Read her disgusting diatribe here:

http://evebitfirst.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/a-man-is-a-rape-supporter-if/

A feminist rant, sexist in the extreme, objectifies and stereotypes men as rapists – one and all. Hypocrisy at its worst.

People like her, genuinely sicken me.

This is a handy guide for men who involve themselves with women.

I’ve recently received a bunch of comments from women who say that they aren’t domineering, manipulative, and emotionally abusive because they (1) have never psychologically abused a man and/or (2) are gay. If you are around a woman who claims to be anti-domineering, see how she stacks up.

A woman is emotionally abusive, manipulative and predatory if:

• • She has ever sexually engaged with any man whilst he was underage, drunk, high, physically restrained, unconscious, or subjected to psychological, physical, economic, or emotional coercion.
• • She has accused a man of being a slut, a cunt, a bastard, a prick or of having “buyers remorse” after a one night stand that didn’t turn into two due to her detailing her life story in a moment of post coital “bliss”
• • She has blamed a man for not putting the toilet seat down, when she has never once lifted it after her own ablutions
• • She has been to a hens night and leered at a male stripper.
• • She characterises being an heiress or an actress as a “legitimate job choice” or defends women who buy womens gossip magazines.
• • She has ever revealed that she used a one night stand to get over an ex
• • She has gone to a strip club
• • She is anti abortion
• • She is pro-choice because she believes that it will make her more sexually available
• • She watches pornography, even if it consists of two men tearing one another a new arsehole, with or without performing the polite reacharound.
• • She characterises the self-sexualising behaviour of some men, such as going to the gym and wearing singlets or driving cars with Leb-Lights on them as evidence of a mans desire to “get” a woman.
• • She laughs at stories told by her friends about the guy that they shagged who had a small cock or was a premature ejaculator
• • She expresses enjoyment of movies/musicals/TV shows/plays in which men are forced to perform culinary duties for a prize, sing or dance and be voted on via text message.
• • She mocks men who complain about unwanted sexual attention as being “gay”.
• • She supports “sexual liberation” and claims that more men would have sex with more women if only they were like their homosexual kin.
• • She states that men who do not want to have sex with her are “gay”.
• • She argues that certain societal behaviours toward men are “cultural” and therefore legitimate subjects of feminist attention.
• • She describes the male anatomy as “throbbing”, “pulsating”, or in any kind of metaphorical terms that imply the sheathing of a sword.
• • She defends the emotional abuse of men on grounds that they are, well, men.
• • She promotes the idea that men, as a class, are happier or more fulfilled if they work, preferably as a tradie and provide for their women.
• • She argues that only men have sexual needs and uses sex as a weapon.
• • She discusses the “types” of men that she finds sexually appealing and/or attempts to demean men by telling them that she does not find them sexually attractive.
• • She sexually objectifies gay men or describes herself as a “fag hag”
• • She defends these actions by saying that some men also engage in them.

So, let’s see how many men reading this know at least one woman over the age of 18 who does not fit this list. Anybody?

—-

Now of course I don’t actually believe any of what I have written in point form above, but as you can see, it is as ludicrous as what that sad oxygen thief carried on with… makes me ashamed to be human, sharing oxygen with people like that – no better than a racist, a homophobe or a religious bigot.

On the same day that those spooky Catholics beatified a dead AIDS enabler and those lovely Americans celebrated the death of an Arab, The Jesus appeared on my bathroom tiles.

Tens of thousands of fat, educated, ignorant Americans party in the streets chanting “USA USA USA” when an Arab is killed – it is a joyous day and the media feast merrily on the triumph of good over evil.

Thousands of impoverished, uneducated Arabs chant something about Allah and fire guns into the air when the death of an American is announced and it is condemned as savagery.

Am I missing something?

Not quite sure who has killed more innocents actually, Americans or Osama.

Let’s conduct the first ever* twitter exit poll this coming Saturday at the Australian Federal Election.

The concept is simple.

Grab your ballot papers, fill them in and snap off a shot on your mobile and then twitpic or yfrog it (or whatever pic service you use).

Add the hashtags #exitpoll #ausvotes to the tweet and see if we can call the election based on the “twexit” poll before Jabba (@laurieoakes), @latikambourke, Kerry O’Brien and the likes.

