Tuesday, June 14, 2011

FacePalm of the Day #89- Debunking Christianity: Articulett, A Woman, Responds to Talbott and Reppert on Rape

John Loftus has posted a quote from a woman who calls herself Articulett. Unfortunately I think she makes the same mistake atheist make when discussing Morality. I think part of the mistake has to deal with emotions. How can anyone not be viscerally disgusted by the very thought of a person - male or female - being raped. We should be disgusted. We should do everything possible to ensure it doesn't happen. But that's not the point most theists are coming from.

Watch out now boys! Get ready for this smack-down:I think I can explain to Talbott why rape is wrong very simply. Mr. Talbott, would you like to be raped (--think of prison sex and not porn)? Would you like it if your loved ones or children were raped? Do you want to live in a rapey society where people can be raped without consequences? Or would you rather live in a society where we agree not to rape each other in return for not being raped? I would hope that most males are not fighting the urge to rape left and right.. but for those who are-- it doesn't seem like religion is deterrent (I'm thinking of Catholic priests here).

I know I don't want to live in a society like that. But should there be consequences against raping another person because rape is unsavory to our culture or because it's objectively wrong under any circumstances? My vote is that it's objectively wrong to rape another human being no matter what.

Civil societies develop laws that punish and imprison those that are prone to inflicting unwanted sex upon others-- but I think if all rapers had to experience rape themselves, then they would find a reason not to rape. I think Talbott is purposefully ignorant if he thinks you need to believe in an invisible sky fairy to conclude that rape is wrong. Theists are so stupid when they try to imagine what an atheist must think or believe. Religion is repeatedly shown to be associated with societal dysfunction (such as rape)-- not lack of belief in sky fairies.

If you don't need God to conclude the rape, in and of itself is wrong, then how do you know it's wrong? Why should we stop people people from raping each other? Of course it is wrong, but how do you know it is wrong?

I consider Talbott's articles an attempt to denigrate lack of belief so that he can imagine that belief is good for something. To me, it's nothing more than purposeful ignorance to spread anti-atheist bigotry.

No one in their right mind would argue that atheists or more like to rape people because they don't believe in God. That is stupid and not part of the argument. The question is by what right and what authority do we claim that a rapist is wrong and dysfunctional? How do we prove that we are right and they are wrong?

I think we were all "skeptical of skepticism" before we became rationalists. The more I try to muddle my way through Talbott and other self appointed experts on the imaginary-- the more disgusted I am with religion. I'm sure I'm every bit as disgusted as Talbott would be if he heard these arguments coming from a person defending Islam or Scientology or Satanism. What a blow hard.

If you are an atheist your only argument against rape is that it irrational and adds nothing to society - nothing more than a preference we all agree with. Society changes. What if the majority lost its mind and began concluding that rape and pedophilia were okay? Would it still be wrong? If you have a final authority, you can argue by that authority that its still wrong. Without that authority, you can be challenged.

Religionists are the ultimate relativists-- they just ascribe what they do to the will of god. And the evidence verifies this. Every religionist imagines that people who believe like they do are the most moral of all. They don't agree with each other-- how much more relativistic can you get? Religionists get their morals the same way every one else does-- they just imagine it comes from the invisible universe creator who created the universe just for them!

That is what is amazing to me. As a Christian I have to admit that to align myself to the will of God, I have to many times do what I would not want to do. Sometimes I don't feel like like being nice. Sometimes I don't want to be unselfish. I don't want to rape anyone, but we know that God does not want us to rape one another. Here is a secret. If you are a Christian, you understand that none of us are moral. The most moral of us is no where near where we should be.

6 All of us have become like one who is unclean,
and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags;
we all shrivel up like a leaf,
and like the wind our sins sweep us away. - Isaiah 46:6

God didn't create the universe for us. God created the Universe for Him. 

For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. - Colossians 1:16

Talbott disgusts me.


Maybe but Jesus loves us even if one is too blind to see it.

Debunking Christianity: Articulett, A Woman, Responds to Talbott and Reppert on Rape
Enhanced by Zemanta


  1. Sam Harris, et al, claims that rape played a beneficial role in human evolution. Richard Dawkins admits that is it now only arbitrarily immoral. Dan Barker claims that it is not absolutely immoral.
    Perhaps someday, rape will make an evolutionary comeback:


  2. I don't get why is it okay to say and write such nonsense as Sam Harris, Dawkins, and Barker about rape but wrong to say rape is wrong because it is against the character and will of God?