By Kevin SullivanWashington Post Foreign ServiceWednesday, October 22, 2008; A10
LONDON, Oct. 21
-- British atheists announced Tuesday a high-profile advertising campaign to put posters on London buses that say: "There is probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."
By Tuesday night, as many as 3,400 donors had given about $80,000 on a Web site set up to take contributions to fund the ads. The money arrived along with messages that ranged from witty to nasty, summed up by one from a donor who gave 25 pounds ($42): "Hoorah for the non-believers!"
"We wanted it to be a positive message," said Hanne Stinson, chief executive of the British Humanist Association, which plans to advertise on buses starting in January. "It's about telling people that it's okay if you don't believe in God. If it raises a smile, too, good."
While the vast majority of Britons identify themselves as Christians, only a small percentage attend services regularly. Atheism is far more popular, and socially and politically accepted, in Britain than in the United States.
Many people who do not believe in God call themselves humanists or secularists. The British Parliament has an active and growing group of legislators who describe themselves as humanists.
One of the world's most outspoken and provocative advocates of atheism, Oxford University Prof. Richard Dawkins, best-selling author of "The God Delusion," is a member of the humanist association and pledged to personally match donations up to 5,500 pounds (about $9,300), Stinson said.
"This campaign to put alternative slogans on London buses will make people think -- and thinking is anathema to religion," Dawkins is quoted as saying on the Web site.
The Church of England issued a statement Tuesday defending the humanists' right to express their views but disagreeing with their message. "Christian belief is not about worrying or not enjoying life," it said. "Quite the opposite: our faith liberates us to put this life into a proper perspective. Seven in ten people in this country describe themselves as Christian and know the joy that faith can bring."
In an interview, Stinson said the initial goal was to raise 5,500 pounds, enough to put advertising on the sides of 30 of London's extra-long "bendy buses" for four weeks. But the Web site was swamped with donors.
One person pledged 10 pounds and left the comment, "Spread the word, and consign this superstitious nonsense to the dustbin of history! America, are you listening?"
Another donated 5 pounds and said, "Marvelous. Sorry it's just a fiver -- I'm between jobs at the moment."
Stinson said she was surprised by the outpouring: "It says something about the very loud voice that religion has in our society. People want something to balance that off." The campaign's unexpected success could mean it will be expanded to include posters inside buses or in the London subway.
A spokesman for Transport for London, which operates city buses, said buses have carried ads for religious groups, but never ads promoting atheism. He said the humanists had not yet formally submitted an ad request.
The ads are "not intended as an attack" on anyone's faith, Stinson said. In her view, they do not encourage people to become atheists, but rather are meant to offer support to "people who already do not believe in God."
The idea for an atheist ad campaign first surfaced in June, as a suggestion by television comedy writer and journalist Ariane Sherine in a column in the online version of the Guardian newspaper. Sherine noted that ads running on the London buses at the time directed people to a Web site that declared that those who do not believe in God will spend "all eternity in torment in hell."
The humanist association agreed to take on the project. The bus ads are designed to tell atheists that they will not burn forever in the "lake of fire" described on the religious Web site, Stinson said. "It's about reassurance."
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
where are YOU?
I was with my sister in an emergency hospital in Manila last August when we saw a young boy, only 14 yrs. old, brought to the emergency room. He has a stab wound just below the left side of his neck. when he was brought there he was already unconscious. By just looking at him, you will already surmise that he will not make it. But still, the doctors in that emergency room work on him for over an hour to save him. while the doctors are busy pumping his heart and inserting different tubes to his body, I was there watching, praying that God perform his miracle.
But after an hour the doctors gave up and the boy died.
God, where are you? Is this another of your so called "God's Will"? He is only a child. Why make him suffer so much?
After this incident, I began to lose what little faith I have.
Holocaust -- God's Will?
September 11, 2001 -- God's Will?
Tsunami that killed hundreds of thousand -- God's Will?
But after an hour the doctors gave up and the boy died.
God, where are you? Is this another of your so called "God's Will"? He is only a child. Why make him suffer so much?
After this incident, I began to lose what little faith I have.
Holocaust -- God's Will?
September 11, 2001 -- God's Will?
Tsunami that killed hundreds of thousand -- God's Will?
