A Rush Limbaugh For the Next Generation

This is Caiden Cowger:

He has his own radio show and everything! Which seems cute… until you realize he’s a young gay basher.

When you listed to his twice-weekly internet talk show based out of West Virginia, you realize that Caiden doesn’t like gays.  

Not at all.

Homosexuality is a belief.  It is a– it is not mandatory in that person.  That person is not born that way… no matter what Lady Gaga says.  That person is not born that way.  It is a decision… It’s getting worse where I’m at. I see younger people that is turning out to be homosexuals. It’s equal, boy and girl both.  All of them are starting to turn into homosexuals.  We’ve got about 30, I’d say 30 teenagers in this county that I’m at, that are homosexuals.  And it is sickening.  It sickens me. And… I knew these kids.  Some of them I was friends with.  I knew these teenagers when they were in elementary school.  I knew them when they were in the beginning of middle school.  And you know what?  They were not homosexuals.  They just decided all the sudden you know what “I think I am going to be gay!” Why they are becoming homosexuals, why they are becoming gay, is because they are being encouraged by it.  

President Obama? “It’s alright, it’s ok, you were born that way! You know what? It gets better.”… Rather then saying, “You need to turn away from homosexuality. That is a perverted belief, and it is immoral.  And it’s not natural.”…  But rather than the president saying that, he is saying, “Homosexuals, you can get married!  And it’s alright! I mean, it’s alright to be gay.  We’ll make it better for you… It’ll be alright.”  See, I’m not for bullying homosexuals, I believe that is wrong.  But when you’re trying to teach them the word of God and they consider that bullying, yeah, I find that a big problem with not being allowed to convert other people to my religion and telling them it is wrong, homosexuality, the belief is condemned by God and you will go to Hell if you consider to follow this belief unless you repent.  It’s getting to the point where I can’t say that anymore.

This stupid Fairness West Virginia that is here in West Virginia?  There was this kid that was on there, I believe his name was Michael, who said there was a girl that came up to me and said, “We prayed for you in church.  We prayed that God would show you the light and you would turn away from your evil and wicked beliefs of homosexuality.” The kid made fun of that!  And then he came out as a victim, “Oh poor me, she hurt me, she hurt my feelings!” But all she was doing was basically, basically, she was witnessing to him.  But he took that as bullying.  He took that as bullying.

Guys, I’m going to tell you this.  When kids or teens are being basically indoctrinated and encouraged to follow homosexuality.  When the president said, “It’s all right, go ahead and be a homosexual.”  With the vice president, “It’s alright.  Be a homosexual.”  Barbara Boxer was on T.V. the other day, “It’s alright. I used to be against homosexuality.  But now I’ve changed. Now I’ve accepted the rainbow.”  I’m going to tell you this guys.  President Obama, Vice President Biden, is making kids gay. Obama… if you’re encouraging, you are making kids gay.  You are saying that it is alright to follow this belief, it is completely natural, there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s not immoral.  They are encouraging kids to think, “Well you know what? You know what? They are talking about being a homosexual, and they’re saying that there’s nothing wrong with being gay so you know what, I think I might try that out for a little bit.” [laughs] That’s what’s going on!

I can’t make this stuff up.

My initial reaction was, “This kid is 14. I said all sorts of stupid crap at 14. I should let this slide.”  But, then again, when I was 14, whatever nonsense I wanted to rattle on about was confined to my friends who were also 14.  This kid has an Internet radio show.  He’s trying to reach a wider audience. I say fair game.

First of all, his lack of understanding of what “bullying” is is astounding. He doesn’t believe in bullying “the homosexuals,” but he reserves his right to tell them that their lifestyle is wrong and that they are going to Hell for all of eternity if they don’t turn from their immoral, evil, wicked ways.  That’s some compassion right there.

I guess this is pretty indicative of the pure and utter ignorance that this kid has been taught.  He absolutely, sincerely believes that kids decide to be gay because Obama said it was okay, or because they are bored, or because it’s becoming more widely accepted in society.  And, boy, is he ever fuming about it.

It’s a good thing Caiden has his god to teach him that we need to love each another, or this kid might turn out to be an asshole one day.

***Update***: Cowger has been taken off the air.

About Jessica Bluemke

Jessica Bluemke grew up in the suburbs of Chicago and graduated from Ball State University in 2008 with a BA in Literature. She currently works as a writer and resides on the North side of Chicago.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=553145445 Gordon Duffy

    Christianity is a choice, bigotry is a choice. Sexuality is not.

  • http://dbcooper.livejournal.com P.F. Bruns

    Jeez.  We haven’t even gotten rid of the Limbaugh we have already, and here’s the new model.

  • Thorny264

    I wonder if he understands the irony of saying homosexuals are being indoctrinated?

  • 0xabad1dea

    They weren’t gay when he was younger… just like he wasn’t straight.

    Funny how suddenly becoming gay seems to correlate so closely with hitting puberty like that

    • Peachy Keen

      I disagree. When I look back at my young self I very clearly recall having crushes on other little girls and getting a time out and a lecture for asking my kindergarten teacher if I could marry her when I grew up. True, little children are not sexual in the sense that teenagers are, but orientation exists to some degree.

      As an aside, do you think everyone would seem this inarticulate in transcript?  Lately I’ve been noticing how terrible conservatives seem to be at forming sentences.

