right, the Gospels were written by men. As you may remember, I am Christian, but I am aware of the problems in the bible. Anyway, I believe the authors were inspired by God, but were not taking dictation.

Pilate's statement has always intrigued me. I have never been satisfied with any definition of 'truth' that I have ever seen.

Respectfully,

Arminius

Arminius:

Pilate's question, "What is truth?" is THE greatest line in the New Testament--a line that shows that the gospels were written by men, not by a deity. It is, of course, the unanswerable question. It is the equivalent of Job's query to God in the Old Testament, "Does thou see as man sees?"

Mr Mark, you said:
"How does a believer knows the truth?
* He reads a book written by other men who were not as smart as him, rejects the parts he doesn't like and pounds what's left into a self-centered set of values that are modifiable as the situation demands."

My reply: I suggest that you substitute 'politician' for 'believer', and it will work a lot better.

Otherwise, we must get into a verbal duke-out about Pilate's statement, "What is truth?". I'm not really ready for that tonight, but it's a good question.

Arminius

For Jihadist:

How does a believer knows the truth?
* He reads a book written by other men who were not as smart as him, rejects the parts he doesn't like and pounds what's left into a self-centered set of values that are modifiable as the situation demands.

How does a believer gets his knowledge?
* He reads books written by other men who are a lot smarter than him, rejects the parts that don't agree with the books written by the men who were a lot stupider than him, and pounds what's left into a self-centered set of values that are modifiable as the situation demands.

:0

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated,

Pussycat! Muslims are forbidden to joke and laugh about anything. You must respect that.

Concy : Why do Muslims have no sense of humour?

Jihhy : Because God told us the truth about reality and it is nothing to laugh about.

**************************************************

Forgetful imam : "My friends, when I came here tonight to give a sermon, only God and myself knew what I was about to say to you, and now only God knows!”

**************************************************

Practical imam : "Every man should have at least one wife, because there are some things that just can't be blamed on the government."

So, Spiderman?

How do YOU make a bee?

Mr. Mark : "I found it all too typical that when the call went out on this thread to produce a few atheist jokes, it was the atheists who did all the work locating the jokes".

That is very telling, is it not?

* Believers don't really make jokes about other believers?

* Atheists can't even joke about themself or think of making jokes about themself and have to look for jokes about atheist and atheism from other sources?

How does an athiest knows the truth?
Refer, refer and refer to other sources.

How does a believer knows the truth?
God gives it to him.

How does an athiest gets his knowledge?
* Refer, refer and refer to other sources.

How does a believer gets his knowledge?
* God give it to him and it is within him.

A believer is never afraid to be idiotic and foolhardy, only atheists are.:)

Cheers
"J"

What a pity that we don't get these blog posts as emails so we could instantly delete CCNL, Spidey, and JJ!

If you find it offensive don't watch and above all don't pay to see it. Frankly Susan I am in agreement.

How much money did they lose on "The Golden Compass" again which was reputedly an attempt at a hit piece on Christianity by a guy who didn't know much if anything about Christianity? Did Christians picket or protest no we just didn't go see it.

Hmmm, time for that famous synopsis of the flaws and errors of contemporary religions. Said synopsis reduces these religions to include Hinduism to the laughable relics that they are. I believe Mike Myers has sequels in the works lampooning Christianity and then Islam in these future movies. In the Islamic sequel, I hear that the Reality Challenges and Obfuscating Jihadist will be sitting in a cabaret eating pork ribs with Jack Daniel's chasers and finishing with a good cigar

The Said Flaws and Errors:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

Many of the 1.5 million Conservative Jews and many of their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.

simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists, amazon.com) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider". (See Professor JD Crossan's book Who is Jesus)

3. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions). (wikipedia.com, and graduate theology studies at many large Catholic universities)

4. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/ plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers. (Karen Armstrong's books, Ms. Armstrong is an On Faith Panelist, the Encyclopedia Britannica and wikipedia.com)

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/ mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”. (cnn.com)

And who funds this terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia. (cnn.com)

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

The caste/laborer system and cow worship/reverence are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism." (Encyclopedia Britainnica)

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):" (wsu.edu/~dee/BUDDHISM/SIDD.HTM)

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies, and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.

Jacoby : "P.S. I don't find Mike Myers funny, so I won't be seeing The Love Guru. Somehow, I doubt that the reputation of Hindus is going to take a nose dive in America as a result of this movie."

Hindus and Indians themselves come out with better humour, satires and parodies on Indians and Hinduism.

There is a difference between "insider" and "outsider" jokes, satires and parodies. The "insider" is one his group can immediately recognise as true, while those by the "outsider" are seen as stereotypings and perceived as bigotry.

There is also the difference between "laughing at" and "laughing with". One would rather listen to jokes made by Chris Rock on African-Americans rather than those made by George Carlin. If Mr. George Carlin ever made any jokes on African-Americans.

Race and religion are personal. So are nationalities. Hence jokes by outsiders on race, religion or nationality can become personalised by the joker and the receiver of the joke. I have never heard so many jokes on the French except in the US and UK.

Perhaps we should consider if Hindus are offended by Mike Myers, "Love Guru" not because he is making light on their belief, but because his humour or satire is premised on a misrepresentation and misperception of bona-fide Hindu gurus and priests. It's one of a series of a long line of stereotyped "Hindu gurus" in Hollywood movies similar to stereotyped "Chinaman".

Humour is a sociological and cultural landmine. One can never be sure whom one offended until people think you are making fun of them and reacted to them, or regarded as a slur or slander of them.

How the other react to humour one makes about them is seen as the barometer of their like/dislike, trust/mistrust due to political, economic, social reasons or history of differences.

So is the tone and thrust of the humour one makes on the other as seen as a barometer of like/dislike. Most are seen as just humour-coated bigotry.

Only the best and truest jokes, comedies, satires last throught the ages.

- Does it hurt?
- Only when I laugh.

- Does it hurt?
- Only when I stop laughing.

Cheers
"J"

Arminius -

I found it all too typical that when the call went out on this thread to produce a few atheist jokes, it was the atheists who did all the work locating the jokes.

Oh well. We're also the ones who seem to be in charge of quoting the scriptures to make our points in debate.

Mr Mark,

I heard the kittens joke some years back, except when their eyes opened they changed from Republican kitties to Democrat kitties.

The boy and his kittens

One day, a preacher was walking along the street and he comes across a boy with a box filled with newly born kittens.

"Boy, what kind of kittens do you have there?" The preacher asked the young boy.

"They're christian kittens, sir" the boy replied. So the preacher, nods, smiles and walks along. Two weeks later he comes across the same boy and asks "How are those christian kittens doing?" The boy smiles at him, looks up and says "Oh, they're not christian kittens anymore"

The preacher, shocked by this exclaims "What... why not?!?" The boy continues to smile and looks at him, "Well, ya see, now they're eyes are open and they're atheists."

The Lying Boys

A clergyman was walking down the street when he came upon a
group of a few boys about 10 years of age, surrounding a dog.
Concerned that the boys were hurting the animal, he went over
and asked them what they were doing.

One of the boys replied, "This dog is an old neighborhood stray.
We take him home with us sometimes, but only one of us can take
him home. So we're having a contest: whichever one of us tells
the biggest lie can take him home today."

Of course, the Reverend was shocked. "You boys shouldn't be
having a contest telling lies!" he exclaimed. He then launched
into a 10-minute sermon against lying, beginning, "Don't you
boys know it's a sin to lie?" and ending with, "Why, when I was
your age, I never told a lie."

There was complete silence for about a minute. As the Reverend
smiled with satisfaction that he'd gotten through to them, the
smallest boy gave a deep sigh. "All right," he said, "give him
the dog."

Jesus and Satan were having an on-going argument about who was better on the computer. They had been going at it for days, and frankly God was tired of hearing all the bickering. Finally fed up, God said, "THAT'S IT! I have had enough. I am going to set up a test that will run for two hours, and from those results, I will judge who does the better job."

