Atheists' Gospel: Quote by Einstein

"[T]he word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."
-- Albert Einstein, in a letter written to philosopher Eric Gutkind in January 1954.

Hate Reaction to The Love Guru

Mike Myers's upcoming comedy, The Love Guru, has attracted the attention of fundamentalist Hindus who are upset by its use of the term "Guru," which has religious and devotional connotations. (In Hinduism, people love and revere their gurus like Christians purport to love and revere Christ.)

.

This fundamentalist Hindu website has even devised a punishment chart that dictates just how long people will suffer in Hell for even watching the movie.

.

Even seeing the movie without knowing that it's offensive to Hindus will earn you 100 years in the Hindu version of Limbo.

.

Note that the really long stays in Hell are reserved for the folks who made the movie, which includes characters such as "Guru Satchabigknoba" and "Guru Tugginmypudha." (Yeah, it's another dumb movie from Mike Myers replete with penis and fart jokes.)

.

This is just more whining by theists, in this case polytheists, who have always suspected that their religion is a bunch of hokum and shriek when anyone confirms that fact. Like Deepak Chopra said, their faith is so weak that even a comedy can offend them.

.

Upon further exploration of situation, however, these particular fundamentalists are more sinister. They also organize and celebrate crusades against inter-faith marriage, book burnings,riots and vandalism over what they regard as impious artistic representations, and constantly work to inflame Muslim-Hindu relations in India, which is already a religious tinderbox.

Are Atheists Inherently Immoral?

"solaphyde" said:

I would not argue that atheism = immorality, but rather
non-morality. That is, conceptually. However practically, because atheism =
non-morality, it leads to immorality. If a Cardinal abuses small children, then
only a theist can hold the Cardinal accountable and say what he did was really
wrong. An atheist cannot consistently do this simply because they do not have a
standard of right, thereby knowing what is wrong.

As the Peanut's Bible would say: Oh, goodeth griefeth.

Atheism is neither immoral nor amoral. Morals and ethics exist independently of whether or not you believe in a Deity or Deities who will smite thou with a stick if thou does something immoral. That's not morality. That's just fear of retribution.

Indeed, most atheists or other seculars that I know are more moral and ethical than theists, because they have thought about whether an act is inherently immoral or unethical, rather than worrying about whether it conforms to a set of laws set down a heck of a long time ago by men who who heard voices.

Indeed, moral or immoral?: I read an article in, IIRC, The Atlantic written by a guy who was a secular Jew. As a kid, he had gone to a yeshiva and argued Talmudic law with the best. At one seminar, an observant Jew who was also a medical doctor treated non-Jewish patients on the Sabbath if it was an emergency. He said that he thought it was moral to do so because, although a Jew is prohibited from working on the Sabbath, God's injunction to save life is more important than not working on the Sabbath.

A rabbi stood up and berated him for treating Goyim on the Sabbath under the admonition to save life, because a Goyim's life is not as important as a Jew's life. (I kid you not. I remember the arguement very well.) However, one could treat a Goy patient on the Sabbath if one did it because one did not want to damage Goy-Jew relations.

Later, the rabbi apologized for his statement because, and again I kid you not, there were Goyim present at the seminar, and his statement was damaging to Goy-Jew relations, and because Goyim are not supposed to know the laws of God that a Jew follows so well. The rabbi should have berated the doctor in private.

Now, is that rabbi moral or ethical? Beyond his quibbling about why one should save the life of a Goyim who is, after all, only a Goyim, how about his attitude toward all of us who are not Jews? Is that moral?

Again, like too much baseless self-esteem leads to bullying, I think too much self-aggrandizing religion leads to immorality by inculcating a callous and uncaring attitude.

TK Kenyon
Author of CALLOUS: A Novel, a story about free will, neuroscience, fate, Schrodinger's Cat, and the End of Days.

Amazon Leaps Ahead!

Amazon has jumped the gun and is offering my new novel, CALLOUS, for sale ahead of its May publication date ( http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1601640226 ) . When RABID was released last year, Amazon sold out and even sucked dry its wholesaler, so they had to backorder the book from the distributer and it took a couple weeks to get the fresh meat.

If you want to read CALLOUS any time soon, muscle your way to the head of the line and snatch a copy from some milquetoast's virtual shopping cart now!

TK Kenyon
http://www.tkkenyon.com

Book Trailer for TK Kenyon's Novel *Callous*

My, oh my! It's quite a show!

TK Kenyon

Five Worst Catholic Cardinals re: Clergy Sex Abuse

For all those believers who think that atheism leads to immorality and crime, let us not forget that the Catholic Church is guilty of widespread concealment and even fostering of child sex abuse.

The following press release by SNAP (Survivors' Network of those Abused by Priests) today listed the following five cardinals as the most complicit in concealing child sex abuse by the religious. In this, they are accessories after the fact because they concealed a crime rather than reported it to authorities.