      • 0xabad1dea

        Sure, in some kids you can tell right away (I asked if I could marry a classmate of my gender when I was in kindergarten and it was patiently explained to me that marriage can’t do that – but you got a timeout for an honest question at that age? How terribly rude)…., but they “weren’t gay” in elementary school because they weren’t thinking about sexuality yet and he probably wasn’t either. He’s retroactively assuming they were straight unless acting clearly gay as children.

        As for transcripts, a perfectly literal transcript makes everyone sound dumber than they are, because uh, um. We don’t notice uh, all those little words and pauses, when someone is talking – and we ummm, we don’t include them in formal writing. So yeah, when people make their own transcripts they like, they usually clean them up a bit. So judging someone solely by a literal transcript isn’t entirely fair.

        • Glasofruix

           I think this kid’s sickening attitude was perfectly transcribed, i’ve seen the video, he tries to act like what he’s saying is cool and that the absolute truth comes out of his mouth. He’s  second on my “Punch in the face until you can’t feel your hands” list (the first is bieber ofc :p )

          • Dan

            Oh the irony of someone being sickened by bigotry and then (even jokingly) proudly proclaiming they have a list of people they want to beat until they can’t feel their hands. Also, Bieber is annoying, but what has he ever done to you for you to want to assault him even more than this bigot?

            • Glasofruix

              I said i want to, not i’m going to, big difference.

            • Fsq

              Dan,

              The poster’s comment about Justin Bieber not withstanding, you miss the point on two things:

              1) Tolerance of Intolernace ISN’T. This, Dan, is what is known as a false-dichotomy.

              2) You seem to think the OP is really ready to beat someone, whn in fact Dan, if you read between the lines, you kinda see the sarcasm and facetiousness in the statement.

              But, this whole notion that tolerating intolerance is the same thing as tolerance. Totally false and a true false-dichotomy.

        • http://itsmyworldcanthasnotyours.blogspot.com/ wmdkitty

           Um, some of us DO type pretty much the same way we speak. And yes, yes, I do also THINK this way.

        • Heisenberg

          Sure, literal translations can make you sound dumb but when you actually have poor grammar…well, you do well enough on your own. “The county that I’m at . . .” I assume he means the county school, but as that stands, that sentence is unacceptable. Also note that he as trouble with is/are and was/were. “I see younger people that IS turning out to be homosexual.” I could be out of touch with the communication level a 14 year old should have. I just know that I work with adults that have similar problems (and don’t care). Literal translations can make you sound like a less refined speaker but dumb is dumb.

    • Tinker

      I really feel that he is telling himself that his childhood friends couldn’t have been gay because he is terrified that he might have ‘caught’ it.

  • http://northierthanthou.com/ northierthanthou

    God or no God, this child isn’t going to teach anybody ANYTHING.

  • Johnlevendowski

    I’m from the great state of West “By God”Virginia. Please accept my most sincere apologies for this bigoted idiot. Unfortunately there’s no shortage of them him and I’m even related to some. I’m sorry and trying to educate as many as I can. – WV atheist

    • http://twitter.com/pgomezi Pablo Gómez

      I just wanna say I actually read “By God” as “bigot”. That would make for a cool typography image, you know, if someone who wasn’t a lazy fuck like me wanted to make it. No need to apologize, there’s crazies all around the world.

      • Johnlevendowski

        Actually, the by god part has nothing to do with religion. From what I was told, it came from the soldiers fighting in WWI or WWII. Their mail kept getting routed to VA so they added the by god part ut of frustration and to get the postmaster’s attention. Nothing more and its stuck since.

  • L.Long

    Unfortunately his gawd DOES teach him to be an arsehole but do it big time and he is already practicing to go big time.

  • Sue Blue

    It’s sad when kids are raised by parents and a community that don’t have a full set of teeth between them, let alone fifth-grade reading ability.  It’s regrettable that this kid somehow got the idea that he had something worthwhile to say, when really, he’s just parroting the ignorant, half-baked ideas and bigoted screed of his elders.  It’s appalling to hear this kid’s homophobia – his fixation on it smacks of fears about his own sexuality – and it’s downright scary to think what this kid might do if he chose to wield a gun instead of a microphone.   
    On second thought, one can damage a lot more people at any one time with hate talk than with bullets, and not even get arrested for it.  

    • 0xabad1dea

       As an educated person with missing teeth…

  • Marguerite

    “It’s equal, boy and girl both.  All of them are starting to turn into homosexuals.   ”

    I can easily believe he’s seeing more kids who are gay. Is it because they’re being “encouraged” or somehow turned gay by evil and wicked liberals? No… it’s because they’re not as afraid to come out as they used to be.  Kids are being encouraged by decent adults to think that their sexuality (whatever it may be) is normal, and that they don’t have to hide it away for all eternity. The natural result is that there will be more (openly) gay people. But twerps like this look around and think, “OHMIGOD EVERYONE’S TURNING GAY!!!”

    “You are saying that it is alright to follow this belief, it is completely natural, there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s not immoral.”

    Aside from the “belief” part of this, he’s right here. This is indeed what decent people are saying. Personally, I think it’s a good thing that gay kids are no longer being told they’re sinners at every turn.

    “We prayed that God would show you the light and you would turn away from your evil and wicked beliefs of homosexuality.”