So Satan and Jesus sat down at the keyboards and typed away.

They moused.

They faxed.

They e-mailed.

They e-mailed with attachments.

They downloaded.

They did spreadsheets!

They wrote reports.

They created labels and cards.

They created charts and graphs.

They did some genealogy reports

They did every job known to man.

Jesus worked with heavenly efficiency and Satan was faster than hell. Then, ten minutes before their time was up, lightning suddenly flashed across the sky, thunder rolled, rain poured, and, of course, the power went off. Satan stared at his blank screen and screamed
every curse word known in the underworld. Jesus just sighed.

Finally the electricity came back on, and each of them restarted their computers. Satan started searching frantically, screaming:

"It's gone! It's all GONE! "I lost everything when the power went out!"

Meanwhile, Jesus quietly started printing out all of his files from the past two hours of work.

Satan observed this and became irate.

"Wait!" he screamed. "That's not fair! He cheated! How come he has all his work and I don't have any?"

God just shrugged and said, "JESUS SAVES"

This is me:

(|| >: ->( >

Death to me!

Rodney Dangerfield : Nobody gives me no respect!

Atheist : I give nobody no respect!

**************************************************

God : I am God.

Atheist: You don't exist. How can you be God?

God : Why are you talking to me, about me then?

Atheist : It is all in the mind!

God : So, why do you mind so much then?

Atheist : It is all a delusion!

God : How do you know you are not now deluded?

Atheist : I'm not! I'm not! I'm not!

God : I created good and evil. I created Obama and Osama. Can you?

Atheist : That's nonsense! You don't exist! Man is the master of his own destiny. I have the power to vote Obama in and to hunt Osama down!

God : Ah, Osama is still loose, and Obama is still not President.

**************************************************

Great Conqueror : “Mufti, all the great rulers of the past had honorific titles with the name of God in them: there was, for instance, God-Gifted, and God-Accepted, and so on. How about some such name for me?"

Mufti : "God Forbid" .

An atheist was taking a walk through the woods, admiring all that evolution had created.

“What majestic trees! What powerful rivers! What beautiful animals!”, he said to himself. As he was walking along the river, he heard a rustling in the bushes behind him. When he turned to see what the cause was, he saw a 7-foot grizzly charging right towards him. He ran as fast as he could. He looked over his shoulder and saw that the bear was closing. He ran even faster, crying in fear. He looked over his shoulder again, and the bear was even closer. His heart was pounding and he tried to run even faster. He tripped and fell on the ground. He rolled over to pick himself up, but saw the bear right on top of him, reaching for him with his left paw and raising his right paw to strike him.

At that moment, the Atheist cried out “Oh my God!” Time stopped. The bear froze. The forest was silent. Even the river stopped moving.

As a bright light shone upon the man, a voice came out of the sky, “You deny my existence for all of these years, teach others I don”t exist, and even credit creation to a cosmic explosion. Do you expect me to help you out of this predicament? Am I to count you as a believer?”

The atheist looked directly into the light “It would be hypocritical of me to suddenly ask you to treat me as Christian now, but could you perhaps make the bear a Christian?” “Very well,” said the voice.

The light went out. The river ran again. And the sounds of the forest resumed.

And then the bear dropped his right paw, brought both paws together, bowed his head, and spoke - “Lord, for this food which I am about to receive, I am truly thankful.”

Q: How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?

A: None. Atheist light bulbs burn for all eternity!

Anonymous:
Q. How many light bulbs does it take to change an atheist?

A. Why bother? Small change.

A. Why bother, Atheist=not worth the time it takes to change a light bulb.

A. Why bother, Atheist are going to hell anyway.

A. tsk, tsk, don't you know, Atheist=hell

Q. How many light bulbs does it take to change an atheist?

A. Why bother? Small change.

A. Why bother, Atheist=not worth the time it takes to change a light bulb.

A. Why bother, Atheist are going to hell anyway.

Q. How many light bulbs does it take to change an atheist?

A. Why bother? Small change.

A. Why bother, Atheist=not worth the time it takes to change a light bulb.

Chris E - Good job - Your latest lightbulb joke as an equal opportunity insult to both believers and atheists.

Dam, you are right there are no decent jokes about Atheists. A shout out to the poster with the Unitarian joke, it was great! That's why Atheists go to their "church", it is really a social place with no pressure. Of course that is what all churches are but in all the others you have to be "one of them" to attend.

On a more serious note, this article points to something that deeply disturbs me. Susan said: "That said, religious groups, including minorities, have enormous power (far too much power, in my opinion) to dictate positive images of their faith to the mainstream print and broadcast media."

And she is right, far too much power. And no where is it more obvious than in the willing suppression of free speech by mainstream media when it comes to any cartoon, or other ridicule of the religion of Islam. Fear has made our media less free, our own government has been complicit in this. The media treats the Muslim religion with kid gloves and those that have the temerity to publish anything that makes fun of or censors Islam is usually terrorized to the point that they stop. I cannot remember any time when our media would self censor due to religious pressure or from atheists. Can you?

The fact is that no religious or ethnic group should be able to suppress the media. I'm not sure how to fix it when the people threatening are not pursued and prosecuted.

Q. How many light bulbs does it take to change an atheist?

A. Why bother? Small change.

Was blocked by wapo censors-

So I'll just post the punchline:

What they wear on their heads looks more like a sheet. We ought to be calling them -----heads.

Chris Everett:
Q: How many atheists does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: They can argue 'till they're blue in the face, but the lightbulb will not change.

Atheists can argue?

You haven't the joke that Atheists can't argue because they are "single emtpy minded fools."

The best thing about being free is letting go of the past and all th baggage it carries with it!

I am a jew by choice, via hindu religion when I was born. You can ridicule the above religions which would not offend me. I would prefer a direct path to the almighty--with out the interference from any wholesaler-or a retailer.
This man made stuff and the fight about it is all bollogna. I would believe Jimmy Carter's way as opposed to my views are the best, follow me or go to hell...It is ludicrous. Thank You

I am a jew by choice, via hindu religion when I was born. You can ridicule the above religions which would not offend me. I would prefer a direct path to the almighty--with out the interference from any wholesaler-or a retailer.
This man made stuff and the fight about it is all bollogna. I would believe Jimmy Carter's way as opposed to my views are the best, follow me or go to hell...It is ludicrous. Thank You

This article dances around the real problem in the world today vis a vis the right to criticize religious dogma: the prohibition on criticizing Islam and its prophet Muhammad. When is the last time a Muslim stood up to defend a critic of Muhammad's right to do so?

The reason for this is that Muhammad himself had those who criticized him killed, and his actions inform Islamic law on the subject of what do to to non-Muslims who criticize. Until we as a society speak openly about this, we will be quietly afraid of Muslims threats and sheepishly censor ourselves.

Q: How many atheists does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: They can argue 'till they're blue in the face, but the lightbulb will not change.

Has anyone heard about the new low-carb Communion wafer?

It's called, "I-can't-believe-it's-not-Jesus."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

What is the difference between a mirror and an atheist?

One reflects without speaking and one speaks without reflecting...

Atheist jokes:

Why did the atheist cross the road?
He thought there might be a street on the other side, but he wouldn’t believe it until he tested his hypothesis.

Why did the atheist throw her watch out the window?
She wanted to see if it was designed intelligently enough to evolve into a bird.

A minister, a priest, a rabbi, and an atheist meet in a bar at 10:00 a.m. The bartender asks the minister what he’ll have, and the minister orders a martini. The priest also orders a martini, as does the rabbi. When the bartender asks the atheist what he wants, the atheist says he'd like a cup of coffee. “Why aren’t you having a martini like those guys?” asks the bartender. “Oh,” says the atheist, “I don’t believe in martinis before lunch.”

Why does an atheist wear red suspenders?
To keep his pants from being taken up to heaven during the rapture.