Additionally, add the hashtag #ALP, #LIB, #GRN or #OTR (other) based on who you gave your first choice preference or only vote to.

This is only for the house of reps – the senate would be too tricky

Twitter always tends to deliver the news more swiftly than the traditional channels (it was first to report the knifing of the despicable Rudd after all) – with your help, perhaps we can be the first to call this election and really annoy those snooty journalists who giggle at their own terrible puns, hashtags and jokes on twitter

To make it easy – simply copy and paste in the below 140chars into a tweet of your own – spread the word, let us declare victory for The Mad Monk or The Ranga Queen before O’brien, Oakes, Martin, Richo or any of those clods.

Twitter exit poll – be the first to call the result of #ausvotes | be part of a world first |  http://bit.ly/bwyRmI #exitpoll

The twitter exit poll experiment

*may not actually be the first ever twitter exit poll

In my professional life, I have been on maybe 300 flights around Australia.

The beauty of flights around the worlds largest continent that is in and of itself, a country; is that they don’t last all that long.

Still, they fucking terrify me.

I like the initial rush of the takeoff and love the landing, but everything in between sends me into a panic.

It shouldn’t. I wont go into the personal reasons for that here, but let it be said that I have faced things far more terrifying than something which has a 1 in 8,000,000 chance of getting one killed.

I haven’t ever flown out of Australia, but my job now requires me to.

It isn’t the thought of death that terrifies me about it though and I realised this after reading this beautifully poetic piece by Christopher Hitchens on the race in which he has become a finalist.

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2010/09/hitchens-201009

The article is poetry.

It is one of the most beautiful things that I have ever read and not for the content, but for the conviction, the strength and the sentiment behind the content.

I hope to have half the courage that Hitchens has displayed should I be given a clock with my time and date on it.

Whilst a man that a large percentage of the world will be watching with bated breath, hopping that he converts on his deathbed, maintains his integrity; I am twisted in knots about getting in an aeroplane to fly to Thailand.

My irrational fear of flying lead me to contemplate posting my wishes for my funeral here just in case my lawyer didn’t take me seriously. For a laugh, I will do so anyway, if only to admit to myself just how stupid I have been publicly.

• - My funeral will be held in a Catholic church, St Bernards Berowra -- though no priest shall be present.
• - My coffin shall be carried by seven leather clad midgets
• - There will be two very attractive people, one male, one female, in tailored, tight, red latex devil costumes who shall surreptitiously dart about the gathering whispering conspiratorially in peoples ears “you know where he is now, don’t you?”
• - People shall be wearing black, purple and red only -- preferably with white or mixed colour shoes
• - People shall not be “mourners” but “celebrators” and any tear shed shall be done so only because they didn’t get a chance to hit me for winding them up
• - No one shall wax lyrical about “what a wonderful person I was”, rather they shall detail my worst qualities and drone on and on about how much of a “cunt” I was
• - The music playing shall be Opeth, Nightwish, Nemesea, Tool, Assemblage 23 and other suitable dark stuff
• - I shall be cremated and, from my life insurance, an ounce of pure cocaine (or more, depending on my weight at death) shall be purchased and mixed with my ashes and snorted by all who wish to “do so in memory of me”
• - Everyone shall get written off and preferably naked with the midgets and then organise a bank heist with jetpack clad monkeys. When they are caught, they shall request clemency by virtue of “grief”
• - A monument shall be erected in my honour outside a church

That is about it…

Anyway, the other thing that gave me pause for thought was this song:

I know that it has nothing to do with fear of flying, but the bit about “I control you” caused me to confront my fear and decide that I wouldn’t let it control me anymore.

Why let fear control any aspect of you?

Those of us who are fortunate know the time of our meeting with oblivion, the rest of us are oblivious.

Why waste what time we have worrying about what may never be when death can come in an instant, without warning, rhyme nor reason.

Live for the now, live for yourself and those around you who you love. Make the most of every day and worry not about the time that will come for you when you meet oblivion.

There is no point in worrying about the things you haven’t done or wanted to do, when you are dead, you wont have any form of conscious thought.

Do those things today, live life without regret so that if you are fortunate enough to be given the time of your meeting with death, you will not fret, rather reflect on a life well lived.