    Sure, that’s not bullying in the least. How silly of anyone to take that the wrong way. Clearly it’s meant in a spirit of kindness and love *rolls eyes*. 

  • TheAnalogKid

    Never been more proud in my motherfucking life to be from West Virginia.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-A-Anderson/100000016895400 John A. Anderson

      Assuming this isn’t sarcasm, I wonder if you pondered the literal meaning of “motherfucker” and West Virginia’s reputation for incest before using the word? And yes, I’m a West Virginia native, too.

  • http://twitter.com/Buffy2q Buffy

    “But when you’re trying to teach them the word of God and they
    consider that bullying, yeah, I find that a big problem with not being
    allowed to convert other people to my religion and telling them it is
    wrong”

    There’s his problem right there–that he thinks he has a right to demand others convert to his religion, and that others are the problem when they tell him (rightfully) to bugger off.  

  • TiltedHorizon

    If sexual preference is a decision then by that logic heterosexuality is just a conclusion; a byproduct of Caiden Cowger lusting men and women equally then ‘choosing’ women, likely only because gawd says so.

    • Annie

      Yes!  His reasoning would mean that we are all gender queer (excuse me if that is not the right term… I’m in my 40s and learned that from my 13 year old) and we all choose who we are attracted to.  In that case, who in their right mind would “choose” to be attracted to a sex that would give them nothing but grief and ridicule?  It’s an insane way of looking at things. This boy frightens me.  He is filled with hatred, and he has the means to broadcast that hate. 

      • TiltedHorizon

         “gender queer”

        I have never heard the term so I googled it. According to the Urban Dictionary it is defined as:

        “most commonly used to describe a person who feels that
        his/her gender identity does not fit into the socially constructed
        “norms” associated with his/her biological sex.

        Not sure it fits. I was leaning towards having no set preference, a form of asexuality so to speak,  hence one would have to make a conscience choice between two equally weighted options.

        • Annie

          Yes, maybe “no set preference” is better. 

  • SeniorSkeptik

    Ain’t Christianity wonderful?  In just one baptism he gets to be a bigot and lover of Jeebus at the same time.

  • http://itsmyworldcanthasnotyours.blogspot.com/ wmdkitty

    “It’s a good thing Caiden has his god to teach him that we need to love
    each another, or this kid might turn out to be an asshole one day.”

    Too late, he already IS an asshole.

  • TR

    I disagree on the “fair game” comment.  This garbage is something he’s been taught, and it’s something that he is almost certainly praised for doing.  I don’t begrudge him for wanting to be accepted by his community or “good” at something.  Honestly, I think that’s one of the most appealing aspect of church/religious education for some children– it is an area of life where it’s very easy to “succeed.” It can take a long time to realize that this approval isn’t everything.

    Wait until he’s 18.  If he’s still spewing hate when he’s an adult, then go after him all you want. 

    • Edmond

      I ALMOST agree with you, but it’s hard to think about the damage he’ll do in the 4 intervening years…

    • http://twitter.com/Buffy2q Buffy

       If he’s old enough to be spewing crap on the radio he’s old enough to deal with the responses to the crap he spews. 

  • Gunstargreen

    If a kid talks about saving the environment they’re a coached, indoctrinated liberal pawn. If a kid talks about hating gays, they’re a hero for religious liberty and morality.

    Sigh.

    • http://criticallyskeptic-dckitty.blogspot.com Katherine Lorraine

      Over the weekend I had much the same response (although I’m an adult) when my mother, sister, and brother-in-law started talking to me about my atheism. When I was a Christian I was so sure of myself and such a soldier for God. My atheism, however, is completely due to being led away by other people.

  • Ken

    IF being gay is a choice, so is being straight.  Why did this kid “choose” to be straight, or does he not believe “choice” is an act of free will.  If, on the other hand, he thinks god has chosen his sexual role for him, then the entire Adam and Eve and Jesus dying for our supposed sins is a lie, since we have no opportunity to ever make “choices.”  Funny how god gives us “free will” without actually giving it to us, then punishes us forever for actually using it.

  • Baby_Raptor

    It’s perfectly okay for them to talk about how they think it’s wrong, but anyone who disagrees is harming children. 

    And then they whine when someone gives them the reaction their hypocrisy deserves. 

    Sexuality isn’t a choice. Being as dense as these Christians are is. 

  • Luke Allport-Cohoon

    >He doesn’t believe in bullying “the homosexuals,” but he reserves his
    right to tell them that their lifestyle is wrong and that they are going
    to Hell for all of eternity if they don’t turn from their immoral,
    evil, wicked ways.  That’s some compassion right there.

    In his mind, he and those who say that ARE being compassionate.  Christians see non-Christians as bound for hell and don’t want them there.  Whenever my mom says she is praying for me I take it as a sign of her love.  I don’t believe in the efficacy of prayer or the existence of the god she prays to, but I know she means the best.

    So when a young Christian proselyte tells someone “We’re praying for you, we want you to turn away from your sin and go to Heaven with the rest of us,” they are being sincere and, in their mind, compassionate.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/SH5Y2EVWTCTIZM4HQSMC2Z4IWQ Nicholas V

       I’m not sure I agree. Some folks who say things like that probably really are doing so out of a position of compassion, however misguided. For plenty of others, though, it may well be passive aggression, or simply mimicking their religious peers, or it may even be done as a frank form of harassment hiding in an acceptable guise.