A Jew, A Catholic, and an atheist are rowing in Lake Erie when their boat springs a huge leak. The Jew looks skyward, and says “Oh, Adonai, if you save me, I promise I’ll sail to Israel and spend the rest of my days trying to reclaim the land you gave us.” The Catholic looks skyward, and says, “Oh, Jesus, if you save me, I promise I’ll fly to the Vatican and spend the rest of my days singing your praises.” The atheist says, “Oh, guys, if you pass me that one life preserver, I promise I’ll swim to Cleveland.” “And how will you spend the rest of your days?” the Jew and the Catholic ask. “Well,” says the atheist, “I’m not sure, but I can tell you one thing: I’ll never go rowing with other atheists.”

How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?
Two. One to actually change the bulb, and the other to videotape the job so fundamentalists won’t claim that god did it.

An atheist goes to a Christian psychiatrist, who hands her an inkblot and says, “Tell me what you see.” The atheist says, “I see Jesus on the cross.” The psychiatrist hands her a second inkblot, and says, “Now tell me what you see.” The atheist says, “I still see Jesus on the cross.” The psychiatrist hands her a third inkblot, and says, “What do you see now?” The atheist says, “It’s Jesus on the cross again.” The psychiatrist says, “Hmmm. Obviously you’ve got Jesus on the brain.” The atheist replies, “Me? I only read the captions you wrote.”

Atheist: What’s this fly doing in my soup?
Waiter: Praying.
Atheist: Very funny. I can’t eat this. Take it back.
Waiter: You see? The fly’s prayers were answered.

How can you tell if an atheist lives in your refrigerator?
You find a copy of The God Delusion hidden in the cream cheese.

An atheist buys an ancient lamp at an auction, takes it home, and begins to polish it. Suddenly, a genie appears, and says, “I’ll grant you three wishes, Master.” The atheist says, “I wish I could believe in you.” The genie snaps his fingers, and suddenly the atheist believes in him. The atheist says, “Wow. I wish all atheists would believe this.” The genie snaps his fingers again, and suddenly atheists all over the world begin to believe in genies. “What about your third wish?” asks the genie. “Well,” says the atheist, “I wish for a billion dollars.” The genie snaps his fingers for a third time, but nothing happens. “What’s wrong?” asks the atheist. The genie shrugs and says, “Just because you believe in me, doesn’t necessarily mean that I really exist.”

Two cannibals are eating an atheist, and one says to the other, “Can you believe the way this guy tastes?”

Knock, knock.
Who’s there?
God.
Who?
God.
Who?
God.
Must be the wind.

During the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution, one morning's executions began with three men: a rabbi, a Catholicpriest, and a rationalist skeptic.

The rabbi was marched up onto the platform first. There, facing the guillotine, he was asked if he had any last words. And the rabbi cried out, "I believe in the one and only true God, and He shall save me." The executioner then positioned the rabbi below the blade, set the block above his neck, and pulled the cord to set the terrible instrument in motion. The heavy cleaver plunged downward, searing the air. But then, abruptly, it stopped with a crack just a few inches above the would-be victim's neck. To which the rabbi said, "I told you so."

"It's a miracle!" gasped the crowd. And the executioner had to agree, letting the rabbi go.

Next in line was the priest. Asked for his final words, he declared, "I believe in Jesus Christ the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost who will rescue me in my hour of need." The executioner then positioned this man beneath the blade. And he pulled the cord. Again the blade flew downward thump! creak! ...stopping just short of its mark once more.

"Another miracle!" sighed the disappointed crowd. And the executioner for the second time had no choice but to let the condemned go free.

Now it was the skeptic's turn. "What final words have you to say?" he was asked. But the skeptic didn't hear. Staring intently at the ominous engine of death, he seemed lost. Not until the executioner poked him in the ribs and the question was asked again did he reply.

"Oh, I see your problem," the skeptic said pointing. "You've got a blockage in the gear assembly, right there!"

Why God never got a PhD
-----------------------

1. He had only one major publication.
2. It was written in Aramaic, not in English.
3. It has no references.
4. It wasn't even published in a refereed journal.
5. There are serious doubts he wrote it himself.
6. It may be true that he created the world, but what has he done since
then?
7. His cooperative efforts have been quite limited.
8. The Scientific community has had a hard time replicating his results.
9. He unlawfully performed not only Animal, but *Human* testing.
10. When one experiment went awry, he tried to cover it by drowning his
subjects.
11. When subjects didn't behave as predicted, he deleted them from
the sample.
12. He rarely came to class, just told his students to read the book.
13. Some say he had his son to teach the class.
14. He expelled his first two students for learning.
15. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students
failed his tests.
16. His office hours were infrequent and usually held on a mountain top.

A Protestant daughter had not been home for over 5 years. Upon her return, her father cursed her.

Where have you been all this time? Why did you not write to us, not even a line? Why didn't you call? Can you not understand what you put your mother through?

The girl, crying, replied, "Sniff, sniff....Dad....I became a harlot...."

"You what!!? Out of here, you shameless sinner! You're a disgrace to this family."

"OK, dad-- as you wish. I just came back to give Mom this luxurious fur coat, title deed to a ten bedroom mansion plus a savings certificate for $5 million."

"For my little brother, this gold Rolex and for you, Daddy, the sparkling new Mercedes limited edition convertible that's parked outside plus a membership to the country club....(takes a breath)....and an invitation for you all to spend New Years' Eve on board my new yacht in the Riviera, and...."

Now what was it you said you had become?" says dad.

Girl, crying again, "Sniff, sniff....a Harlot, Dad! Sniff, sniff.

"Oh, Jesus! You scared me half to death! I thought you said a Hebrew. Come here and give your old man a hug.

I found these, googling “atheist joke.” Both are at the expense of atheists. I knew there must be something out there.

What do you get when you cross an atheist with a Jehovah’s Witness?.... Someone who knocks at your door for no apparent reason.

An atheist asked preacher, "Do you believe in eternal life?" The preacher has no time to reply. "Well its a load of rubbish!" shouted the Atheist. "I believe in science, evolution, survival of the fittest, and when we die, that's it! No eternal life, no great judgment, and no God!" The Atheist continues his assault against the preacher repetitiously and tirelessly. "Eternal life! Eternal life! Ha! "Its all pie in the sky when you die." When I die that's it, the end, no eternal life, no nothing. He continues, until he reaches his climax, "I will be buried six feet under when I die and that's it! Nothing! Caput! When I die I am utterly convinced that that will be the end of me!" "Well thank God for that" replies the preacher!

Dear E Fav -

I don't really know any jokes that poke fun at atheists. I would certainly love to hear them myself.

I'm a musician, and I have a whole slew of musician jokes. It's not like I would take offense at a joke made at my expense.

Perhaps the reason that there are no atheist jokes is because atheists are so poorly regarded by the largely religious public that to joke about them is akin to joking about child molesters (oops...that would be the priests!).

More likely, it's the fact that the vast majority of atheists don't see themselves defined by their atheism. They may see themselves as Americans, or Irish or even stamp collectors, but being "a-" something is hardly an identity that one can hang a joke on.

No one is asking for jokes about people who don't collect stamps ("did you hear the one about the non-stamp collector?") or people who aren't Americans ("did you hear the one about the non-American?").

It's easy to poke fun at what people ARE. What they AREN'T? Not so much.

A catholic priest and a rabbi find them sitting next to each other on a long journey, and so after some hesitation start to talk to each other. After discussing the weather and the cricket, the priest turns to the rabbi and says that he thought it was rather strange that he had to follow dietary laws.

The rabbi replied, "Well, when I was a small boy, I did suck out a clam. What about you? What do you eat?"

"Not what," replied the priest, "Who."

A Jew finds himself standing outside of the gates of Heaven waiting in line to speak to Peter.

Peter walks up to the Jew and tells him, "You have been a good man, enter into heaven and walk down to door number four. However, be very quiet when you pass door number 1."