Live for the now, but in doing so, don’t neglect your humanist urges -- this life you have is your only life, but it is also the only life that those around you will have.

We all fear death but it shouldn’t cloud our desire to live.

Thank you Christopher

In order to illustrate that, below are two pictures of the odious David Barker – aspirational federal member for bigotry and ignorance.

Someone feed that man

Casting calls for Star Wars 7

Barker has been disendorsed – and rightly so – by the Liberal party as a direct result of his bigoted comments about atheists and Muslims.

http://www.news.com.au/features/federal-election/revealed-liberal-candidate-david-barkers-anti-muslim-campaign/story-fn5taogy-1225896534232

The disgraceful Barker describes himself as a “man of strong Christian faith”, and, in a state of apparent psychotic delusion suggested that he was “going to win this seat… claim it as mine and when I get in I will give my votes all of them to God who is on the side of the Liberal Right”.

He then went on to accuse non-Christians of “worshipping a false god”, attacking Julia Gillard for being an “atheist” and his opponent Ed Husic, for being a  “strong Moslem”.

At the same time, he described federal Liberal leader, Tony Abbott as “God’s mouthpiece in politics” before going on to say “I don’t believe God would have called me to run in this seat if he didn’t expect me to win,”

Clearly this man is delusional, a clear case for atheism if I have ever seen one. Perhaps he isn’t to blame however, he looks like he is merely half a chromosome away from being burdened with Down Syndrome.

It is hard to take someone seriously when they mention an Invisible Sky Monkey at the best of times, but when someone then goes on to say things like:

“I vote for freedom of worship if the worship is of Jesus Christ or The Jewish God anyone else well they are worshipping a false god anyway so who cares.”

“Voting should only be voluntary for Liberal and National voters the rest can not bother since with every vote they bring the nation closer to the brink of disaster and closer to the hands of a (sic)muslim country.”

“Someone get me into parliament … and watch me go. They will see my talent as the voice of … God himself.”

… it is obvious that there is something not quite right in the rats nest of synapses that they call a “brain”.

To summarise what this clown has said:

• An Invisible Sky Monkey speaks to him
• His Invisible Sky Monkey is the only real Invisible Sky Monkey
• Freedom is ok, so long as it is the kind of freedom that he approves of
• Only people who subscribe to his extreme views should be allowed to vote

It is scary that such a warped, delusional and bigoted individual was ever endorsed by a major political party in the first place. I could understand those twisted clowns at Family First or the CDP running with such an ignorant candidate, even putting him up on a pedestal and plastering Australia with posters of his deluded visage – but the Liberals?

A cynic might suggest that this kind of bottom feeding, disgusting individual; is exactly the kind of person who appeals to the traditional “aspirational” Liberal heartland (those inherent racists who don’t make enough money to be a Liberal voter though have delusions of grandeur and hope to one day be able to afford a bottle, not a cask of wine) – though one must give kudos to the “muscular Catholic”, the “mad monk”, Tony Abbott for the swift punishment that he dished out to the detestable Barker.

He was disendorsed and Abbot said: he is “gone, he’s finished”. “Attacks on people based on their religion have no place in this election campaign,”

A reasonably brave move given that he is running against an atheist and risks alienating the Christian right… actually, what the fuck am I saying, the Christian right are rusted on conservative voters come hell or high water. Still, I have to give credit where it is due, and Abbott is either maturing as a leader and a human being during this campaign or has some very talented advisors grooming him 24×7.

At the heart of the issue though is something that the slug like Barker himself raised:

‘But I don’t know if we want at this stage in Australian politics a Muslim in the parliament and an atheist running the government.’

Of course, a fundamentalist Christian is in a much better position to tell us what we can and can’t do in both our public and private life, because the one true god speaks to him and is on his side.

Religion has no place in politics, be it Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Sikhism, Scientology or any other kind of paranormal whackiness. Politics should always be based on pragmatism, logic and reason – what is best for the people no matter what their creed.

Odious, bigoted, ignorant, detestable cretins like David Barker have no place in our political landscape (or in civilised society) and we, one and all, atheist, Christian, Muslim, Jew, humanist, Hindu, Sikh, worshipper of the Flying Spaghetti Monster alike; should unite to ensure that these vile human beings are never afforded a position of power in our society.