      Regardless of the speakers’ motives, the listener is entirely justified in not wanting to hear it and telling them to bugger off. I can’t even imagine what hell school would have been if people I barely knew felt they had some right to walk up to me at any time of day to witness to me about my sexuality. I wonder how these young Christians would enjoy being surrounded by atheists who were constantly telling them how destructive and false their beliefs are, and how they really have to give up religion in order to have a good life.

      • DG

        They are.  My kids can turn on the TV, go to the Internet, or read a blog, in addition to listening to kids at school, and hear how destructive and false their beliefs are, and how they really have to give up religion in order to have a good life.  Just read this blog.  Post after post praising those who are taking an ‘in your face’ approach.  That’s my point.  Atheists who want to keep it quiet?  They have something to say about Christians who evangelize.  Atheists riding the current wave of fundamentalist evangelical atheism are dipping both feet into the pool of overwhelming hypocrisy. 

        • amycas

          That’s bull and you know it. The majority of people in this country are theists, and the majority of theists are Christians. I went to public school, and even then I was still surrounded by Christians. I think you’re confusing “secular” with “atheist.” There’s a difference. 

          Also, a child being evangelized to in school is a captive audience–they have to be at school. You are not a captive audience when you choose to visit this blog. The same for your children.

    • Salty

      Real compassion is oriented toward the feelings and the well-being of the person in front of you, not your own sense of self-importance and your psychological need to demonstrate how much more True your Beliefs are than everyone else’s.   This is the big problem with Christianity, all the witnessing and proselytizing.   It’s fundamentally disrespectful to outsiders and other ways of being.   They are taught that they CANNOT live and let live.

      • DG

        So you have problems with that strain of modern atheism that is going around trying to encourage people to quit their religions? 

  • http://friendlyatheist.com Richard Wade

    Homosexuality is a belief. it is a- it is not mandatory in that person. That person is not born that way… It is a decision.

    I’m really looking forward to reading The Etiology of Homosexuality By Means of Conscious Decision by the world-renowned psychologist, Caiden Cowger, PhD. This landmark work, the apex of a brilliant career, has sparked a revolution in the field of psychology and won accolades from the greatest minds in human behavior.  Backed by mountains of empirical data from extensive clinical research, well-designed controlled experiments, and… What’s that? …He’s just a little punk who’s repeating like a parrot the ignorant, bigoted crap that his parents, his friends, and his preacher all pull out of their asses?  …Oh. …Never mind.

    Yo, Caiden! Please tell us about the very important day that you sat down and with careful, mindful consideration and grave seriousness, consciously, deliberately and with 100% responsibility DECIDED to always think about women when you have your way with yourself, instead of thinking about men.  I’m sure that you remember that momentous day and that life-changing voluntary decision vividly, just like all the gays remember the days that, according to you, they “decided” that they would much rather put themselves in front of the vicious, hateful, MALICE of puffed-up, phony, self-righteous, ignorance-loving bigots like yourself.

    C’mon, Caiden. Tell us all about how you self-appointed your sexual orientation.

    Kid, the internet is eternal. What you say and write on it will be around decades from now, when you’re a little wiser and a lot sadder. My words ridiculing you, but much  more importantly, your own words ridiculing yourself will be available for anyone to use against you, even if you’ve finally seen through the loathesome bullshit that you’ve been taught. Your youth will be a perpetual embarrassment to you for the rest of your life.

  • Tyler

    Damnit. I live in West Virginia, and I didn’t even know about this. Wow, way to make our state look even more ignorant kid. 

  • Hibernia86

    I think we should take him seriously. Just because he is 14 doesn’t mean we have to tiptoe around him. When I was 13, I spoke to the planning department of my county to advocate for against sprawl and for smart growth. I wanted to be taken seriously. This kid does too. So let’s respond how we would to any other bigot and tell him why his rant is unacceptable.

  • Christian von Kietzell

    Sounds like someone who hasn’t come to terms with his own sexuality yet. Otherwise he wouldn’t feel threatened like that.

  • Keulan

    Might turn out to be an asshole? I’d argue that this kid already is an asshole, and it’s his religion that’s the major reason for that.

  • DG

    Ah yes, what follows are explanations as to why it’s bullying to tell someone who is gay that it is wrong, but telling people their religion is wrong isn’t bullying.  Despite the fact that religion, like anything, is a result of people making things up in order to cope with life while they pass on their DNA.  Or my favorite, that it’s wrong to tell people to convert to Christianity, but it’s wonderful to tell people to leave their faith (as in Catholics, leave your church). The toughtest thing about post-moderns, I tell my boys, is that they are amoral.  Especially the secular brand.  They have no moral foundation.  They believe in whatever gets them what they want or helps them win an argument today.  They aren’t based on anything other than ‘I want it now’.   And that’s tough to reason with.

    • http://hauntedtimber.wordpress.com/ timberwraith

      As I’m not a part of the usual echo chamber here at this website, I can actually agree with most of this:

      Ah yes, what follows are explanations as to why it’s bullying to tell
      someone who is gay that it is wrong, but telling people their religion
      is wrong isn’t bullying.  Despite the fact that religion, like anything,
      is a result of people making things up in order to cope with life while
      they pass on their DNA.  Or my favorite, that it’s wrong to tell people
      to convert to Christianity, but it’s wonderful to tell people to leave
      their faith (as in Catholics, leave your church).