The Jew is curious and asks Peter, "Why do I need to be quiet as I walk by door number 1?" Peter replies, "Oh that's where the Protestants and the Christians are and they think they're the only ones here."

Susan, Your persona takes a big hit when you say you don't find Mike Meyers funny. He is, IMHO, and in the opinion of at least 3 living generations, the funniest and most talented comedian alive. You comment suggests that, not only do you not have a well developed sense of humor, but that you are out of touch with a vast majority of the rest of us. I hope you find it worthy of your time to think about this and find ways to catch up with us, instead of remaining on your solumn perch.

To whoever submitted the Jesus and Satan joke:

As someone who spent 25 years programming computers, that gave me a huge laugh! Thanks!

Arminius, a believer

Jeez - I can see whay Anonymous remains anonymous. I would be too if I said such stupid things. Here is a good joke illustrating the absurity of religion (can't vouch for the accuracy):

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said, "Stop! Don't do it!"

"Why shouldn't I?" he said. I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!" He said, "Like what?"

I said, "Well, are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious."

I said, "Me too! Are you a Christian?" He said, "Christian."

I said, "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?" He said, "Protestant."

I said, Me too! Are you Episcopalian? Baptist? He said, "Baptist!"

I said, "Wow! Me too! Are your Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?

He said, Baptist Church of God!" I said, "Me too!

Are you Original Baptist Church of God or Reformed Baptist Church of God?" He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God!"

I said, "Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915?" He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915!"

I said, "Die, heretic scum!" and pushed him off.

A Lawyer Goes to Heaven

A lawyer died, and found himself outside the Pearly Gates. St Peter came out, gave him a huge hug, and said, "Welcome! You have no idea how glad we are to see you! Let me show you to your new home." So St Pete led the lawyer to an immense marble mansion, with fountains gushing cool spring water or even wine, lots of good food, and angels to wait on him. The lawyer was astonished. St Pete then took him out on a balcony to look around. The lawyer looked down and saw an old man in a ragged robe coming out of a shack. The lawyer, shocked, asked, "My goodness, who is that?" St Pete said, "Oh, that's one of the popes." The lawyer was aghast. "A pope? I've got a mansion and he has a shack? What's going on here?" St Peter replied, "Look, we have dozens of popes here, but you're the only lawyer we've got!"

Jesus and Satan have an argument as to who is the better programmer. This goes on for a few hours until they agree to hold a contest with God as the judge.

They set themselves before their computers and begin. They type furiously for several hours, lines of code streaming up the screen.

Seconds before the end, a bolt of lightning struck taking out the electricity. Moments later, the power is restored, and God announces that the contest is over. He asks Satan to show what he has come up with.

Satan is visibly upset, and cries, "I have nothing! I lost it all when the power went out."

"Very well, then," says God, "let us see if Jesus fared any better."

Jesus enters a command, and the screen comes to life in vivid display, the voices of an angelic choir pour forth from the speakers.

Satan is astonished. He stutters, "But how?! I lost everything, yet
Jesus' program is intact! How did he do it?!"

God chuckles, "Jesus saves."

Mr Mark:
"Atheists believe they are above ridicule and God knows why."

Maybe god knows something about the atheists that you don't."

That made me laugh too, and it's also at the expense of supernaturalists. Now - please put your creative talents to work on a joke that will make me laugh at the expense of atheists.

Susan Jacoby:

Enjoy!!

A JOKE FOR CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS

A pastor was addressing the children during the Christmas service. "Who is the mother of Jesus?" he asked them.

Without hesitation, dozens of tiny voices chorused back "Mary."

"That's right. Now who can tell me who is the father of Jesus?"

There was quiet and fidgeting. After all, no one had told them there was going to be a quiz. Then a young girl spoke up. With assurance, she boldly announced: "I know. It's Virg."

After two more seconds of silcne the entire community erupted in laughter. Of course - we all know it was Virg an' Mary.

In a personal setting where one hears others using slander and other malicious innuendo towards oneself or others, one would assume an attempt to undermine motivated by jealosy, arrogance, hate, and an attempt to drive out an enemy. However, one's own family or friends may use similar language among themselves, and one assumes love and belonging. The conclusion must be that the speech is not the issue. The motivation is the issue, and motivation is hard to determine. It can even be easily misrepresented. The ambiguous nature of speech means that the way it is received means much more about the receiver than it does about the speaker. In other words, when one hears words as disrespectful, the hearer is the one doing the disrespecting. Experienced speakers will understand this and seek neutral ground. The naive speaker will simply return the disrespect.

Anonymous:

"Atheists believe they are above ridicule and God knows why."

Maybe god knows something about the atheists that you don't.

Susan Jacoby:

I see your point. The Catholic and Protestant jokes are just examples.

CATHOLIC JOKE: PUNISHMENT FOR SIN

The head priest at a certain church was out for the day, so he asked the deacon to do confession for him. The deacon agrees, and the first person that comes says, "Forgive me, for I just gave a guy a blow job."

He says, "You have sinned." Then he looks at the sheet on the wall that had punishments for certain sins on it, but blow job was not on there, so he went out to ask one of the altar boys what he usually gives for a blow job.

The altar boy answered, "Oh, about five dollars."

-----------
A PROMINENT PROTESTANT GOES TO HEAVEN

Bill Gates dies, and ascends to the Pearly Gates to meet God. God immediately recognizes him and says to him "Bill Gates -- you're a great man. i Guess you figured it out. I predestined you to get everything except the mayonnaise. I shall give you a choice of either heaven or hell." Bill Gates tells God that he would like to see both before making a decision.

So God takes Bill Gates down to Hell, where there are beautiful, nubile bikini models, perfect weather, free drinks, and eternal happiness. "That doesn't seem so bad," says Gates. "Let's see Heaven now." God and Gates go to Heaven, which seems to be just a bunch of old, crusty angels flying around and sitting on a few clouds. "I've made my decision," says Gates. "I choose Hell."

Six months later, God goes down to Hell to check on him and finds him hanging above a pit of fire with wild harpies tearing out his intestines. "What happened to all the bikini models and the sun and the fun?", Bill Gates screams. "Oh, that," says God. "That was just the demo. I'm the Protestant God, remember?"

For the record, once again to the not-so-covert anti-Semites who occasionally appear on this thread, my father was a Catholic convert born into a German Jewish immigrant family. My mother was from a half-German, half-Irish Catholic family. What does any of this have to do with satire? (Come to think of it, a satirical writer could have made something funny out of my family.)

I grew up hearing a great many Catholic jokes, told by Catholics to one another. I imagine many of those jokes would have been considered offensive by the same Catholics had they been told by someone outside the faith. Those of you who fixated on my "Jewish" example--including philo-Semites and anti-Semites--missed the point entirely. What I said could just as easily have been said of any other ethnic or religious group in American society. But that's no reason to censor anyone.

I enjoy the Wiccan jokes, as they are new to me. It just proves that humor is a universal human trait.

Lepi-

Back atcha, especially the Unitarian joke! I've found out that there's a UUC in the next town over, and have been meaning to go when I wake up early enough to get to the service.

Thanks to Spidey for filling in the rest of the Christian response to learning Edison is an atheist - denying it and trying to prove he was a Christian.

Q: Why did the Catholic cross the road?

A. Catholic: Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, did I cross the road?

Q. Why did the Protestant cross the road?

A. Protestant: I own the roads, the oceans, the oil, and all the mayonnaise

Wiccan;

Nice one!

Arminius:
Assuming that Wikipedia is correct, your strange universe quote was from J.B.S. Haldane

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._B._S._Haldane

I am a Unitarian and a Pagan, and I enjoy jokes about both groups.

Q: How many Witches does it take to change a light bulb?
A: What do you want it changed into?

Q: How many Pagans does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Six - one to change the bulb, and five to complain that light bulbs never burned out before those damned Christians came along.