Recently, a tweet caught my eye.

Posted by @mmaryannwright - it was a link to a story about two couples who were suing a hospital for failing to detect that their children were carrying the condition Trisomy 21

The allegation is that ante-natal testing was negligent and failed to detect the presence of the condition.

The parents claim that had they been made aware of the presence of the condition that they would have terminated their respective pregnancies.

The couples are suing for the depression, shock and anxiety that they have suffered as a result of having believed that they were to have a healthy child, free from defect; only to discover that they in fact were presented with a child with a chromosomal disorder.

They are also seeking compensation for the continuing costs of raising a child with such a disorder.

One of the children also suffers heart, kidney and thyroid problems and can’t walk.

The tweet that accompanied the link was:

These kind of people make me sick

That is her opinion, that is fine. I don’t know her personal circumstance, whether or not she has raised a disabled child or has a disabled sibling and as such, it would be wrong of me to form an opinion about her as a result of her tweet.

What struck me though was that in saying what she did – that they made her “sick”, she appeared to show absolutely no empathy for what the couples in question experienced.

To declare my hand (I am not going to say “pro choice” – such a misnomer) – I believe that people have the right to make an informed choice about matters which have the potential to impact their lives, adversely or otherwise.

I replied and the conversation want this way:

What I took issue with was the arrogance implicit in what this person was saying.

“These kind of people” make her “sick”.

No explanation as to why, just a judgement, no explanation as to whether or not she had walked a kilometre in their shoes, just a scathing character assessment that throughout the fragmented Twitter conversation, appeared to show a complete inability of this individual to empathise with four distressed human beings.

In her final comment to me; she said “I hope for your sake you’re trolling.”

The supreme arrogance of such a statement, along with this persons willingness to condemn people for being so terrible as to be desirous of having a choice; tells me a lot about her character, values and morals.

I will leave you to make your own assessment of this person – without knowing her personal circumstances, it would be wrong of me to perform an analysis of her character.

What I will say however is that nobody has the right to judge a fellow human being without knowing what that person has experienced, what their personal circumstances are.

Unfortunately a driving force behind the judgement of the actions of others is religion.

To suggest that abortion is wrong, that same sex relationships are abhorrent, that an unmarried woman is unfit to be the leader of a nation, that women are inferior to men – these are the constructs of religion.

Interestingly, and I am not suggesting that the person who tweeted the original tweet is religious, not for one moment – but the religious who condemn things such as abortion, homosexuality and the like forget that in their sacred text, it says:

Leviticus 21:

16 Then the Lord said to Moses,
17 “Give the following instructions to Aaron: In all future generations, none of your descendants who has any defect will qualify to offer food to his God.
18 No one who has a defect qualifies, whether he is blind, lame, disfigured, deformed,
19 or has a broken foot or arm,
20 or is hunchbacked or dwarfed, or has a defective eye, or skin sores or scabs, or damaged testicles.
21 No descendant of Aaron who has a defect may approach the altar to present special gifts to the Lord. Since he has a defect, he may not approach the altar to offer food to his God.
22 However, he may eat from the food offered to God, including the holy offerings and the most holy offerings.
23 Yet because of his physical defect, he may not enter the room behind the inner curtain or approach the altar, for this would defile my holy places. I am the Lord who makes them holy.”

For mine, this is the “sacred book” of the Christians vigorously promoting abortion.

Of course they had to get the “testicles” in there didn’t they? Jesus Christ – why are they all so obsessed with sex?!

As such, no true Christian can condemn abortion for “theraputic” reasons if they wish to claim that they honour the word of their god.

UPDATE

After I posted this, the tweets from the individual in question were (read from bottom up) somewhat amusing. I didn’t bite back and was quite nice to her, providing my email address should she wish to discuss the matter and offering her an unfettered, unedited right of reply on this page.

To date, she hasn’t accepted.

Defamation?

Some people claim that a Mexican gardener speaks to them.

Others still, assert that this (strangely Anglo looking, based on “artists impressions”) 2010 year old Jewish zombie asks them to do naughty things and vilify others in his name.

Well… they don’t actually have their own personal Jesus.

I do.

I don’t have much need for keys.

I live in a world of fingerprint and retinal scanners, swipe cards and security codes. I only possess two keys.