      However, you too engage in prejudice when you say:

      They have no moral foundation.  They believe in whatever gets them what
      they want or helps them win an argument today.  They aren’t based on
      anything other than ‘I want it now’.

      On one side, we have atheists stereotyping Christians as intellectually stunted immoral bigots and on the other hand, we have Christians stereotyping atheists as amoral hedonists who would hurt anyone if it accomplished their personal goals.  Both perspectives reduce real life people to hollow caricatures.  Both dehumanize the other group as worthless people, deserving of abuse.

      If you fight abuse with abuse, you will only reproduce violence.  It will shift and change form, but the violence one pours into the world inevitably resurfaces.

      • Glasofruix

        The thing is, we might say that religious people are idiots, we do not however engage in violent actions to assert our ways. We’re not beating people in the name of evolution, we do not support hate groups (even if i want to punch some people real hard i know that there are laws about that that could bite me in the ass later).

        • DG

          No?  Who’s we?  No atheist in history?  No atheist in the world?  You seem to have a pretty high opinion of atheists.  I have a feeling that less Christians do those things than you suggest, and more atheists also do such things than you suggest.  It’s a fragile thing to base an argument on ‘my side is better than yours.’  Most thinking people come to  the realization, by the end of the day, that neither side can boast more than the other.  I know I did.  It didn’t take me long in my agnostic days to realize there were some fine Christians (and other religious folks) out there, and many of the non-religious I knew or knew of (including a couple professors I had) could be pretty rotten to the core (including their attitudes toward religious folks).  That argument works in a self-contained world of one’s own making, but outside of that, it falls to pieces on the rocks of reality.

        • http://hauntedtimber.wordpress.com/ timberwraith

          Given enough power, atheists (like all groups of human beings) are perfectly capable of reaching a place where they will abuse their power.  Believing that you are immune from such tendencies might very well make such matters a likely outcome if/as atheists gain majority status.  You are just as human as Christians are and subject to humanity’s propensity for us vs. them thinking and the abuse that usually follows. Ironically, your belief in your own superiority illustrates the tribalistic tendencies I speak of.  Let your collective guard down long enough, and atheists will also make a call to arms against their enemies.

          • Glasofruix

            You seem to suggest that atheism is something akin to organised religion, while it’s not.

            • http://hauntedtimber.wordpress.com/ timberwraith

              The de facto reality is that atheism is currently a social movement with a growing body of common beliefs and behaviors.  It is an ideology with a following whose numbers are increasing with time. 

              Religions are also ideologies.

              As are economic systems.

              As are political philosophies.

              All are subject to the usual social forces that bring bad and good into the world.

              • Glasofruix

                Yes but still, atheists are isolated groups/individuals with no hierarchy. The only reason for atheists to regroup is to fight discrimination from religious folks.

                How do you picture atheists abusing their power? Is giving the same rights to every one abuse of power?

                • http://hauntedtimber.wordpress.com/ timberwraith

                  Right now, you can feel comfort in the progressive values espoused by many atheists. However, what about when that ideology spreads throughout a country’s populace and comes to occupy the hearts and minds of people across the political spectrum?

                  I can very easily imagine a country controlled by atheists using their
                  military might to kill Muslims (or another religious group whose home country represents a strategic threat or economic interest) out fear, hatred, and economic self interest.  Being a nascent social movement and an established social power are two very different matters.

                • Glasofruix

                  Atheism is the absence of belief in a god or gods, that’s the common ground for every atheist, whatever political/ideological preference is an individual matter (you can be an atheist and dislike gays or be a racist). The nice thing about it, it’s that it does not occupy the heads or minds of people (i don’t get up in the morning wondering what atheist stuff i should do today or how can i believe less in skydaddy). So if something happens in position of power it will not be due to “absence of belief in a god or gods” but rather personnal interests of individuals. I can’t say the same about religion, because it can justify about everything…

                  Oh and the US government is already invading muslim countries in the name of national security, remember what happened in Iraq?

                • http://hauntedtimber.wordpress.com/ timberwraith

                  And I’ve met people of many religions from across the political spectrum too, people who have strongly varying philosophies toward people and life.  These variations are not unique to atheism.

                  Your words do not change the reality of abuse that I see creeping deeply into the atheist movement.  Atheism as it currently exists, has the intent of spreading itself.  I’m not a fan of a movement that is both evangelistic and abusive. That format is all too familiar.  It has been tried by a number of religions and political movements.  The results leave something to be desired.

                • amycas

                   I can see how you would perceive “new atheism” to be evangelistic, but you’ve yet to show an example of it being abusive. All you’ve said is that there is the potential for abuse of power, I agree with this to the extent that there is potential for abuse within any movement.

                • http://hauntedtimber.wordpress.com/ timberwraith

                  Right now, the cracks I see spreading across the edifice of atheism is a willingness to engage in ridicule and contempt toward others of differing belief systems.  Numerous leaders in the atheist movement have endorsed this method of interaction. The social spaces of atheists are filled with such behaviors.  Any way you look at it, this is the embrace of abuse as a means of achieving your goals and the practice is widespread.