Q: How many Unitarians does it take to change a light bulb?
A: We choose not to make a statement either in favour of or against the need for a light bulb. However, if in your own journey, you have found that light bulbs work for you, that is fine. You are invited to write a poem or compose a modern dance about your personal relationship with your light bulb. Present it next month at our annual Light Bulb Sunday Service, in which we will explore a number of light bulb traditions, including incandescent, fluorescent, 3-way, long-life, and tinted, all of which are equally valid paths to luminescence.

Q: Why did the atheist cross the road?
A: You're begging the question!

Q: Why did the Catholic cross the road?
A: So it would get into heaven.

Q: Why did the Jew cross the road?
A: What, he should stay on one side?

Q: Why did the Muslim cross the road?
A: If he wants to cross, he will cross.

Q: Why did the Protestant cross the road?
A: Because I said so.

May I volunteer a Wiccan joke (I saw it on this forum back when it first started)?

What does a Wiccan do when she has to park downtown?

She reads the signs, calls the quarters, and pays tribute to de Meter.

(Well, it's funny to Wiccans.)

Another good article by Ms. Jacoby.

The only point I would contend is regarding her understanding of pornography; it is not a communication of truth, or even of idea, but rather a perversion of natural act(s), or the further depravation of unnatural act(s) in order to arouse passions in the viewer. It is advertising for a lifestyle (like smoking cigarettes) more than communication of an idea (like insisting on the primacy of the right to life, or the right to choose). We as a society have repeatedly agreed, with Congressional and Supreme Court agreement, that advertisements are subject to regulation and prohibition; for instance, the broadcast advertisement tobacco is forbidden in the US; formerly the advertisement of any FDA-regulated drug was forbidden as well. I can see no reason that the advertisement of promiscuity and rape ought to escape regulation.

The point was incidental to her post, though, and does little to mar her very sensible comments.

I found South Park's episode attacking Dawkins to be unfunny and in poor taste, but they have a right to poke fun at anyone they want in whatever way they want to. I always wonder about thin-skinned religionists who can't abide humor at their expense (or even cartoons). Is their religion so weak that it can't withstand a little ribbing?

Chris E - I must admit, I got a laugh out of your Edison joke, but I'm afraid it was at the expense of supernaturalists. I could imagine them recoiling upon learning that Edison was an atheist (I didn't know) and feverishly but unsuccessfully trying to think of ways to avoid using electricity.

Your second joke was a little tedious, I thought. Here's one I think is just a little better:

Q: How many atheists does it take to replace a light bulb?

A: What kind of a stupid question is that?

Maybe you and others here can help with another joke, though. I’m trying to remember the jokes on a theme of body parts - the ones about engineers with red and blue wiring and lawyers with only two parts that are interchangeable. Remember? Is there an atheist-joke opportunity there?

Speaking of absurd, if anyone needed a humor transplant it would be Spiderman2.

The Armageddon & Harlot of Babylon themes are getting to be very boring - and they've both been done so much better.

If you learned to laugh at yourself my good fellow, you would only be doing what everyone else is already doing with gusto!

So join the crowd - we're all in it together.

PS. Thomas Edison died a very rich man - and being ever inquisitive as well as inventive, he was also interested in the 'life after death' question along with the late, great master magician Harry Houdini, but never arrived at a conclusion in his lifetime - we're still waiting to hear someone channel either Harry H. or Thomas E. convincingly, but no luck so far.

Farnaz-

I was raised in America in the Episcopal faith. In my early thirties, I went to a geneticist with a mild health issue. He took me aside and told me I was a Jew- my blood told him. This is happening to many unknowing Jews. I guess the Jews who were able to leave early, hide their background, and start a new life were also busy making babies : ) But they couldn't change the blood they gave their grandchildren. Life goes on..

I went to a MJ Rabbi to learn more about Judaism in the context of my Christian belief. It seems Yeshua (Jesus) has rediscovering His Jewish roots too. He lived His life on earth as a Torah-observant Jew. He came to fulfill the Law, not destroy it. I believe Yeshua is haMashiach. But no matter what you believe- there are no partial Jews. If you are a Jew- embrace your history- you will not escape it.

For me, humor is our natural response to the absurd. That's why it can be such fun to poke fun of religious pretensions - because religion is, at its heart, absurd. That's also why it's hard to make fun of atheists - because atheism is about keeping your worldview free of absurdities.

But here's my effort anyway:

Q: How many atheists does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Countless atheists are involved, beginning with Thomas Edison himself, who said "So far as religion of the day is concerned, it is a damned fake... Religion is all bunk."

or this:

A: There's not enough information to answer that question definitively. Is it a typical household lightbulb that can be handled by a single person? How high up is it? Is a ladder needed, and if so, is one available? Is it a stepladder or does it require someone to steady it? What about the replacement bulb? Is one available, or does someone need to buy it? Do they have the money? Does the cashier count among those needed to change it? How about those in the manufacturing process? Do we count them? I'm sorry, but the question itself is so ill defined that it simply can't be answered in any meaningful way.

I can see that Anonymous doesn't truly possess a funny bone - if you're going to be mean-spirited, you've got to be really, really funny!

You are not -

E Favorite,

The best Episcopal joke is to call us Whiskeypalians, because whenever four of us get together, there's always a fifth. We think it's funny.

Well, a conspicuous lack of humor can be a funny thing in itself. Certainly ethnic and racial humor is based almost exclusively on stereotyping, which in turn is based on myth (in the pejorative sense) and confabulation - but why it's ok for folks to make fun of themselves on this basis and yet take offense when 'outsiders' do it is kind of a mystery. Apparently self-deprecation at least for some, is just part of the 'we're all in it together' self-identity thing. Any theories?

On the other hand, humor as an attitude seems to be as universal as religion.....hard-wired indeed!

Atheist humor is rare, because it's hard to make fun of the lack of belief in a supernatural reality - well, it's got to be way more challenging anyway. Is there any substance to be had in non-belief? You could always go after the scientific orientation that many atheists subscribe to. But what's funny about empiricism?

Probably atheists would be best at atheist humor anyway - needless to say, religionists would not be welcome to participate! You lack the requisite identity.

I presume you would have to go after a stereotypical atheist attitude, rather than the vacuum of non-belief - as Susan points out, comedic genius is probably up to the task.

Do we have any here?

My response to the "atheist jokes" here is that none of them offend me, nor do I find them very funny.

I can only remember hearing one religious joke - when I was a kid, about a visitor to heaven asked to be quiet when approaching the Catholic section because "they think they're the only ones here."

As an adult, I've also heard remarks about the "frozen chosen" applied to Episcopalians and sometimes to Presbyterians - both groups seemed proud of the moniker.

I liked Susan's essay well enough. I think she is a tolerant and straight forward person, so I am not going to read hidden meanings into her writing.

I think that there are some people who would never, ever mock another person's religion or ethnicity, but that would have nothing to do with their own religion, but just how they are born, and made on the inside.

So, at least according to my observatoins, there are in every relgion and ethnic group, people who would mock others, and people who would not. Wasn't Susan, just using as an example, people who would mock others?

Atheists don't seem very keen on writing satire about themselves.

Believers are too kind to do on their behalf.

What next?

Another Anonymous:

Anon:

Farnaz is correct. The terms semite and aryan developed as she said by European racialists in the nineteenth century.

When referring to "races" or "peoples," these words (semites, aryans) are reifications, nothing more.

Hence, the word anti-Semite, has become antisemite. Originally, anti-Semite had a positve meaning to many European Catholics and Protestants, but not to Jews.

BTW: In case you haven't been reading Farnaz's posts on this blog, she knows what she's talking about re: racialism, religion, multiculturalism.

June 18, 2008 4:25 AM

---------------

Another Anon, I sure know about religion and multiculturalism in a positive sense. About racism not so much, although I know how rampant it is.

The Heart of Whiteness by Robert Jensen is a very good read on the topic of racism.

Anon:

Farnaz is correct. The terms semite and aryan developed as she said by European racialists in the nineteenth century.