Still, they are important keys.

I have, for as long as I can remember; had a problem with losing and misplacing my two keys.

In the past two months however, I have never once misplaced them, lost them, been unable to find them or forgotten them.

The reason is thus:

Two months ago, a good friend of mine went to America -- land of the giant Jesus, where over half the population have a personal relationship with this wizard from ancient times.

America is the Mecca for Christians really. Creationism is rife, you can’t get elected to public office unless you speak to the invisible sky monkey (all credit to The Princess of Yesterday for that -- even though it angers my winged monkeys), there are excellent public services such as being able to write letters to heathens for them to read when The Rapture comes and you are whisked away to fellate angels on a cloud somewhere…

It is, I am told, a wondrous place.

Anyway, when my friend came back, he came back bearing gifts (and no, he is not Greek).

My swag of goodies included a poster of Chairman Mao and a Jesus keyring.

The Good Chairman was immediately framed and hung centrally in my lounge room…

Fuck me, that was spooky, as I write this, the haggard old woman on The Catherine Tate show mentioned Chairman Mao… god moves in mysterious ways.

Well fuck me twice… the next skit on the show just paraphrased a tweet from the aforementioned Princess of Yesterday -- “footprints on the heart”.

I think that Jesus *is* speaking to me… mind you the prick hasn’t given me the Powerball numbers yet.

Anyway, before I meander too far off track -- they were very thoughtful gifts, the kind that someone who has taken the time to get to know you, but loves a good wind up would give.

After hanging the Chairman up, I strung Jesus… er, attached my keys to the Plastic Saviour.

It isn’t just any plastic saviour -- it has a button that; when pressed, allows a bright light to shine out from ‘neath his robes. It is the kind of light I imagine that people see when they are dying and their brain is starved of oxygen.

It is most useful at times.

To get to the point though, ever since I affixed my keys to my own personal Jesus, I haven’t once misplaced them, never lost them, never forgotten them.

It is almost as if Plastic Jesus is my keys shepherd and they shall not want.

Whilst this trinket hasn’t yet made me lie down in pastures green, it has often lead me by quiet waters and never once abandoned me.

This has given me pause for thought, perhaps the zombie Jewish Mexican gardener cum carpenter who speaks to others is trying to speak to me.

Perhaps he is constructing some kind of living metaphor for me -- that where as once my keys were lost, now they are found; and, whilst he watches over them, never again shall they meander aimlessly through life…

It is all very confusing to me and I must confess (with thanks to The Catholic Church) that I am not waving but drowning.

Perhaps this is a sign.

Perhaps I have been chosen.

Perhaps soon I shall be given my sacred mission.

Perhaps I will reach out and touch faith…

It could be argued that anything which is dynamic – be it organic or inorganic; could be subjected to a form of evolutionary process.

Traditionally accepted evolution does tend to favour a gradual shift which is generally considered beneficial in that it promotes the survival or adaptation of a species or organism to better perform in its environment.

Language and the use of language is something that changes as new mediums, in which it is used; appear.

I would stop short of calling changes in language “evolution” however as the alterations are often bastardisations.

I am going to discuss one of the most overused and bastardised terms that one encounters during ones online experience:

• LOL

Being a keen student of language and the nuances contained therein, the proliferation of the Internet has caused me a vast amount of pain.

I suppose that it isn’t the proliferation of the medium itself that has caused the pain, it is more likely that the greater exposure to literary laziness has been at the root of the pain that I have felt.

The proliferation of said medium has merely enabled exponential access to my synapses by anyone who is moderately capable of mashing their sweaty paws on a keyboard.

Being reasonably ancient, I have been exposed to the ‘net in various forms for nigh on a score of my life.

My first modem was about the same size (and weight) of the original PS3 and ran at a ridiculously low baud rate.

At any rate, I have been exposed to this medium for quite some time.

I remember, back in 1996, whilst using ICQ – which was a sensational program until AOL purchased it… as were Netscape and Winamp… (what is it with AOL ruining everything that they acquire?) – the first time that I was confounded by a spate of acronyms that had appeared on my screen.

LOL, ROFL, ROFLMAO…

When they were explained to me, I was a little disgruntled.

