Elisabeth Hasselbeck Interviewed Creationist Ken Ham and a Black Hole of Ignorance Was Formed

On Fox News yesterday, Elisabeth Hasselbeck interviewed Creationist Ken Ham about those pesky atheists and their billboards proclaiming that people can celebrate the holidays without Jesus.

“You know, the atheist who are a very small minority in the population have been trying to impose their religion of atheism on the culture now for quite a while,” Ham explained. “You know, getting Bible, prayer out of schools. Christian symbols out of public places.”

“Because they’re becoming so aggressive, I just feel that it’s really time Christians really stood up in this culture to take on the atheists and to proclaim their message of hope,” he continued. “I mean, what’s the atheists’ message? There is no God? When you die that’s the end of you? So everything’s just meaningless and hopelessness?”

Apparently, paying for a billboard is the same as pushing an anti-God agenda throughout our entire culture.

Ham, as usual, is just lying to anyone who’ll listen. There’s no anti-God agenda on the side of atheists — not on a public policy level, anyway. When it comes to public schools and the government, all atheists want is for all belief systems to be treated equally. If a Christian display is allowed in City Hall, then atheist displays must be allowed, too. At school, kids can’t be forced to recite or listen to Christian prayers.

That’s not anti-Christian. That’s pro-neutral.

Ham’s upset because he knows he can’t compete on a level playing field. He needs the advantage that his majority provides. When he doesn’t get it, he lies. This is the same guy who thinks natural history museums are a problem because they dare to report the facts without referring to the Bible for supporting documentation.

Meanwhile, Hasselbeck didn’t bother to even bring up Ham’s ridiculous beliefs and let his lies just slide by without pushback. It was irresponsible journalism… which, I guess, is slightly better than we’ve come to expect from her network.

About Hemant Mehta

Hemant Mehta is the editor of Friendly Atheist, appears on the Atheist Voice channel on YouTube, and co-hosts the uniquely-named Friendly Atheist Podcast. You can read much more about him here.

  • LesterBallard

    Thanks for ruining my day, Hemant. Think I’ll go look at Corgi pups and kittens for awhile.

  • Dave The Sandman

    Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh
    The Stupid…..It burns!

  • $84687101

    This image drives me nuts. I’ve seen it sourced to some Deviant Art page or something before, but I feel like there must be a series of these, and it seems like there isn’t. Maybe it’s just my pattern seeking primate brain, but surely that’s meant to be a number 2, right? Surely whoever made it also made the other 9 digits?

  • WallofSleep

    “… but surely that’s meant to be a number 2, right?”

    Ah, now I see it. Reminds me of when I was in kindergarten, and my mom ironed my name on my back-pack with these letters that were comprised of little monsters and critters. I haven’t thought of that in years. My mom used to be so cool.

  • allein
  • Dave The Sandman

    If you look hard with your eyes screwed shut you can also see the face of Raptor Jesus or maybe a Lovecraftian Deep One in the smoke

  • Art_Vandelay

    Wouldn’t a black hole of ignorance mean that all the ignorance got sucked up? This is more like an ignorance supernova.

  • SeekerLancer

    I don’t know, a singularity of stupid from which no intelligence can escape aptly defines these two.

  • http://www.dogmabytes.com/ C Peterson

    No intelligence is likely to get close enough to be trapped.

  • Spuddie

    Curiosity may draw some in, the danger lies in figuring out how close one must be to observe the stupid without being drawn into it

  • http://www.dogmabytes.com/ C Peterson

    Maybe a black hole is the wrong analogy. It’s more like dark matter- totally non-interacting with light.

  • http://lady-die.deviantart.com/ LizzyJessie

    You’d have to observe it indirectly like any other black hole, or be effected by its sheer force of suck. Though the theory that at its core is material that’s so incredibly dense that it can be difficult to imagine how it came to be.

  • $84687101

    Putting Ham on the air in the first place is irresponsible journalism. The guy is a fringe wacko who happens to have bilked enough of his followers to build a permanent carnival side show.