                  What will be the next step?  Will the embrace of one abusive behavior open a propensity to engage in other forms of abuse as your collective level of social power increases?  Do you think the verbal  abuse and dehumanization of those with differing  beliefs bodes well for the future?

                  We shall see…

                  But it’s all perfectly acceptable because religious people use verbal abuse, too.  I wonder how early Christians behaved when they were a young social movement? 

                  What’s good for the goose…

                • DG

                  timberwraith has you on that one.  If atheism isn’t a movement, then it needs to stop doing everything under the sun that movements do.  it’s a movement, and in its day, has born some pretty bad examples of human inhumanity.

                • Glasofruix

                  And you’re thinking about who? Stalin and whatnot? Sorry but that “argument” was shot down on many occasions.

                • DG

                  Actually I wasn’t thinking of Stalin, though the Communist regimes that dedicated themselves to brutally suppressing and ostracizing religion in favor of non-religious philosophies are examples of how eliminating religion doesn’t always lead to joy and happiness.  Nonetheless, if your contention is that atheists never do anything bad in the name of atheism, then that argument only holds true if either you believe 1. atheists are perfect and never do anything wrong, or 2. you have redefined atheism in such a way as to make it impossible to do anything wrong based upon it, while being able to do good and give it credit.  That’ll work for preaching to the choir, but it won’t convince many people outside the choir loft.

                • amycas

                   Can you name a single person prominent within the atheist movement who has advocated for forcibly removing religion from society?

          • Glasofruix

            ” In another era, with atheists at the helm of a powerful nation and a
            powerful military, do you really believe your collective hands will be
            free of blood?

            History says otherwise.”

            Which history? Are you referring to Stalin again? This thing is getting ridiculous, there’s absolutely no proof that he commited crimes in the name of atheism. You know what? Hitler was a vegeterian, what will happen when a vegeterian gets in the position of power? How about someone with a moustache?

            • DG

              The Soviet Union brutally suppressed and oppressed religion.  Of course, anything that got in the way of the Soviets got it in the neck.  But based on the Marxist idea that religion was a problem that needed eliminated (long and short), people of faith – while allowed to exist in the Soviet Union – were treated about as well as African Americans in the south in the 1920s.  Sometimes not that well.  Those who refused to compromise their religious beliefs according to the state’s wishes, found themselves sent to exile – or worse. 

              Religion was officially derided by the state.  Soviet students were taught to have nothing but contempt for that legendary drug of the masses.  Those who insisted on believing did it best behind closed doors.  The same is true for Communist China, Mao following the same basic contempt for religion. 

              Of course it goes back before the 20th century.  The infamous dechristianization during the French Revolution, when radical rationalists swept the countryside, demanding that people renounce their age old superstitions and embrace that wonderful new rationalism of the age.  Thousands were imprisoned who refused, we don’t know how many were executed before it was finally ended a couple years after it started.

              The point is, true-blue ‘we embrace reason and rational thought and reject all religion’ hasn’t been around that long.  It hasn’t had much power, and has had few chances to influence an entire society.  Some societies that have embraced it seem to get along fine – so far.  Others not so much.  The point being, simply believing that the eliminaton of religion will bring about peace, love, and harmony might have seemed feasibel 300 years ago, but in the 21st century, with history at our backs, not so much. 

              And of course, as is always the case, including cases of evil done in the name of religion, the details are far more complex than merely ‘atheist does X, thus atheism is bad.’  That’s just basic history 101.

              • Stev84

                They persecuted religion and had people pray to the state and Stalin instead. Very literally. Same with Maosim in China and in an even more extreme form Juche in North Korea where the leaders are literally gods. They’re nothing but secular ersatz religions, complete with their own gods, temples and holy books.

              • Stev84

                They persecuted religion and had people pray to the state and Stalin instead. Very literally. Same with Maosim in China and in an even more extreme form Juche in North Korea where the leaders are literally gods. They’re nothing but secular ersatz religions, complete with their own gods, temples and holy books.

                • Glasofruix

                  “In East Germany they replaced the confirmation rite with a secular
                  version that was heavily laced with socialist ideology and included
                  swearing allegiance to the state. That happened in the order of the
                  Soviet Politburo.”

                  You mean like kids in the US who have to recite the pledge of the allegiance every day?

                • DG

                  All that proves is that if you eliminate religion, people will fill it with something else.  The stories of incense and prayers being lifted up to Stalin or Mao are shaky at best, and smack of historical urban myth.  In each case you mention, it’s the result of the atheist’s ‘all religion is evil and all evil is religion’ mantra.  That’s not to say they didn’t *act* like gods.  But the idea that various individuals were religious simply because the demand absolute fealty is stretching the definition of the word religious.  I’m inclined to agree with Glasoofruix on this one. This comes not from a clear and definite definition of religion that the non-religious leadership of these regimes supposedly embraced, but rather as a sort of backwards reasoning that says if all evil is religious, then these regimes must have been religious somehow. 

              • Glasofruix

                And there again you’re pulling shit out of nowhere. I’m of russian origin, my grandma is very religious and she knew the soviet regime, she, and everyone she knew, were never and i say never annoyed because of their faith which she never hid from no one (and she’s catholic, not orthodox like 99% of russians). During Stalin’s rule it was far more dangerous to tell jokes about the government than believeing in skydaddy.