When referring to "races" or "peoples," these words (semites, aryans) are reifications, nothing more.

Hence, the word anti-Semite, has become antisemite. Originally, anti-Semite had a positve meaning to many European Catholics and Protestants, but not to Jews.

BTW: In case you haven't been reading Farnaz's posts on this blog, she knows what she's talking about re: racialism, religion, multiculturalism.

Farnaz:

Anonymous:

Semitic is a term introduced by nineteenth century Germnan linguists to designate a language group. (See dictionary.) The same holds true for Aryan (Also see dictionary).

The terms were then essentialized by EuroCatholics and EuroProtestants, whose genetic and hematological interrelations I leave to you.

I also await your explanations of there ethnic interrelations.

June 18, 2008 1:39 AM

-----------------------------------------
FARNAZ, since I wrote my own understanding of the words semitic and antisemiticsm, here a definition from the Merriam Webster dictionary:

SEMITIC -

1 : of, relating to, or constituting a subfamily of the Afro-Asiatic language family that includes Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, and Amharic

2 : of, relating to, or characteristic of the Semites

3 : jewish

SEMITE -

1 a: a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs

b: a descendant of these peoples

2: a member of a modern people speaking a Semitic language

Here some basic information about the word Aryan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan

EuropCatholic and EuroProtestant political and ethnic rivalries and conflicts in Europe and even carried over to new lands with them is a topic too long and deep for this thread.

Since you have left, I'm posting this only for completion's sake.

Susan Jacoby: ...The First Amendment grants religion no immunity from criticism or satire, however vulgar and insulting such comments may seem to believers. Satire-- from Aristophanes through Jonathan Swift, Monty Python, and Stephen Colbert--is inherently disrespectful, and its targets are always offended...Groucho, Harpo, Chico and Zeppo could make any god or religion look ridiculous. They could make atheists look ridiculous too. I'd pay to see that movie.

--------------------------------

Opportunity to make the movie right here about atheists involving satire, however vulgar and insulting such comments may seem to atheist. Satire -- from Jonathan Swift, Monty Python, and Stepehn Colber --- is inherently disrespectful, and its targets are always offended.

To PAM ---

Take note.

FARNAZ, the Middle Eastern Jews could consider themselves "pure bred" Jews! Funny term, but as far as the dictates of the Judaism goes the pure Middle Eastern origin does mean something special.

My heart goes out to you when I hear about the suffering you went through and the suffering of the people you know. BTW, I don't belong to a X, Y, Z chromosome religion or race. I know only about the human race and one God who created all and loves all. Sure Jews gave me a name for my God. For that I remain grateful.

I wish you peace and joy and success in everything you do, strength for your struggles and patience to endure what you cannot change.

Farnaz,

Stop it, please. I can't bear it. I can't go on reading the replies.

I suspect that Susan Jacoby has not intellectually left the block she lives on, upper west side.

Perhaps she will now.

Goodnight.

M. Anon

Prayer from Farnaz

Baruch Hashem

I understand that you are not postbiblically much into personal requests, that you are transpersonal, transhistorical, etc.

I also understand that it is my job and that of everyone else to fix things up here in the created world, that I am to ask that you to bless everyone.

Please bless everyone.

Also, please, I hope that in my small way (very small), that I have fixed a few things and maybe can fix some more.

Please bless everyone. Bless Pam, Anonymous, Susan Jacoby.

Bless my S, my Pakistani sister, who is still in Islamabad, and please keep her Talib tormentor in jail where he belongs, and bless him, too.

Bless the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, who did not know that antisemitism did not include them, and murdered Ismael in the street.

Bless the three million of us Middle Eastern Jews in Exile, X, Y, and Z Jewish Chromosomes.

Bless us all, and bless everything.

Amen

PS. Please save me.

FARNAZ, I mean that Jews spread out and mixed with other peoples for many centuries. So while the original blood would have been traceable to Israel, it would have got very very diluted after many centuries of living with a different race.

FARNAZ, Ethiopians and Europeans practicing Judaism as a religion may or may not have any ethnic Isreali Jewish blood in them. But the connection of original Jews with Ethiopia is very long, much longer than with Europe.

"What "particular" culture? Ethiopian? Iranian? Syrian? Mexican? Polish? Russian? Ukranian? Lithuanian? Latvian? French? German? Brazilian? Israeli? Algerian? Indian? Jamaican? Irish? English? Spanish? Etc.?"

Now it's time for you to reread MY post, Selah. I did say "stem from". Two or three thousand years ago there were Jamaican and Irish Jews? I don't think so.

"WHAT 'genetic identity'?"

You don't know that Y chromosome analysis can trace people to particular regions? Because Jews remained a closed breeding stock for as long as they did, there are mutations that occur only in people who trace their roots to Judea.

Look, I'm not against you here. I don't personally discriminate or harbor racial or ethnic hatred. I don't believe in Social Darwinism, either. I don't tell ethnic jokes. I'm sorry that some people do. I'm sorry for all of the awful ways that people have treated other people throughout time. My ancestors pushed the native Americans off of their land, cheated them, killed them, kept African slaves, and as recently as my parents, were racially bigoted. I hate that. I'm sorry that you've had to suffer because of bigotry, and I'm sure that there's much that I don't understand about the Jewish faith, heritage, or experience. But I can't change the past, and I can't change the world.

May you find peace.

Judaism in the original sense was not meant as a proselytizing religion. Hence the word convert has no meaning. One is born a Jew which is a particular tribe of people who follow a particular religion. One becomes a Jew by marriage by being accepted into the tribe of people who follow the religion.

When the dilution of ethnicity takes place for many centuries as it did in Europe, one has the religion and a distinct culture but only mild or even non-existent ethnic roots of the Middle Eastern people who brought it there.

Anon:

FARNAZ, once more, there is an ethnic element to Judaism but there is none in Christianity
-----------

Could you explain the "ethnic element" shared by Ethiopian and Polish Jews?

Thank you.

FARNAZ, once more, there is an ethnic element to Judaism but there is none in Christianity.

FARNAZ, there is genetic and ethnic relevance in Christianity. Christianity was born in Judaism but it was not meant to remain in Israel or among the Jews, but salvation was promised first to the Jews and then to the Gentiles. So early Jewish converts to Christianity concentrated a lot of effort to bring Christianity to their own people spread out in different parts of the world.

ANon:

Hence a Christian (Catholic) may be of any nationality and are equally "pure" Christians.

SOMEbody forgot to tell that to all the converts to Christianity who are still considered Jews by their fellow Christians. From this point onward, I will use the term Christian to refer to Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox Christians, et al.

JUDAISM forbids use of the word "convert." ONce a person becomes a Jew, s/he has always been.

RE: Nationality. Kindly read my last post to Pam.

Anon:

In explaining Catholic/Christian genetics and ethnicity, kindly generalize beginning with the "Semites," Romans, Greeks, etc.

Would you also explain why antisemitism is directed against all persons who are "Jews" as you define them, not the least of whom are Ethiopian.

Thank you.

FARNAZ that was my imperfect take on ethnic Jews and non-ethnic Jews.

Christianity is not a religion of a particular people. It came from the Jews and Judaism but it was meant to be restricted to them. The disciples of Jesus were commanded to go out and spread the good news to the whole world. Hence a Christian (Catholic) may be of any nationality and are equally "pure" Christians. Any discrimination based on ethnicity among Christians has political and ethnic roots (racial or otherwise) and nothing whatsoever with the religion itself.

Anonymous:

Semitic is a term introduced by nineteenth century Germnan linguists to designate a language group. (See dictionary.) The same holds true for Aryan (Also see dictionary).

The terms were then essentialized by EuroCatholics and EuroProtestants, whose genetic and hematological interrelations I leave to you.

I also await your explanations of there ethnic interrelations.

