Washington Wasn't Christian
-- But Who Cares?
Elizabeth WH

Graphic Rule

From: "Positive Atheism Magazine" <editor@positiveatheism.org>
To: "Elizabeth W H." <>
Subject: Re: Big list of quotes
Date: Friday, January 19, 2001 3:34 AM

Of course we'd like to hear truth spoken. We celebrate each time someone makes a convincing case for their position and shows us something that we didn't already know. We also celebrate whenever we catch someone in a lie, because this shows that humans can and do think for themselves if they want to, and that the power of chicanery, particularly opportunistic religious charlatanism, is on the wane, and will soon roll over and die.

Unfortunately, we have strong reason to suspect that what you are saying here is not truth. We have thoroughly covered the falsehoods you attempt convey here. By your feeble attempt at denouncing the character of one man, Governor Morris, you expect to overthrow all the careful study we've presented here?

I wonder why you'd want to do this! And to what end?

Ah! Some insight!

You here admit that you are incapable of even imagining how someone could fail to agree with your dogma! Thus, since it is inconceivable to you that someone would disagree with you, you would probably go to any lengths -- including dishonesty -- to assert your claim to truthfulness. And in lieu of a convincing case, all you have left is pound your chest and assert.

Finally, may I suggest that you at least find out what atheism is before discussing the topic with an atheist. You are here attacking your own false definition for atheist.

We wouldn't expect someone who believes to be convinced by evidence that lie outside that person's faith-based, cultic world view. Only someone who thinks, who is willing to follow truth wherever it may lead, regardless of the cost, can be expected to change their mind on matters that could impact their loyalty to the tribal totem.

So, then, you would overthrow the entire science of particle physics, which has demonstrated (among other things) that a "singularity" (a positron-electron pair, with a sum of zero energy) can and does manifest out of nothing, equals zero energy, and can and does assimilate back into nothing? You are asking me to disregard an entire branch of science which has shown, in several different ways, that the sum of energy in the universe equals approximately zero, which suggests that the universe could only have come from nothing -- not something -- and could only have utilized zero energy to get here? That's what physicists are saying these days. It is religion which misrepresents science by making statements such as, "it is not possible to make something out of nothing" and then uses this incomplete understanding, cloaked in scientific terminology, to try to overthrow science itself!

Well, thus far, science has done a much better job at making predictions and at bringing peace and harmony to humankind than has the Christian religion.

Which would you choose if you were me? I would choose science over all other methods I've encountered, and I would choose the Christian religion close to last among all other belief systems I've encountered. I would even put the Christian religion behind the other major religions, such as Islam and Hinduism. At least those systems did not systematically oppose human scientific inquiry (though they had their moments).

Meanwhile, can you give more than this to convince me that you are telling the truth? In other words, am I to prefer the ancient tales told by illiterate goat-herders around a campfire of camel dung over the accumulated knowledge of the world's scientists -- just because you tell me so? or can you make a case for yourself?

If you cannot make a convincing case for these claims, then I have no reason to believe anything else you say -- neither about the Father of our Country, nor about this thing you call "The Word."

So, then, have a nice life. As far as we can tell, it's the only one we get.

Cliff Walker
"Positive Atheism" Magazine
Five years of service to
     people with no reason to believe

Graphic Rule

Material by Cliff Walker (including unsigned editorial commentary) is copyright ©1995-2006 by Cliff Walker. Each submission is copyrighted by its writer, who retains control of the work except that by submitting it to Positive Atheism, permission has been granted to use the material or an edited version: (1) on the Positive Atheism web site; (2) in Positive Atheism Magazine; (3) in subsequent works controlled by Cliff Walker or Positive Atheism Magazine (including published or posted compilations). Excerpts not exceeding 500 words are allowed provided the proper copyright notice is affixed. Other use requires permission; Positive Atheism will work to protect the rights of all who submit their writings to us.