  • Matt Bowyer

    In other words, Faux News’s kind of guy.

  • islandbrewer

    Sounds like the perfect host for his own show on FOX!

  • WallofSleep

    Ya know, I almost felt sorry for her when she was on The View. Now I understand why she was there in the first place.

  • http://youtu.be/fCNvZqpa-7Q Kevin_Of_Bangor

    …..

  • FirstAmongEquals

    Hasselbeck and Ham – together they have an IQ of negative 50.

  • Justatron

    That’s awfully generous of you…

  • JerichoWall

    The cameraman’s IQ raised it by at least 100 😛

  • Matt Bowyer

    Faux News is such a deep black hole of ignorance, that it loops around and spews the ignorance back out.

  • newenglandsun

    “anti” – opposed to
    “a” – a negation
    “theism” – the idea that there is a god or ruler to be obeyed
    “atheist” – one who negates the theist position, a rebel, an anarchist to the political rule (theos was also applied to rulers), opposed to theism, opposed to the god or gods

    Mehta said: “There’s no anti-God agenda on the side of atheists”
    Contradicts himself with: “not on a public policy level, anyway”

    Check out Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins if you think this following position is true – “When it comes to public schools and the government, all atheists want is for all belief systems to be treated equally.” Let’s see…I vaguely remember Dawkins and his “there probably is no god” campaign.

  • Lando

    But atheists don’t argue that every church should be bulldozed, or for football to be the only acceptable Sunday activity. There’s no atheist conspiracy to destroy the belief in deities.
    We’re arguing that this country, which was founded on concepts like equality, shouldn’t promote one religion over all others. We don’t believe any of these gods exist, but aren’t trying to force anyone into disbelief.

  • newenglandsun

    So books like “The God Delusion” aren’t part of something to destroy belief in God? “How about God: The Failed Hypothesis”? Or “God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything”?

    By the way, I am not a supporter of “liberalism” in America as you might have already guessed. But I am no American “conservative” either.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OO-BwjZE3gU

  • Lando

    ‘Comprehensive?’

    adjective
    1.
    complete; including all or nearly all elements or aspects of something.
    “a comprehensive list of sources”

    Let’s hurry up and add ‘Sifting through videos and pulling words and phrases with no regard for context.’

    As far as ‘we don’t have to respect religion,’ any disagreement about the existence of any god can be taken as disrespectful. Does that mean that atheists need to accept that every religious claim is accurate?

  • baal

    Your dictionary fetish is your down fall.

  • Lando

    Shhhhh; I’ve got a paper-cut to deal with.

  • baal

    blargh @ disqus. I thought I was replying to NESUN(day). Thankfully, I think it still works.

  • Lando

    It’s alright; the vice cops confiscated most of my dictionaries – I thought my secret was safe.

  • Spuddie

    When you have actually read them, we can discuss their content. I think you just read titles and drew your own conclusions.

    Plus you are under the stupid belief that Dawkins represents some form of atheist pope that people feel compelled to follow for the belief.

    Come back when you bother to learn something about atheists beyond what a lying creationist and an airhead fox news bobblehead say on the subject

  • Scott_In_OH

    So books like “The God Delusion” aren’t part of something to destroy belief in God? “How about God: The Failed Hypothesis”? Or “God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything”?

    Thank you for laying out this misconception so clearly. It is VERY important that you recognize that it is a misconception.

    You are equating the free speech of individual citizens (Dawkins writing “The God Delusion”) with the coercive power of government (requiring Christian prayer in schools or displaying only Christian symbols on public property). THESE ARE NOT THE SAME.

    Christians are free to write as many books, hang as many billboards, hold as many meetings, go on as many talk shows, say as many masses, … as they want. Hemant’s point is that atheists are not trying to outlaw that, and he is correct.

    Likewise, atheists are NOT trying to use the government to outlaw any of that or to force children to say a prayer to Dawkins, Einstein, or Science or to force local governments to display only “The Solstice is the Reason for the Season” signs in front of their Town Halls. This is also Hemant’s point, and again he is correct.