The things that I said may have been worthy of someone laughing out loud, but they certainly were not rolling around on the floor laughing (unless they had been indulging in a bit of the green) and I hope that they had not been deprived of their buttocks.

I found it somewhat lazy, but didn’t bother too much about it.

It isn’t all that difficult to type in “ha ha” or similar and really only a couple more keystrokes.

To me, it was like the person who signs off, in their corporate auto signature; with “rgds”.

That is the height of laziness. Ssomeone who couldn’t be bothered to type three extra characters into an auto signature should be summarily dismissed from both their job and the human race.

I digress however.

It hasn’t been until more recent years where the abuse of the language through the medium of “LOL” has reached such epic proportions.

It disgusts me that it has, for some people; become a form of punctuation.

Not only that, but these serial abusers of the language are generally too lazy to even bother capitalising it.

For example:

“got a chopa gnr on wasteland teh othr day lol”

- lol is not a period.

“was walking down the street the other day lol and saw this fag wearing scoops”

- lol is not a comma

The acronym itself is a bastardisation of the language, however the use in modern day for, texting, chat and the like is a bastardisation of a bastardisation.

It is a mutation upon a mutation.

To suggest an analogy: if the modern day use of the term were a foetus undergoing pre-natal testing, the obstetrician would counsel the couple to consider an abortion.

I used to fight against the spread of the term in its pure format – “LOL”, but that battle has clearly been lost; much to my chagrin.

It isn’t too late however to attempt to fight against the overuse and bastardisation of the term; for it is a slippery slope my friends.

If we aren’t vigilant, pretty soon we will end up with people using the term as a pause in spoken sentences instead of a breath.

Furthermore, there are additional bastardisations of the term:

“I lol’d” or “I lold”.

This translates as:

“I laugh out loud’d.”

Strictly speaking, the term really should be:

“I l’dol”.

It is akin to “shan’t”

Whilst that is a contraction of shall not and doesn’t really make sense when you look at it – it should be “sha’n't”, it would make much more sense to “l’dol” than to “lol’d”.

The bastardisation of the language that has been seen through the mutations of the original acronym of LOL has lead to an almost complete breakdown in the ability of some people to effectively communicate – and indeed, others to decipher their jibberish.

For example:

“lol teh othr day u wer pwnd when i pwnd ur ass 2 many timez”

That is painful to read.

Whilst I often do things “for teh lulz”, I have never “lol’d” (or indeed “l’dol”).

It isn’t the acronym itself that bothers me any more; it is the overuse, bastardisation and improper use of the acronym that has me somewhat confounded.

I fret for the future of this country, and indeed, the world at large when I see this kind of degeneration of the written word as surely it is but a microcosm of the greater ills of society at large.

Some would suggest that “LOL” has become a word in and of its own.

I would vigorously contest this suggestion.

The accepted arbiter of what can be described as a word in the proper sense of the term, I would suggest; is the Oxford English Dictionary.

This mighty tome of reference lists it as an acronym derived from email, internet or text chat.

In fact; most dictionaries seem to see it in that light.

I would suggest that LOL is no more a word than GNU, SOS, PC, PS, PS3, BP, BPM, STD, RSVP or any of the commonly used acronyms that have been used over the years – many for a period spanning many more score years than this blight on the language.

It could be argued that this is not the case with RSVP – as people often request someone to “RSVP” – though I believe that this could be seen as a correct usage despite the repetition of the “please” – “please répondez s’il vous plaît” = “please please reply” and could be seen as somewhat pleading or begging.

“LOLling” or having “LOL’d” is, I submit, akin to replying “I was PS3ing” or “I PS3′d on the weekend” when a caring friend requests that you share knowledge of your activities.

I don’t believe that I have validated the use of the acronym as an expression, merely accepted that the acronym, like the common cold; is here to stay.

The premise of my diatribe is that people have attempted to turn it into a verb and/or an adjective (and indeed a form of punctuation) – which in my opinion, it should never become – and in doing so, have done it incorrectly.

It is a blight on the language akin to “ur” and must be stopped!

Join with me my friends to fight this plague, this disease.

Buy a fucking badge today.

I was inspired to write this little rant after having read this hilarious piece by “Pastor” Daniel Nalliah:

Religious nutter claims Australia is doomed because we have an atheist PM

Two screws loose and a microphone

Now you would be forgiven for thinking that the above link is a pisstake, but unfortunately; it isn’t.