Monday, October 20, 2008
Erap For President in 2010? by Harvey Keh
ON MY way to work this morning, I heard some disturbing news about the results of a supposedly Malacanang-commissioned confidential survey on the early ranking of possible Presidentiables showing that former President Joseph “Erap” Estrada was on top with a 23 percent rating. The survey also showed Vice-President Noli De Castro in second place with Senators Francis Escudero, Manny Villar, Loren Legarda and Mar Roxas lagging behind.
I am personally saddened by the results of this survey if indeed this was conducted scientifically and accurately. I’m wondering if Filipinos have actually forgotten the crimes that former President Estrada has committed, including his involvement with illegal gambling operations that eventually led to his ouster in 2001. Have we also forgotten that this was the same man that was convicted of Plunder charges just a year ago?
Yet as I reflect further on the results of this survey, it appears that majority of Filipinos are now very disgusted and disillusioned with the present administration that they are willing to bring back a convicted plunderer in the hopes that he will do a much better job of running the affairs of our country. While I agree that many of us have lost hope and trust in the Arroyo administration, have we also lost patience in looking for new leaders who can effectively and ethically lead our country that we have to settle for former President Estrada? Have we chosen to give up and just accept that we can never find a better leader other than Erap? I would like to continue to believe that there are still many good, effective and well-meaning government leaders in our country who may not be as popular as Erap, but can do a much better job in helping our country move forward at the pace of our Asian neighbors such as Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Japan, China and Vietnam.
As much as I believe that the opposition should unite under one common candidate if they hope to be able to topple the political machinery of the incumbent administration in the 2010 elections, choosing Erap will not send out a clear message of promoting change and development in our country. Many Filipinos especially those living abroad are now looking for a Filipino leader that will really work for genuine and lasting positive change in the lives of every Filipino most especially the poor and the powerless.
Let us all remember that change in our country cannot happen overnight and will not be delivered by just one person, it will take years of good governance, ethical leadership and the proactive social involvement of every Filipino if we want to achieve lasting peace, prosperity and progress for our country.
In this age of rapid globalization and migration, if we elect Erap back to Malacanang, we will not only continue to become the Sick Man of Asia but we will also become the Laughing Stock of the World.
I am personally saddened by the results of this survey if indeed this was conducted scientifically and accurately. I’m wondering if Filipinos have actually forgotten the crimes that former President Estrada has committed, including his involvement with illegal gambling operations that eventually led to his ouster in 2001. Have we also forgotten that this was the same man that was convicted of Plunder charges just a year ago?
Yet as I reflect further on the results of this survey, it appears that majority of Filipinos are now very disgusted and disillusioned with the present administration that they are willing to bring back a convicted plunderer in the hopes that he will do a much better job of running the affairs of our country. While I agree that many of us have lost hope and trust in the Arroyo administration, have we also lost patience in looking for new leaders who can effectively and ethically lead our country that we have to settle for former President Estrada? Have we chosen to give up and just accept that we can never find a better leader other than Erap? I would like to continue to believe that there are still many good, effective and well-meaning government leaders in our country who may not be as popular as Erap, but can do a much better job in helping our country move forward at the pace of our Asian neighbors such as Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Japan, China and Vietnam.
As much as I believe that the opposition should unite under one common candidate if they hope to be able to topple the political machinery of the incumbent administration in the 2010 elections, choosing Erap will not send out a clear message of promoting change and development in our country. Many Filipinos especially those living abroad are now looking for a Filipino leader that will really work for genuine and lasting positive change in the lives of every Filipino most especially the poor and the powerless.
Let us all remember that change in our country cannot happen overnight and will not be delivered by just one person, it will take years of good governance, ethical leadership and the proactive social involvement of every Filipino if we want to achieve lasting peace, prosperity and progress for our country.
In this age of rapid globalization and migration, if we elect Erap back to Malacanang, we will not only continue to become the Sick Man of Asia but we will also become the Laughing Stock of the World.
Teflon God
Teflon God
Wendy Kaminer
The following Op-Ed is from Free Inquiry magazine, Volume 25, Number 4.
On March 12, 2005, Terry Ratzmann strode into a church service in a Milwaukee, Wisconsin, hotel and started shooting. He killed seven people, including the pastor, and injured four. Ratzmann and the people he shot were members of the Living Church of God, described in the press as a small, relatively insular, Christian sect marked by a belief in the coming apocalypse, the subordination of women, and a strict set of dietary and behavioral rules. Church members (who number about seven thousand) are expected to date and marry within the faith and are discouraged from seeking professional help for psychological problems. Ratzmann apparently had his share, but he concluded his shooting spree by killing himself, offering no explanation for his rage.