  • newenglandsun
  • Scott_In_OH

    Oh, good grief. Everyone on this board will agree with you that Soviet leaders (at least before Gorbachev, as the book you cite points out) were anti-theist–that is, they sought to undermine the Orthodox Church as an alternate source of power. Most of us will also agree that those leaders were atheist themselves. Where we disagree (and have said so many times) is with the claim that Soviet leaders’ anti-theism was a direct result of their atheism, and with the implication that atheism must always lead to anti-theism.

    Soviet leaders were also anti-capitalist. Must atheism be anti-capitalist? Soviet leaders banned independent association around issues of labor rights or political reform. Must atheism always be anti-worker and anti-democracy?

    Asked another way, do you believe some ideology, religion, or worldview must dominate every society to the exclusion of others, or do you think it is possible that having no formal ideology can open political and social space for a daily give and take among multiple perspectives?

  • Richard Thomas

    You shoot your own argument in the foot. “Anti” is opposed to, “a” is negation. Therefore “opposed to theism” would be “antitheism”, not “atheism”. Get it together and try again,

  • newenglandsun

    Opposed – “to be hostile or antagonistic to; be against”

    Negate – “to deny or contradict”

    Contradict – ” to affirm the opposite of (a proposition, statement, etc)”

    Source: World English Dictionary
    Opposed does come from the word opposite, verdad?

  • $84687101

    Put down the dictionary, you’re too stupid to use it.

  • newenglandsun

    Then the pot looked in the mirror.

  • WallofSleep

    When seeking a battle of wits, it’s best to come armed. You did not.

  • newenglandsun

    I was the only one who brought a dictionary.

  • WallofSleep

    “I was the only one who brought a dictionary.”

    And a mind like a steel trap: rusted shut and obsolete.

  • newenglandsun
  • Spuddie

    Shilling for your own site is tasteless enough, but then you have the nerve or stupidity to trot out an argument so canned that it would be subject to recall by Hormel.

    You are far less clever than you think you are. You set yourself up for people to consider you a fool for mistaking the difference between anti and a. You never read a word of Hitchens or Dawkins and are dropping their names based on second hand whining about them.

    And your name is entirely fictional. There is no sun in New England. Just brighter clouds on a given day.

  • God’s Starship

    I don’t want to read your shitty blog. Make an argument for yourself.

  • http://www.holytape.etsy.com Holytape

    But you’re the only one who thought the zebra did it.

  • Richard Thomas

    Just like “anaerobic” means “opposed to air” (“a” = “an”). Get your shit together.

  • newenglandsun

    Because anaerobic is using something else as opposed to air to train.

  • ZenDruid

    Derp?

  • http://www.holytape.etsy.com Holytape

    Have you been anaerobically training your brain?

  • cyb pauli

    This must be a joke.

  • R Bonwell parker

    This idea you have that “clarification” is the same thing as “contradiction” explains a lot of the other logical lapses in your comment.

  • JerichoWall

    theism = “having a belief in a god”
    atheism = not “having a belief in a god”

    It doesn’t get much simpler than that.

    Now, I happen to be an atheist who is also anti-religion but I can’t be anti-god as I don’t believe a god exists. If evidence starts showing up which suggests that a god might exist I’ll give it a very good examination.

    But that won’t stop me being anti-religion which is just BS made up by mankind in its infancy and ignorance to a) control the masses, b) claim rights to particular land areas of the World, c) explain [incorrectly] how we came into existence.

    And once the deluded religious masses stop foisting their religion on us and insisting that [selected bits of it] it be taken into account when deciding legal issues, atheists will have no need for billboard campaigns putting an alternative viewpoint.

  • WallofSleep

    “Let’s see…I vaguely remember Dawkins and his “there probably is no god” campaign.”

    A bus ad campaign in the UK is not the same as promoting a religion in the public school system in the US. That, and the ad campaign was created by Ariane Sherine. Dawkins supported it, but it was not “his” campaign.