Strangely though, I find myself appreciating the unprecedented audience that the Internet in its current form gives the religious nutters.

They, better than any atheist – Dawkins and Hitchens included – provide a potent deterrent to those wavering in their “faith” or those considering absconding from reason.

They also do a better job of parodying religious belief than the likes of the wonderful people over at Landover Baptist

The fellow who wrote the article on that site is also the fellow who claimed that his god murdered people in  bushfires throughout Australia. The reason? Because he was angry with homosexuals.

This fraud then goes on to say:

“Then we stretched our hands over federal parliament and prayed for ungodly leaders in parliament to be removed and righteousness to be restored”

“Many Christian Leaders believed that Kevin Rudd was God’s man for the hour and promoted him as many Christians voted for Labor in that election.   Unfortunately, due to a lack of spiritual discernment by much of the Church , Kevin Rudd was elected as PM.  He was not God’s choice, but the people’s choice.  God gave the people what they asked for”

Yes with a maybe, no with a but.

Preach to me, preach to me now - 1902 GODHATESFAGS

This kind of rubbish, the “it is god’s will” or the “he is omniscient but gives us choice” type argument is not only illogical, but it makes it impossible to have a reasoned, logical conversation with anyone of religious belief.

Those of us who have engaged in debate or discussion with fundamentalists know that it can be frustrating – and is, indeed, ultimately a waste of one’s time.

It isn’t just the fundamentalists though, that it is pointless attempting to discuss “faith” rationally with.

Faith, by its very nature, is incompatible with reason.

Why? For many reasons, but one of them is:

Because there is always a caveat.

In the case of Nalliah, his twisted caveat invokes free choice in the face of omniscience.

He is loathe to admit that when he and his deluded friends talk to their imaginary friend, nothing more than a reinforcement of their own delusions is achieved – yet who is he to question the whims and fancy of this all knowing, all wise sky pixie?

Instead of admitting that he is delusional, or that he is – point blank wrong – it is so much easier to invoke the tired old cliché of “god works in mysterious ways”, or “he is testing his people”.

Put simply:

• - Nalliah and his deluded flock prayed that the godless heathens would be removed from power
• - The most pious and piously arrogant Prime Minister we have ever had assumed office
• - Said PM, Kevin Rudd – conducted pressers from his church every Sunday morning
• - Said overtly pious PM was replaced by, gods forbid, an atheist (and a woman – let not that significance go unnoticed)
• - Ergo, Kevin Rudd was a tool of Satan and has been replaced by a heathen who will lead all Australians toward a fiery pit unless they vote for the fundamentalist Catholic Tony “The Mad Monk” Abbott

This is his god’s plan.

Nalliah is obviously missing several vital synapses in the rats nest that he indulgently calls a brain, but how is he any different than the “moderate” believers who cherry pick from the bible citing such inanities as “well, it is an anecdote, a message on how to live your life”.

No.

You either take the bible chapter and verse or you don’t take it at all.

At least fruitcakes like Nalliah and his flock have the courage of their insane convictions and completely ignore modern science, wisdom, proof, evidence and logic in favour of the superstitions of ignorant shepherds of aeons past.

The worst kind of believer is he or she who decides instead to attempt to flirt with modern knowledge yet tentatively clutches at the straws of ancient ignorance through a disheartening fear of their own mortality.

If you think that that is harsh, ask a “moderate” Christian if they believe in the story of Adam and Eve, Noah’s Ark, if they subscribe to everything mentioned in Leviticus.

I would be willing to bet my left testicle that they present to you a caveat.

The “moderate” Christians will look you in the eye and tell you that their god didn’t answer their prayer for a child dying of leukaemia because it was “his will”, yet will happily turn around and claim that their prayer for rain or the success of a friends child at a job interview was granted.

Doesn’t sound like the will of an omnipotent being to me.

Of course we know better than to stone homosexuals and adulterers to death in this day and age (do we?), though yes, this man called Jesus died and rose again, turned water into wine and raised a man from the dead…

Yes, of course, and bushfires, earthquakes, tsunamis and the like can’t be explained by science – they are of course a sign from a sky pixie unhappy with same sex attraction, abortion or an atheist Prime Minister.