Five Worst Catholic Cardinals

1. Cardinal Francis George of Chicago
2. Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles
3. Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Houston
4. Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston
5. Cardinal Edward Egan of New York

Cardinal Francis George of Chicago

-- In August 2005, Fr. Daniel McCormack was questioned by the police because of abuse allegations. Two months later, the Chicago lay review board recommended that George suspend McCormack. George refused, kept silent and let his chancellor promote McCormack. Three months later, police arrested McCormack again. During those last few months of his active parish ministry in Chicago's inner city, McCormack molested at least three boys, the district attorney said. (One of the children, prosecutors say, had been assaulted "on an almost daily" basis.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/09/national/09priest.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

McCormack has pled guilty to child molestation.

Later, records obtained by victims' attorneys showed that in 1999, a school principal reported accusations against McCormack to archdiocesan officials. Nothing was done.

Adding insult to injury, five high ranking church officials closely involved in this fiasco have since been promoted. http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2008/01_02/2008_01_24_Hogan_TheCardinal.htm

The female veteran school principal (who was the only archdiocesan staffer to call the police) has, however, been fired. Church authorities refuse to say why. http://reform-network.net/?p=606

-- While the McCormack case has received some attention, George has displayed shocking callousness, recklessness and secrecy in other, post-2002 cases. Perhaps most notably, within months of the adoption of the so-called 'reforms' in Dallas,
George knowingly and secretly let a convicted predator priest (Fr. Kenneth
Martin) work in the archdiocese and live, part-time, with George in George's
mansion. http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news5/2003_03_02_Falsani_PriestsCase.htm

Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles

In 2005 or 2006, LA church and school officials were questioned by police about current child sex abuse allegations against John Malburg. Malburg was a Catholic high school principal from a politically prominent family. The archdiocese didn't suspend him. They told no one about the investigation. Six months later, Malburg was arrested and criminally charged. Parents asked church officials "Why didn't you tell us? Why didn't you suspend him?" Cardinal Mahony's PR man told the LA Times "Law enforcement told us to keep quiet." The next day, in the LA Times, prosecutors said they never made any such request. http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2006/11_12/2006_11_19_NBC4_ArchdioceseChurch.htm , http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news5/2006_11_17_Hong_CorruptionTarget.htm

In just nine months, police say, Fr. Nicholas Aguilar Rivera, sexually assaulted at least 26 boys in Los Angeles.

In August 2007, long-secret church records about Aguilar were publicly disclosed. According to the New York Times, the documents showed that then-Msgr. Thomas Curry "tipped off" the accused pedophile priest who then fled to Mexico to avoid criminal prosecution.(An LA district attorney said Curry "facilitated" Aguilar's flight.) Aguilar went on to molest kids in Mexico later. http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2006/09_10/2006_10_21_McKinley_AccusedPriests.htm

Curry is now one of Mahony's auxiliary bishops. Despite public pleas to discipline Curry, or at least speak out about Curry's irresponsible secrecy, Mahony said and did nothing.

· For years, Mahony stayed secretly let an admitted child-molesting cleric live in his archdiocese (in a picturesque religious complex overlooking the ocean), despite the cleric's being wanted on criminal charges in Canada. In 2005, when SNAP and others demanded that Mahony and his colleagues turn Franciscan friar Gerald Chumik to law enforcement, he let Chumik move from Santa Barbara Mission Church in Santa Barbara to Missouri.

For 14 years, Chumik has been a fugitive from his native Canada.

SNAP leaders believe this needlessly put children at risk and is a clear violation of the much-touted Dallas Charter which all American bishops adopted in June of 2002.

Elected district attorneys rarely feud in public with powerful religious figures. But in October 2005, (more than three years after Mahony pledged "openness" about child sex abuse and cover ups), Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley said "Three years ago, I urged Cardinal Mahony to provide the fullest possible disclosure of evidence of sexual abuse by clergy. Despite two court rulings ordering full disclosure, Cardinal Mahony continues to claim 'confidentiality privileges' that no court has recognized." http://da.co.la.ca.us/mr/archive/2005/101205a.htm?zoom_highlight=clergy

Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Houston

In November 2007, a victim reported having been sexually abused by Fr. Stephen Horn between 1989 and 1993. DiNardo found him credible and suspended Horn. The Cardinal, however, kept the allegation and his determination secret from parishioners, police and the public for two months, despite US bishops' repeated pledges to act quickly and openly with credibly sex abuse allegations. Finally, in mid-January, DiNardo disclosed his action. (The delay gave Horn, a credibly accused molester, ample opportunity to fabricate alibis, destroy evidence, intimidate victims, threaten witnesses, or even flee the country, as some pedophile priests have done.)

Part of DiNardo's secrecy and delay occurred in the weeks between when the Pope announced that DiNardo would be named a Cardinal (October 2007) and when DiNardo was promoted amid much pageantry (November 24). Some Houston Catholics have speculated that DiNardo didn't want the news of Horn's crimes to 'rain on (DiNardo's) parade.'

Weeks ago, SNAP wrote DiNardo, urging him to explain and apologize for his secrecy. SNAP has urged the cardinal to visit parishes where Horn worked and emphatically beg victims and witnesses to come forward, get help and call the police. He has not responded to either the letter or the request.