FARNAZ, so the European Jews whose Middle Eastern roots and ethnicity must be greatly diluted or even non-existent in many cases are merely followers of Judaism. Anti-semitism by pure definition is directed to a particular ethnic group, namely the Semitic Jews originally from Israel, the Middle East. There is a confusion about this discrimination because most European Jews are of European descent with very little ethnic Middle Eastern blood in them. Ethnic (Semitic) religious Jew and merely religious Jew of mixed European or African origin are not the same. You are ethnically a Middle Eastern Jew in the sense of an Israeli tribe, even if you do not practice the religion Judaism.

Pam:

Catholicism was spread widely among many nationalities, while Judaism remained a part of a particular culture and people who shared (and still share) a genetic identity. It's not bigotry to recognize that, is it?
--------

WHAT??!!

What "particular" culture? Ethiopian? Iranian? Syrian? Mexican? Polish? Russian? Ukranian? Lithuanian? Latvian? French? German? Brazilian? Israeli? Algerian? Indian? Jamaican? Irish? English? Spanish? Etc.?

WHAT "genetic identity"?

You read and reread my post. Good God. I'm wrong. You exist.

NOw, please do something.

Selah

FARNAZ, the original Jews of Israel were an ethnic Middle Eastern group who according to the dictates of Judaism were not allowed to intermarry. All Jews of mixed/non-semitic origin are not ethnic Jews in the Biblical sense. They are followers of the religion Judaism.

Susan Jacoby:

RE: Your essay and Farnaz's posts.

You disappoint, you disappoint, you disappoint.
This is not the first time you have been questioned on your use of Jews as an "example." I recall the essay in which you referred to Orthodox Jewish women (I shall try to locate it) and the subsequent comment on Catholic women that followed.

It wa then that we received the great apologia on your non-practicing "Jewish" father, who, your tone suggests, for mysterious reasons (!) feared revealing his "Jewishness" to your extended family. QED, there is no discrimination against Jews, no bigotry, only misguided apprehension among Jews, and being "half Jewish" could surely not have been offensive.

You were. The sad part is that you do not seem to take in what others say to you. This is, I suspect, part of that "arrogance" of which we atheists are so often accused, part of being a white cultural Catholic atheist.

The postmodern critique of "examples" and who uses them, "demographics" and who draws them is not new.
---------------

I am a middle-aged WASP man, raised as a Christian, considered myself a former captive of Christianity who escaped to New York City, where I attended college as an undergraduate. I believe I have been an atheist since birth.

When I came to this blog, I sought the company of fellow atheists and relgious adherents alike, not that I've ever been very far from either group in my adult life, but engage them as such primarily in a professional capacity. I'm not naive and expected blindness, intransigence, bigotry from time to time, not only from others but from the panelists, and from myself.

However, I also expected reflection, admission of incorrect behavior, mistakes, etc. I have not seen that from you.

You owe it to Farnaz, to me, and to all who post here to reflect, with good will and an open mind, on what she writes to you.

One last post, since Farnaz asked -
"Is she then also an atheist of Catholic descent?"

I assume that her mother was Catholic, yes.

Of course I don't have to tell you that Jewishness has always been considered not just a religious designation, but a cultural and inherited one. You clearly consider it so yourself, since you call yourself Jewish, but are an atheist.

Catholicism was spread widely among many nationalities, while Judaism remained a part of a particular culture and people who shared (and still share) a genetic identity. It's not bigotry to recognize that, is it?

Saying that one is of Catholic ancestry might mean that your family was Irish, or Italian, or Mexican, but saying that you're of Jewish descent means your ancestors stem from a particular part of the Middle East, although they may have been in many regions in the meantime, with all of the attendant intermarriage.

I've done enough genealogy to know that none of us are PURE anything, and ultimately, of course, we are all from the same rootstock - and that has nothing to do with Noah. :)

Q. How do you know that the atheists at On Faith are all masochists?

A. They debate the Xians, don't they?

Q: How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?

A: One. He changes the light bulb, and that's that...until he turns on the light, sees a host of religionists in the room, and spends the next 30 years trying to convince them that the light bulb turning on wasn't a miracle.

"You are expected to prove that atheists can ridicule themselves. Their expertise at ridiculing and insulting believers is well known. Not so well known is how well they take a dose of their own medicine. So prove it on this thread."

Who the hell are you to tell me what to do?

Since my offerings were not accepted in the spirit in which they were offered, I think I'd prefer to call it a night. You can spew your hatred alone.

Pam:

"In what way is she "half-Jewish"? Would you define what you mean by that? IN the same way as I am? I don't understand."

I mean that her father is (was?) Jewish. She is an atheist of Jewish descent - is that not what you are?

I did reread your post - still sounds to me like you're getting on her case for using Jews in her example.
--------------
Pam:

I'll respond to your question and comment once I'm clear on what you mean.

You say she is an atheist of Jewish descent, that her father was/is Jewish.

Is she then also an atheist of Catholic descent?

To PAM ---

You are expected to prove that atheists can ridicule themselves. Their expertise at ridiculing and insulting believers is well known. Not so well known is how well they take a dose of their own medicine. So prove it on this thread.

"In what way is she "half-Jewish"? Would you define what you mean by that? IN the same way as I am? I don't understand."

I mean that her father is (was?) Jewish. She is an atheist of Jewish descent - is that not what you are?

I did reread your post - still sounds to me like you're getting on her case for using Jews in her example.

Pam:

"Is there a point?"

Yes, Farnaz, she is half-Jewish - Jewish in the same way that you are.

You took her to task for using Jewish humor rather than Catholic, and asked her what she knew of Judaism.
------------------------

Pam:

Thank you for your reply. First, I did not take her to task for what you say I did. Perhaps, you should reread my post.

Second, I don't understand you when you say "she is half-Jewish - Jewish in the same way that you are."

In what way is she "half-Jewish"? Would you define what you mean by that? IN the same way as I am? I don't understand.

To PAM ---

I mean, your science classes addressed to the foolish believers who can't understand science because they believe in God.

"Is there a point?"

Yes, Farnaz, she is half-Jewish - Jewish in the same way that you are.

You took her to task for using Jewish humor rather than Catholic, and asked her what she knew of Judaism.

To PAM ---

And BTW I have attended your science classes on these threads.

To PAM ---

And you prove at least one atheist blows it out of her...

"Some atheists would have believers believe that atheism in itself makes scientists of them and belief in God makes believers incapable of understanding science."

Again, a totally unfounded assertion.

"Believers don't smoke it in their..."

Then you're the exception that proves the rule.

Anonymous

Anonymous:
FARNAZ, Susan Jacoby is partly Jew.

-------------
Anonymous:

What does that mean?
-------------

PAM

I am aware of Susan Jacoby's last name.

Is there a point?

FARNAZ, Susan Jacoby is partly Jew.

To PAM ----

Atheists who claim science and atheism are synonyms are arrogant clowns who do not understand science or religion.

Said PAM ---

I don't know any atheists who make either of these claims - did you have someone in mind, or are you just blowing smoke out of your...

June 17, 2008 11:57 PM

To PAM ---

Some atheists would have believers believe that atheism in itself makes scientists of them and belief in God makes believers incapable of understanding science.

Believers don't smoke it in their...

Apparently some atheists blow it out their...

Pam:

Farnaz,
Perhaps you should take a harder look at Susan's last name...
-----------------------

Pam,

I am aware of Susan's last name.

Is there a point?

"Atheists are found trying to explain science to believers over and over again. You are one of them. You just did it by borrowing someone else's words."

Gee whiz, I thought those words were poking a bit of fun at science. Can't win for losing with some of you hard-core haters, I guess.

Some atheists would have believers believe that atheism in itself makes scientists of them and belief in God makes believers incapable of understanding science.

Believers don't smoke it in their...

Atheists are found trying to explain science to believers over and over again. You are one of them. You just did it by borrowing someone else's words.

Farnaz,
Perhaps you should take a harder look at Susan's last name...

Susan Jacoby:

Meant to write "a few days ago" concerning the "joke" incident I reference on my previous post.