                • DG

                  That’s odd, since every former Soviet I knew said just the opposite.  Every former Soviet I”ve ever read or heard said the opposite.  Far be it from me to cast doubt on your grandmother’s recollections, but the fact is there is a mountain of evidence and testimonies that say otherwise.

                  Oh, and you’re missing the point in the French Revolution. I hope you haven’t fallen into the Atheist Hitchens style trap of going through history, picking out the parts that help your case, and never even reading anything else.  RIP, but we historians used to make a drinking game out of how much that man got wrong about history.

                  It happened.  Look it up, and it was aimed at destroying religion and setting up an enlightened state of pure reason.

      • DG

        Most atheists are good people, typically not reflected by what you see on most atheist blogs (though not all, I’ve been pointed to some pretty interesting blogs where the conversation is more or less rational and respectful).  Nonetheless, too many modern – or shall we say post-modern – atheists seem to revel in the moral relativity of the modern politically driven debate.  Hence you have atheists being shocked – Shocked! – that Christians would tell people that other religions are wrong, while at the same exact moment praising atheists who make a career out of telling Christians (and other religious individuals) that their religious beliefs are wrong, stupid, evil, whatever.  And they do it without missing a beat.  Of course it’s not as if Christians or other religious folks can’t do the same thing – it’s OK when I do it, just not them. It’s especially common in fundamentalist camps within various religious traditions. But that’s why Mark Shea is fond of saying: ‘scratch a modern atheist, and you get a fundamentalist every time.’ 

        But I agree with your statement about fighting abuse with abuse.  If the terms I used were too sweeping, I take them back and apologize.

        • Glasofruix

          “while at the same exact moment praising atheists who make a career out
          of telling Christians (and other religious individuals) that their
          religious beliefs are wrong, stupid, evil, whatever.”

          Mostly because they can back that up with some serious evidence, unlike religious folks who just spew bullshit taken directly out of a dark and smelly hole.

          • DG

            Oh, my bad.  Prove there is no God. Then I guess you have at least some validation for saying nothing other than ‘those morals only apply to everyone else, but not me because I’m right.’

            • Glasofruix

              So you claim that god exists and then you demand me to prove that he does not? This common tactic does not work, the burden of proof is still on you and you haven’t provided a single particle of evidence.

              • http://hauntedtimber.wordpress.com/ timberwraith

                Ah, but for DG, the burden of proof is upon you. So, you can both stare at the impenetrable walls of each other’s respective ideologies and feel satisfied that all is well and good.

                • Stev84

                  Nonsense. Logic dictates that the burden of proof is always on the one making the positive assertion. There is nothing relative about it.

                • http://hauntedtimber.wordpress.com/ timberwraith

                  Which is the standard response, has been heard many times, and has no real effect upon someone who has had the powerful subjective experience (real or not) of the presence of a supernatural entity.

                  Each of your respective ideologies/perspectives contain self-reinforcing beliefs that mean little to the other person.

                • DG

                  I think I apologized for the over-generalization, didn’t I?

                • http://hauntedtimber.wordpress.com/ timberwraith

                  DG, I think your words have made it clear that you don’t see all atheists as morally stunted people.  That’s good.

                  My main request is that you please keep in mind that wording such as this can be pretty triggering:

                  The toughtest thing about post-moderns, I tell my boys, is that they are
                  amoral.  Especially the secular brand.  They have no moral foundation. 
                  They believe in whatever gets them what they want or helps them win an
                  argument today.  They aren’t based on anything other than ‘I want it
                  now’.   And that’s tough to reason with

                  Atheists are accused quite regularly of being morally and ethically adrift.  It’s a prejudice that atheists often face.  Plus, such approaches fall into the “my group is better than yours” trap.

                  Also, a small point: most  atheists I’ve encountered on line tend to frown upon post modernism.

                • DG

                  And yet so many seem to utilize some of its more, shall we say, shady aspects. 

                  Nonetheless, point taken.  But it is true that too many atheists today, resting on such weak arguments as ‘our side never does anything wrong’, find themselves basically saying ‘that was yesterday’s morality, today it doesn’t count since it helps us to think otherwise.’  That’s hard to square with a consistent moral stance.
                  I wouldn’t say immoral, since too many atheists are capable of being good.  Problem I see, is that atheism is far more capable of falling into the ‘here today, gone later today’ moralizing of post-modern debate than those confined to an ethic centered on a longer standing tradition.  Not that religious (Christians or otherwise) can’t join in with the best of them.  But simple observation suggests it’s easier for the atheist to join the relativity club when it comes to rules for living. 

                • http://hauntedtimber.wordpress.com/ timberwraith

                  Oy, we are running out of space to type readable sentences.

                  DG, religion shifts its take on morality as well.  Not so long ago, slavery, segregation, the oppression of non-protestant Christians, the oppression of Jews, and so on, were justified as proper moral behavior by what was once considered mainstream Christianity.  Such is not the case today.

                  Also, there are umpteen religions on the planet with thousands of sects and denominations. Whose code of morality does one use?  Whose deity/spirit force does one turn to for guidance?

                  Religion and a belief in the supernatural hardly provide a single, unvarying source of morality. Religions change as cultures change.  Religions are born, evolve, and die.  Nothing in this world is static–not even people’s understanding of what they think their god(s) deem to be moral behavior.  People’s belief that only their religion is true might provide the illusion of statuc solidity but that’s hardly the way such social institutions work.