When he was a bishop in Sioux City Iowa, DiNardo similarly mishandled the Fr. George McFadden case in Iowa, only disclosing the allegations against this predator priest long afterwards.)

Beginning in the 1990s (and likely longer), Sioux City church officials knew of repeated charges of child molestation against McFadden, an admitted abuser, dating back into the 1960s. (DiNardo was Sioux City bishop starting in 1997.) For at least five years (and even later), DiNardo had the chance to disclose McFadden's hurtful actions to police, prosecutors, parishioners, and the public, and to keep McFadden from other vulnerable children. He stayed silent.

According to the Des Moines Register, "The confessed child molester continued to hear confession and say Mass daily over the past decade at the Cathedral of the Epiphany, Sioux City's largest Catholic church.) http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news/2002_06_23_Rood_ChurchSecrecy.htm

McFadden is accused of abusing more than 25 girls and boys in dozens of civil lawsuits. Despite his alleged 'treatment' and 'retirement' in the 1990s, he continued to function as priest until 2002. http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news5/2008_01_14_Kever_PriestRemoved.htm , http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2008/01_02/2008_01_14_Quinn_ChurchOfficials.htm

Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston

Last month church officials disclosed that, for the second year in a row, O'Malley is in violation of the US bishops' child sex abuse prevention policy. Much in the policy is meaningless public relations, SNAP is convinced. But O'Malley's breaking one of the proven, practical requirements that help prevent abuse: training kids how to avoid or stop being victimized.

Roughly one in five Boston Catholic children is not receiving this training. Every child is supposed to receive it. Worse, O'Malley tries to dodge responsibility for this clear, egregious refusal by blaming pastors and parishioners.

But O'Malley's had six years to persuade colleagues to weaken the national abuse policy, devise alternative programs, or get on board (and get his employees on board). He's done none of these three steps.

Nor has he disciplined a single individual for flaunting this national requirement. http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2008/03_04/2008_04_11_Hamm_AbuseVictims.htm
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2006/03_04/2006_03_10_Levenson_88Victims.htm

In a 2006 case with disturbing parallels to many of the hundreds of Boston pedophile priest cases, O'Malley moved very slowly and gingerly against a prominent Catholic hospital official who faces multiple allegations of sexually harassing employees.

A high ranking human resources official at the hospital "accused O'Malley of improperly interceding in the investigation to help (the accused), giving him advance notice of the probe, providing him with an adviser, and telling of the reprimand before consulting with the board," according to the Boston Globe.

The cardinal's actions ''have made a mockery of the investigation. It is nothing short of shameful," she wrote. "Perhaps most troubling" was what she called the ''near absence" of concern for the women complainants that she said was shown by the church hierarchy. http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/05/21/omalley_reprimands_caritas_chief/

Cardinal Edward Egan of New York

Less than two months ago, the New York Post reported "The former principal of a prestigious Catholic high school who resigned amid allegations of inappropriate images on his work computer was allowed to stay on the job for nearly five months after a priest wrote the New York Archdiocese accusing him of serious misconduct."
http://www.nypost.com/seven/02282008/news/regionalnews/diocese_let_school_big_slide_99632.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/nyregion/28hayes.html

In 2003, Egan became the first US prelate to refuse to say mass for the devoutly Catholic, hand-picked, distinguished lay panel chosen by bishops to look at the church's child sex abuse crisis. According to the New York Times, Egan also "interfered with" and prevented the US bishops' 'watchdog' on clergy sex cases from speaking in his archdiocese.

(SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, is the nation's oldest and largest support group for clergy abuse victims. We've been around for 17 years and have more than 8,000 members across the country. Despite the word "priest" in our title, we have members who were molested by religious figures of all denominations, including nuns, rabbis, bishops, and Protestant ministers. Our website is SNAPnetwork.org)

Pope Speaks Out, Obliquely, Against Religious Extremism

In the Wall Street Journal (April 14th,) John D. McKinnon wrote about Pope Benedict XVI's visit to the US and his speeches here. He also noted that the Pope spoke out against extremism:

A major theme of Pope Benedict's papacy has been the importance of reason and
faith coexisting. Reason without faith, he has said, leads to empty materialism, while faith without reason leads to extremism, as in parts of the Middle East.

...

Pope Benedict also has spoken out against intolerance in the Islamic world, provoking a violent backlash in the Muslim world with a 2006 speech in Regensburg, Germany. On Easter he baptized a well-known Italian Muslim in a ceremony that drew renewed criticism from parts of the Middle East. "The pope understands the danger of radical Islam," said a former Bush administration aide.

The Pope is right. (And there's a sentence I thought I might never write.) He's taking a huge personal risk of angering the Islamists by telling them that it is wrong to kill people merely because they are angry.

I support Pope Benedict XVI in his valiant stance against irrational extremism.

TK Kenyon

www.tkkenyon.com

Author of RABID and CALLOUS: Two novels about science and religion, with some sex and murder.