It occurred last Wednesday morning at a large college campus in New York. Faculty, adminstrators, student participants and witnesses are continuing to sort it out. It could result in suspensions.

Since I was an unwilling witness, and since I have multi-cultural credibility, I will continue to be involved in it, like it or not. I don't like it. It began ugly, has gotten uglier, will get uglier still.

Freedom of speech....

Anonymous wrote:
"Atheists who claim science and atheism are synonyms are arrogant clowns who do not understand science or religion.

Atheists who claim believers do not understand science are pathetically ignorant."

I don't know any atheists who make either of these claims - did you have someone in mind, or are you just blowing smoke out of your...

Pam,

Those last two Asimov quotations were of his finest. The first was new to me, the second I knew. The first brings to mind the thoughts of an astronomer, can't remember who: "The universe is not only stranger than you imagine, but stranger than you can imagine."

Here are a couple more from Mr. Asimov:

"Science does not promise absolute truth, nor does it consider that such a thing necessarily exists. Science does not even promise that everything in the Universe is amenable to the scientific process."

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' (I found it!) but 'That's funny ...'"

Atheists who claim science and atheism are synonyms are arrogant clowns who do not understand science or religion.

Atheists who claim believers do not understand science are pathetically ignorant.

"Finally, did you catch my reply to your fine poem in Susan's last thread?"

I did, thank you.

The quote I just posted wasn't my own - nor, I just discovered, is it Anonymous's - it is from Isaac Asimov. Yes, I assume he meant belief to be included in that. Just a bit of self deprecation.

I think most atheists consider religion's biggest draw to be the promise of everlasting life. We certainly have nothing to offer to replace that. You have to be able to take your facts hard and cold to reside on our side of the aisle.

Atheists who claim science and atheism are synonyms are arrogant clowns who do not understand science or religion.

Susan Jacoby,

You write:

Two Jews may laugh uproariously at a joke based on a Jewish stereotype--if one Jew is telling the joke to another Jew--but the joke may not seem very funny if told by a Christian. I assume that the same generalization applies to Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists.
---------

Interesting comment from a former Catholic, present cultural Catholic. Why not use your own ethnoreligion as an example? Not to worry, though. Jews, being sui generis, always love being examples. We are an ironic people.

Ever seen or heard Jews making Catholic jokes? Protestant jokes? This Jew never has.

Do tell some, if you know them.

When gentiles tell "Jewish" jokes, are they telling jokes from a religious or "ethnic" perspective?

Do Christians and Catholics know anything about Judaism? About Jewish ethnicities?

On your thread, I've seen only steadfast resistance to learning anything, to knowing anything about us. Any comments?

Did you here this one, very popular for years here in New York where you and I live: "A Jew would bend of backward for a penny."

Heard the first response in a College cafeteria from a Jewish student, only two days ago: "That's okay. Catholics are busy bending over forward for other reasons."
----------------

Yours truly and a colleague had to call security. Seems some of your fellow cultural Catholics don't seem to share your sense of humor.
Don't even bother telling me that the "penny" business is not "humor." Many of your Cultural Catholic sisters and brothers think it is.

What do you know of Judaism, Susan? Just asking. The ethnicities?

Given that our ethniticities occur in contexts as distant from one another as Iran is from Poland is from Ethiopia, that our "humor" is not the same, what would be an "ethnic" Jewish joke?
-----------

Love being an example....

-----------
It is truly a shame--and a testament to the poor quality of education about our own history--that more Americans do not understand that the benefits of free speech far outweigh the importance of anyone's hurt feelings. In the 1970s, I was called a "First Amendment junkie" by feminists who wished to censor pornography.
------------

Speaking as one who was spirited out of Iran with siblings by parents, who saw blood flow in the streets, curtesy of the Iranian National Guard, I can tell you that it is not feelings that worry me.
------------------

Love being an example....
------------------
Although I love it, love it I do, it seems that we Jews are so consistently your example regardless of the topic, that I wonder if you could, instead, bring your example-making skills to bear on Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, et al., just for the sake of honing your finely tuned example-making skills.
---------------

BTW This is a postmodern world. Ever read a critique of "examples"?

BTW 2: Here I am an atheist, but will always be a Jew. Same for the Askenazim.

Do you understand?

Atheists who claim science and atheism are synonyms are clowns who do not understand science.

Hi, Pam,

You mentioned,
"Inspect every piece of pseudoscience and you will find a security blanket, a thumb to suck, a skirt to hold. What have we to offer in exchange? Uncertainty! Insecurity!"

I assume you include belief in your definition of pseudoscience. My belief has its core of certainty, but is no security blanket. On the contrary, it is a lifelong seeking, realizing that I know so little. I am not hiding behind anything. It is the core meaning of jihad, an inner struggle.

Finally, did you catch my reply to your fine poem in Susan's last thread?

Arminius

How's this?

"Inspect every piece of pseudoscience and you will find a security blanket, a thumb to suck, a skirt to hold. What have we to offer in exchange? Uncertainty! Insecurity!"

~Anonymous

Hi, Jihadist, here's a start:

Q: How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: None. They are all in the dark.

Q: How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Six. One to change the bulb, five to figure out the reasoning behind it.

Q: How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: One, but only if the bulb is a believer that wants to become an atheist.

Enjoy, all.

Arminius, a believer

Susan,
An incredible essay, thank you. This one is a classic. I am a very determined defender of our Constitution - anyone who wants to change it to mirror their religion is, according to the oath I took as a soldier, a domestic enemy. And, therefore, my enemy. Note, all, that I am a believer.

Arminius

Let atheists prove themselves in this thread with some clever and witty self ridicule.

How about something on:

Why did the atheist cross the road?

- Because he wants to get away from hell?

- Because he can't stand the heat of fire and brimstone?

- Because he wants to run away from believers?

- Becuase he can't stand being saved?

- Because he don't want salvation?

Any more by anyone and really, really funny ones?

Jacoby : "Groucho, Harpo, Chico and Zeppo could make any god or religion look ridiculous. They could make atheists look ridiculous too. I'd pay to see that movie."

Well then, we'll have to do the best we can without the Marx brothers plus the other Marx not related to them, Karl.

I don't hear too many jokes by atheists on atheism and atheists. Only many by atheists on beliefs and believers.

Anyone knows of any really good and very funny atheists and lightbulbs jokes?

Ah, well, I'll have to make do my own unfunny version then, on atheists and lighbulbs.

How many atheists does it take to fix a lightbulb? Who knows and anyone can add on or give better versions....

- One to assert the lightbulb is the fruit of science and not of religion

- One to pontificate that the lightbulb is the cause of Enlightenment

- One to maintain the lightbulb brings man out of the Dark Ages into the Lite Ages

- One to explain how a lightbulb is made and thus not a creation of God

- One to prove the lightbulb is not a miracle of God but by man

- One to write a manual on how to fix a lightbulb in incomprehensible technical language

- One to call a technician to fix the lightbulb

God : "Let there be light"
And there was light.

Scientific explanation - God used a voice recognition electronic devise to turn on the light. Much preferable than the naff "handclap" method.

Cheers

"J"

David Miller, the atheists are not so tolerant when they are ridiculed. They exhibit a sense of entitlement to be exempt from ridicule. Atheists must respect the rights of others to find bits of humor in their atheism.

My attitude is that I have the right to make fun of anything and that everyone else has the right to make fun of everything, including things that I hold to be important. Controlling humor is just one more way to control dissent and dissent is essential to democracy.
How strong can a person's faith be if a humorous remark about that faith offends them? Do they find a grain of truth in the humor that threatens them?
I was born and raised Catholic and at about the age of 12 heard Tom Lehrer's Vatican Rag and found it to be hilarious. I got thrown out of parochial school for singing it.
Yes, we should respect other peoples' beliefs (assuming that they don't try to turn them into law) but we must respect the rights of others to find bits of humor in that faith.

Atheists believe they are above ridicule and God knows why.