Atheists are one of the most despised minorities in America while Christians have broad economic and political power, but Christians feel threatened?

What are the Christians so afraid of? The truth, perhaps?

Whether or not it is true, and whether or not Myers requested it be stolen or not, it was a deliberate act of provocation designed from malice. From a Catholic perspective, after all, he didn’t just pierce a piece of bread, but Jesus.

And how is the PZM piercing different from a Catholic recipient biting the wafer with his/her teeth? Or digesting it with stomach acid? That would be vicious if the thing had a pain-sensing neuron in it somewhere.

Besides, the context of PZM’s actions was quite humanitarian: supporting a youth whom the Catholic Church had harmed merely because he showed the wafer to some friends.

Certainly if people want to criticise specific opinions or actions, they are entitled to do so. It is different when we are talking about a blanket condemnation of an entire group as “evil”, based on nothing more than that they don’t share the speaker’s religious views. In my view that is bigotry, and unacceptable. Do you consider it acceptable for someone to publicly condemn all blacks as evil?

No I don’t, not at all. But I also don’t consider it acceptable for groups like RRS to say anyone who isn’t an atheist is mentally ill.

Part of my point of view as an atheist is that I do not respect a belief simply because it is a belief. If there is good reason for a belief or PROOF of a belief, I will respect it because I can relate to it, but I will not offer what Dawkins calls “undeserved respect” to something someone says simply because it is a belief.

I read through the article and everything about transubstantiation and “substance” and what vs. how… and none of it means much to me at all if I can’t test it. Show me proof that this cracker is now imbued with the spirit of Jesus. Demonstrate to me why eating it is important (and not cannibalism). Am I being “disrespectful” of the belief? No, I’m asking valid questions, but the only answer to them is “You have to believe…” and “Because the Bible says this.” Well, that’s not good enough for me.

What the professor did I think proved a humorous point, not unlike the cartoon a few years back depicting Muhammad. Look at how upset people get over a CRACKER. It is an awkward little plastic-tasting wafer that has no measurable effect on the people who “receive” it. Bringing that to light might seem disrespectful if one maintains their religious privilege, but honestly I think people are just upset that it shatters the illusion. It’s like showing how a magic trick is done… it’s fun to believe that it’s magic (or holy), but then someone shows you how it’s done (or that it’s still just a cracker) and the mystique is gone. If you define your whole life around that illusion (or delusion), then you might be upset, but only because you’re confronted with truth you’ve been ignorant of for so long.

Just because people don’t want the government poking through their affairs without good cause, doesn’t mean they have something to hide.

Ah, but you aren’t a tax-exempt organization who is legally required to report your finances to the government in exchange for remaining tax-exempt. Grassley is going after these megachurches because their self-reported finances are wonky and raise numerous red flags.

Ur-Nungal, it’s just a frakkin’ cracker. It has no power, no magic.

And you deliberately ignore the context of the action – PZ’s ‘desecration’ of the Cheezit was in direct response to the Catholic Church sending death threats to and trying to expel a catholic college student who tried to show and explain the eucharist to his non-catholic friend.

Sending death threats and trying to get someone expelled is much worse than hurting the fee-fees of the catholics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharist_(Catholic_Church)

Whether or not it is true, and whether or not Myers requested it be stolen or not, it was a deliberate act of provocation designed from malice. From a Catholic perspective, after all, he didn’t just pierce a piece of bread, but Jesus.

Not only is it an unpalatably reactionary and, for Catholics, desecrating action, it fails to advance anyone’s interests – unless someone has a vested interest in seriously winding them up. I mean, how does this advance the cause of enlightening others or w/e, or even promoting understanding and tolerance for atheism in the USA?

It’s as productive singing the Horst-Wessel-Lied because it’s Chanukah.

ZackFord, you might want to read the Substance Theory page on their, too. Helps explain the belief.

Christians are supposed to rejoice and be exceeding glad when they are persecuted. They are not supposed to get mad or fight back. They are not suppose to whine and complain. They are not supposed to file lawsuits or take out ads. I guess most have not heard the sermon on the mount.

Matthew 5:11&12 (KJV)

Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

I think that today’s Christians are spitting in Jesus’s face by the way they so often directly reject his teachings. Talk about taking the name of the Lord in vain. It’s not about profanity. It’s about claiming to follow Jesus while ignoring his words.

I also think today’s Christians have a persecution complex. None of the things listed in the original post seem like true “bashing” or “persecution” to me. If they whine about this, what would they do if real persecution came?

But free speech is free speech. So long as it’s not “fire” in a crowded theatre, it’s legal and fine with me, no matter how much I might hate the content.

Blanket vilification of a group is every bit as bad as shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre. For the results, see Rwanda, Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia, Nazi Germany, the American South, many centuries of religious wars and religious persecution …