Sterilizing the DemonSpawn

What do you do if your child is possessed by Satan?

Forget performing an exorcism. Only God can cast out demons. But you can take matters into your own hands:

“The first thing we do,” Landover Pastor, Deacon Fred explains, “is put a Bible on the ground. If the baby crawls away from the Bible, it immediately becomes a candidate for sterilization.” The possessed child is then placed in a crib with a full grown adult swine to see if the demon will hitch a ride (Mark 5: 11-13). “We then take the pig to Landover Lake and see if it drowns itself in accordance with scripture,” Deacon Fred says. “If the pig drowns, the child may stay with its parents. If the pig does not kill itself, then the malformed offspring is shipped off to the Landover Home for the Demonically Possessed in North Dakota. It can sometimes take 20 years until it is safe to return the little “demon hotel” to its mother — but that gives her plenty of time to explain what a demon was doing in her womb in the first place.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Here’s the Bible Crawl in action:

babydemon.gif

Landover Baptist Church is no stranger to baby sterilizations:

Spring sterilization and the Bible Crawl have been a Christian tradition at Landover Baptist Church for nearly 57 years… Landover member, Mrs. Ida Jenkins, recalls, “I remember when the doctor told me that Satan stole my baby’s sight. Little Henry was born blind. We made sure the Devil didn’t get the last laugh on my Henry. We had him sterilized two hours after he popped out!” Mrs. Jenkins was eager to stop the Devil’s handiwork as soon as possible. “We didn’t even wait until Spring! Satan had his red tail wrapped around my boy’s head so tight, the annual Bible Crawl was out of the question!”

Sterilizing children is the only hope. If I had one, I would go ahead and just ship it to Landover today. With airholes in the box, of course.

You can check out the rest of the ongoings at Landover by checking out their monthly newsletter.


[tags]atheist, atheism, Christian, fundamentalist[/tags]

  • alphager

    You do know that it is a parody site, right?

  • http://amiable-atheist.blogspot.com amiable atheist

    yes, please tell me that is satire!

  • Kate

    Uh…yeah. That’s his point.

  • http://skeptigator.com Skeptigator

    Does anybody else think the whole Landover Baptist/Deacon Fred bit is over-the-top obnoxious? Gratingly obnoxious.

  • Jonathan Dolias

    My favorite part of this was not the article itself, rather this response from my company when I clicked the link to the church “Your request was denied because of its content categorization: “Adult/Mature Content;Humor/Jokes””

  • http://www.aperfectfool.com Perfect Fool

    I admit, I thought it was pretty hilarious at first. But now it’s just annoying. They have to keep raising the bar for people who know it’s a parody, and for those who don’t, it can be quite shocking. The humor value of this is questionable at best.

  • http://atheistokie.wordpress.com/ Atheist Okie

    I think it’s brilliant. “Are they for real, or not?” Keep ‘em guessing.

    We know it isn’t real, but if it really takes that long to figure it out, then it should tell you how sad religion, especially evangelical Christianity, really is.

    Landover Baptist= Satire

    Westboro Baptist= God only knows.

  • Christian fool

    Yes, ha, ha. I share Skepitgator’s opinion about obnoxious.

    Shall we talk about atheism in practice, perhaps at the extremes? Seems to me I remember a country whose official religious stance was atheistic. This country was documented killing between 25 and 60 million people in less than 80 years. And though the standard retort is about “The Inquisition” killing people too (5,000 to 100,000 – for researchers who include those estimated to have died in jail) over 350 years.

    Let’s do the mathematical moral equivalence (you have to dig and think to get the “whys” and other troublesome political and religious details):
    Inquisition worst case: 100K/350 = 285/year
    Soviet Union best case: 25M/80 = 312,500/year

    Hmm, let’s vote for your favorite mix of philosophy and power…

  • Billy S

    Christian fool (nice name) said:

    Let’s do the mathematical moral equivalence (you have to dig and think to get the “whys” and other troublesome political and religious details):
    Inquisition worst case: 100K/350 = 285/year
    Soviet Union best case: 25M/80 = 312,500/year

    A few problems here. These atrocities are hardly comparable due to the fact that the Inquistion was not the sole misdeed in the history of Christianity, and the death tolls could not possibly be even due to the fact that the time periods involved had staggering differently world populations and weaponry. This means that the Christians of the Inquistion having a lower death toll is not indicative of higher moral fiber, but rather of the fact that they had less people to kill and not enough efficiency in their methods of killing them. This is in contrast to the nations of the 20th century and beyond, who have comparatively massive populations and have had them as of the Industrial Revolution, and have a vast array of killing devices due to the same event, the likes of which make the torture devices of the Inquisition look like grisly play-things.

    Then there is issue of communism itself being more to blame for the atrocities of atheistic communist nations than atheism itself, due to the fact that communism is an explicit ideology with demands that most be followed, whereas atheism is, as you have said, a philosophy. When it comes down to it, due to the nature of atheism being merely the lack of religious belief rather than an actual doctrine demanding a certain set of behavior, it cannot be criticized as easily as one could criticize adherents to explicit doctrines such as Christianity and communism (especially when the criticized actions are justified by the ideology itself).

    But, when it come down to it, this entire pissing match of determining what belief system is responsible for the most deaths is incredibly suspect, and in bad taste. Whenever these topics are brought up, they should be taken with a grain of salt. This kind of thing is beginning to get into Godwin territory….we could call it Stalin’s law…(“as a debate goes on, the chances of a person blaming another person’s ideology X for the atrocities Y of random person Z approaches 1″). I know that doing this is nothing new…but it is becoming far more rampant now and really inhibits actual honest debate.

  • False Prophet

    The difference, Christian fool, is that you’re defending Christianity despite acknowledging the Inquisition. We’re not making apologies for Stalin because he was an evil man, atheist or not (and he didn’t have problems using churches to support him when necessary, btw).

    More to the point, atheism is not a system of morality. It is simply an intellectual position where the holder does not believe in the existence of any gods or divinities. There are moral atheists and there are immoral atheists, much as there are moral theists and immoral theists. Moral atheists have no issues condemning immoral acts by other atheists, whereas many allegedly moral theists continually defend the immoral acts of their co-religionists.

  • JeffN

    “whereas atheism is, as you have said, a philosophy”.

    “More to the point, atheism is not a system of morality. It is simply an intellectual position where the holder does not believe in the existence of any gods or divinities”.

    Aside from atheisms lack of belief in religion(s) Or God(s) what would make it any different then say Confucianism or Buddhism neither of which has no belief per say in God but practice there beliefs more as an enlightened way of believing, living, and of life? All three belief systems claim to think and seek enlightenment.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X