Police suggested that "the motive (had) something to do with the church and the church services." Ratzmann, who may have targeted the pastor for execution, was said to have "stormed out" of a service two weeks prior to the shooting after hearing a taped sermon that attributed bad luck to ungodly choices. "All we know is he was very upset with the church, either with the church generally or a portion of the church or sermon," local district attorney Paul Bucher remarked. "We've ruled everything else out."
Speculation about the relationship between church dogma or culture and Ratzmann's homicidal fury was aired briefly in the mainstream press along with descriptions of the Living Church of God as "cultish." The challenge that religious violence poses to simplistic equations of religion and virtue is evaded when the religion in question can be dismissed as a cult or a fringe group. You can avoid examining the potential dangers of religious belief by crediting "true" religions for virtuous behavior and blaming "false" religions for vice. Indeed, if the Living Church were on the fringe of the New Age instead of evangelical Christianity, conservative Christian commentators would likely have used Ratzmann's shooting spree as an occasion for expounding on the evils of occultism and pop spirituality. Or, if violence occurs within a respectable mainstream faith-if an apparently respectable Christian or Jew hears God ordering him to kill people-religion's defenders can blame the violence on one outre, or schizophrenic, individual. (A spokesman for the Living Church characterized Ratzmann's act as "satanic.")
God is like a Teflon president who gets all the credit for his successes and none of the blame for his failures. When a religious person invokes God to avert, not inspire, violence, an amen chorus instantly appears. Google "Terry Ratzmann," and you'll get about 19,000 hits, compared with 120,000 hits for Ashley Smith, the young woman taken hostage in Duluth, Georgia, by alleged mass murderer Brian Nichols on the same day as Ratzmann's killing spree. Smith persuaded Nichols to release her and turn himself in peacefully. She "disarmed the 6'1'', 210 lb. suspect with her faith," People magazine reported. As almost everyone must know, Smith read to him from the best-selling evangelical self-help book, A Purpose Driven Life, and talked about God's plan for him.
Religious biases aside, a young, attractive woman who deftly defuses an explosive situation by establishing an emotional bond with her assailant is a better candidate for the cover of People than a dead homicidal maniac. If Smith had talked her way out of captivity and Nichols into it without the aid of religious belief, she would still have garnered admiration and publicity. Still, the assertion that she was saved by faith and her report that Nichols had called her "an angel sent from God" made the narrative irresistible. Smith became a celebrity, as her story became an argument for religious belief. "I think God gave this young lady a supernatural empathy and compassion for someone that most anybody else would have tried to kill," H.B. London, a vice president of Ministry Outreach for Focus on the Family, observed. "Every Christian organization in the country will want to tell her story."
They might have started by telling her story to those Christians who disdained Ashley's Smith's "supernatural empathy" and like "most anybody else" clamored to kill Brian Nichols. Only a few days after Smith spoke to Nichols of God's love, Bill O'Reilly was promoting a petition to impeach Atlanta's District Attorney, Paul Howard, for not immediately declaring an intent to seek the death penalty in Nichols's case.
Does God favor or disfavor killing? Believers apparently differ.
Maybe Ratzmann thought God wanted him to shoot up his church. Maybe not. Maybe O'Reilly thinks that God wants Georgia officials to kill Brian Nichols; or maybe, unlike Ashley Smith, he thinks God is indifferent to Nichols's fate and is content to let the people of Georgia decide it. Meanwhile, Catholic bishops have started a new drive against the death penalty, which they consider unnecessary though not inherently immoral. Catholics are divided on the death penalty (a little less than half support it), but evangelical Protestants tend to favor it strongly. The public seems simply confused: majority support for the death penalty competes with even stronger majority belief that innocent people are sometimes wrongly convicted and executed, by God-fearing executioners, no doubt.
Wendy Kaminer is a lawyer and social critic. Her latest book is Free for ALL: Defending Liberty in America Today.
Wendy Kaminer
The following Op-Ed is from Free Inquiry magazine, Volume 25, Number 4.