                • Glasofruix

                   Yeah, logic ;)

                • DG

                  No, in polite dinner conversation and academic debate, the burden of proof can be placed on demonstrating God if we insist that God has to be proven based on whatever you want to base it on.  Demand that God must be proven scientifically by physics, fine.  It’s a fun debate.

                  But begin saying that religion is stupid, evil, a great lie that is the primary cause of human suffering in the world, those who believe it are inherently warped, twisted, and ignorant, and it’s time religion gets taken out once and for all so that humanity can thrive (while suggesting those who cling to their religion are abusers of children, bigots, and a threat to humanity), then the burden of proof is on you. 

                  Easy choice. 

      • amycas

         yay, an “echo chamber” reference”…./rolls eyes

    • Glasofruix

      As usual you are full of shit without any evidence to support your claims.

      How are those sources on gay suicides coming by the way?

      • DG

        Boy, you are the one trick pony, aren’t you.  Read the comments on ‘it’s terrible when Christians tell others they should convert, or they are wrong.’  Then read the various posts and comments praising atheists who go out and tell Christians and other religious individuals they are wrong, or those launching the ‘Leave the Catholic Church’ crusade.  Resting of case to commence, now.

        • Glasofruix

           Of course it’s terrible when xtians proselytise, because it often goes on par with terms such as “hell”, “damnation” or “your mother should have aborted you” (when not direct death threats) as well as the general air of superiority that THEIR beliefs are the only true ones without anything to support that claim. And i’m not mentionning the sense of shame they try to instill in you for being who you are.

          • DG

            The one thing I’ve learned in my almost 50 years of life – nobody has a singular claim on the ‘we’re right, you’re stupid/evil, and it’s high time you realize my way is the only way or else…’  approach to life.  Of course some of the things you mention would be horrible to say, and I don’t doubt there are some who have said such things.  Just like there are atheists who doe no better.  At the end of the day, that doesn’t add one thing or another to the core of the debate: which is true. 

            Oh, and Christians can also fall into the trap so many atheists fall into: That’s what those types of people do; we never, ever do such things.  Trust me, atheists are no less prone to doing bad, despite what so many atheists nowadays seem to think.

            • Glasofruix

              Oh yeah atheists can be bad, no doubt about that, but there’s no correlation between atheism and being an asshole. Remind me the last time you saw someone committing a crime in the name of atheism?

              • DG

                Then there’s no correlation between atheism and anything good that atheists do.  You can’t have it both ways.  Personally, I think atheists are quite capable of using and exploiting their atheism for personal gain at others’ expenses, just as a lack of belief in God has propelled individuals to delve into some pretty impressive depths.  Same with religion.  Has led people to some pretty bad things, but has also inspired some of the best.  Again, the parlor game that says my side is better than yours is a dead end.  Good for rallying the troops (and sometimes worse), but not really a solution to the age old problem. 

                • Glasofruix

                   “Then there’s no correlation between atheism and anything good that atheists do.”

                  I never said there was.

                • DG

                  Well, at least you’re consistent on that one.  That’s fair enough. 

                  Oh, it compels them to search for meaning in other areas that the religious individual might not be as inclined to consider.  By default, a person who will not believe in God or the divine will be blocked from seeing the universe a certain way.  But the same goes the other direction.  While both are, of course, capable of understanding a variety of perspectives, sometimes that other side of the tracks opens up an insight or perspective that those who have other world views might miss. 

                • Glasofruix

                  I’m sorry, but i find the notion that we miss something because we do not believe in the nonexistent plain and simply ridiculous. Religion is widely known to block other perspectives, people were burnt alive for saying that Earth revolved around the sun, religious dogma is by definition immovable and unchangeable. That’s why so many creationnists think science is weak, because scientific theories can be adapted in the light of new evidence.

                • DG

                  What people were burnt alive for saying the earth revolved around the sun?  Names?
                  I’m not sure I get the gist of the rest of your post, which seems to say I’m wrong about the idea that folks can miss things when they see the world one way or another, since you then go on to point out how religion does just that.  You’re suggesting only religion, and nothing else?   

                • Glasofruix

                  DG, you seem to suggest that by not accepting religion i’m somewhat limited in my search for knowledge. I think that religion is the limiting factor here. The basic religious premise is that whatever religion says it’s the absolute truth and must not be questionned. Let’s put it that way, your limit is the sky, my limit is the edge of the universe (if one exists).

  • Fsq

    There is an update to this story on Huff Post – the Internet hosting site “Spreaker” pulled his show. They said it was hate speech and went against the contract he agreed to when he signed up for the Internet radio hosting services.

  • TheAnalogKid

    Even if homosexuality was a choice, big fucking deal. It’s none of this little prick’s business, or anyone else’s.

  • houndies

    when this kid grows up, and ventures into the real world and starts to think for himself…he’s is gonna be so embarrassed. lets hope. just a young parrot at this point.

  • Kaydenpat

    His side is losing as more Americans support equality.  Hopefully, as he matures, he’ll be exposed to more sensible enlightened people. 

  • Raising_Rlyeh

    “And… I knew these kids.  Some of them I was friends with.”

    That says the most about this kid. I am sure that those “ex-friends” are so sad to hear that this bigot doesn’t want to be friends with them anymore.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X