On March 12, 2005, Terry Ratzmann strode into a church service in a Milwaukee, Wisconsin, hotel and started shooting. He killed seven people, including the pastor, and injured four. Ratzmann and the people he shot were members of the Living Church of God, described in the press as a small, relatively insular, Christian sect marked by a belief in the coming apocalypse, the subordination of women, and a strict set of dietary and behavioral rules. Church members (who number about seven thousand) are expected to date and marry within the faith and are discouraged from seeking professional help for psychological problems. Ratzmann apparently had his share, but he concluded his shooting spree by killing himself, offering no explanation for his rage.
Police suggested that "the motive (had) something to do with the church and the church services." Ratzmann, who may have targeted the pastor for execution, was said to have "stormed out" of a service two weeks prior to the shooting after hearing a taped sermon that attributed bad luck to ungodly choices. "All we know is he was very upset with the church, either with the church generally or a portion of the church or sermon," local district attorney Paul Bucher remarked. "We've ruled everything else out."
Speculation about the relationship between church dogma or culture and Ratzmann's homicidal fury was aired briefly in the mainstream press along with descriptions of the Living Church of God as "cultish." The challenge that religious violence poses to simplistic equations of religion and virtue is evaded when the religion in question can be dismissed as a cult or a fringe group. You can avoid examining the potential dangers of religious belief by crediting "true" religions for virtuous behavior and blaming "false" religions for vice. Indeed, if the Living Church were on the fringe of the New Age instead of evangelical Christianity, conservative Christian commentators would likely have used Ratzmann's shooting spree as an occasion for expounding on the evils of occultism and pop spirituality. Or, if violence occurs within a respectable mainstream faith-if an apparently respectable Christian or Jew hears God ordering him to kill people-religion's defenders can blame the violence on one outre, or schizophrenic, individual. (A spokesman for the Living Church characterized Ratzmann's act as "satanic.")
God is like a Teflon president who gets all the credit for his successes and none of the blame for his failures. When a religious person invokes God to avert, not inspire, violence, an amen chorus instantly appears. Google "Terry Ratzmann," and you'll get about 19,000 hits, compared with 120,000 hits for Ashley Smith, the young woman taken hostage in Duluth, Georgia, by alleged mass murderer Brian Nichols on the same day as Ratzmann's killing spree. Smith persuaded Nichols to release her and turn himself in peacefully. She "disarmed the 6'1'', 210 lb. suspect with her faith," People magazine reported. As almost everyone must know, Smith read to him from the best-selling evangelical self-help book, A Purpose Driven Life, and talked about God's plan for him.
Religious biases aside, a young, attractive woman who deftly defuses an explosive situation by establishing an emotional bond with her assailant is a better candidate for the cover of People than a dead homicidal maniac. If Smith had talked her way out of captivity and Nichols into it without the aid of religious belief, she would still have garnered admiration and publicity. Still, the assertion that she was saved by faith and her report that Nichols had called her "an angel sent from God" made the narrative irresistible. Smith became a celebrity, as her story became an argument for religious belief. "I think God gave this young lady a supernatural empathy and compassion for someone that most anybody else would have tried to kill," H.B. London, a vice president of Ministry Outreach for Focus on the Family, observed. "Every Christian organization in the country will want to tell her story."
They might have started by telling her story to those Christians who disdained Ashley's Smith's "supernatural empathy" and like "most anybody else" clamored to kill Brian Nichols. Only a few days after Smith spoke to Nichols of God's love, Bill O'Reilly was promoting a petition to impeach Atlanta's District Attorney, Paul Howard, for not immediately declaring an intent to seek the death penalty in Nichols's case.
Does God favor or disfavor killing? Believers apparently differ.
Maybe Ratzmann thought God wanted him to shoot up his church. Maybe not. Maybe O'Reilly thinks that God wants Georgia officials to kill Brian Nichols; or maybe, unlike Ashley Smith, he thinks God is indifferent to Nichols's fate and is content to let the people of Georgia decide it. Meanwhile, Catholic bishops have started a new drive against the death penalty, which they consider unnecessary though not inherently immoral. Catholics are divided on the death penalty (a little less than half support it), but evangelical Protestants tend to favor it strongly. The public seems simply confused: majority support for the death penalty competes with even stronger majority belief that innocent people are sometimes wrongly convicted and executed, by God-fearing executioners, no doubt.
Wendy Kaminer is a lawyer and social critic. Her latest book is Free for ALL: Defending Liberty in America Today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)