    You fail. So hard.

  • newenglandsun

    Philosopher King – your arguments are invalid. Appeal to an atheist.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrEnMpxYiaE

  • Richard Thomas

    Aww, did you make this? Are they teaching Strawman Arts and Crafts at Homeschool University now?

  • newenglandsun

    No. That was actually an atheist who made that. He’s actually quite engaging and one atheist I would consider worthwhile reading and viewing.

  • baal

    Why did he post with your name? I refreshed my page and it still says that newenglandsun posted the supposed atheist’s video.

  • Spuddie

    I think he is in the remedial class

  • $84687101

    Is there actually an argument in there somewhere, or are you just babbling nonsensically?

    That’s a rhetorical question.

  • newenglandsun

    Yes. However, whitewashed Americans prefer things to be straightforward and blunt so naturally, you, as an American, were too stupid to understand it.

  • WallofSleep

    Casting aspersions on the intellect of others, yet you haven’t the brain power to distinguish the difference between a bus ad in the UK and the practice of shoving religion into public schools in the US. Nice.

  • newenglandsun

    Considering that at the beginning, the United States wasn’t very nice to my beliefs, I don’t agree with Fox News either. I’m just commenting that the religious fundamentalist vs. atheist argument is twofold of immaturity vs. immaturity. There’s nothing of value to be gained when you only see your side as the worthwhile side and accept no critique whatsoever.

    “It is lamentable, that to be a good patriot one must become the enemy of the rest of mankind.” – Voltaire

  • Fred

    You must have a widely divergent definition of critique.

  • baal

    You are 200 years old?

  • SeekerLancer

    But yet instead of simply voicing your distaste for American Atheists current billboard campaign, which many atheists here including myself have done in Hement’s original post about it, you yourself make an insulting and immature post.

    And then you celebrate all the dislikes you get for it. That is the behavior of a troll, not someone who can claim the “maturity high ground” or whatever.

  • $84687101

    I for one just prefer complete sentences and coherent paragraphs over abbreviated single definitions posted as if they demonstrate every possible use, meaning, and connotation of a word.

  • Spuddie

    Mark Twain had a saying which seems appropriate to you, “better to keep ones mouth shut and let people think you are a fool than…” you know the rest. :)

  • baal

    I suspect were you to visit, you might notice that Americans, like all groups of 350 million humans, tend to vary. Thanks for tarring all of us with the same brush. Your language lesson was less than instructive, as well.

  • Guest

    And yet instead of simply voicing your distaste for American Atheists current billboard campaign, which many atheists here including myself have done in Hement’s original post about it, you yourself make an insulting and immature post.

    And then you celebrate all the dislikes you get for it. That is the behavior of a troll, not someone who can claim the “maturity high ground” or whatever.

  • newenglandsun

    Yay! Fifteen dislikes! I’m about to set a record!

  • allein

    I doubt that.

  • Castilliano

    I snorted. LOL. :)

  • allein

    :)
    I wonder what the record is. I’m sure it’s far higher than 15. I know I’ve seen upvotes in the hundreds (or thousands, on some other sites), but I don’t know the highest number of downvotes I’ve seen.

  • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

    Even on FA, I’ve seen some posts get into the 50s or 60s at least.

  • MerlinBlack

    Hitchens was a self-described antitheist. Your argument fails without even introducing outside topics/information.

  • Cdat88

    Our atheist shields cannot repel stupid of that magnitude!

  • Richard Thomas

    Mine did just fine :)

  • WallofSleep

    You jerry-rigged your Bullshit Detector to boost your Atheist Shielding output, didn’t you?

  • Cdat88

    He also routed it through the flux capacitor, revered the polarity and put his deflectors on double front!

  • WallofSleep

    I am ashamed to admit it, but I also revere the polarity. I fear a new religion is afoot.

  • Pitabred

    Mine goes to 11

  • OhioAtheist

    Ken Ham and his ilk are perpetually in the “me” phase that most grow out of at age three.

  • http://thebigreason.com/ Mark Eagleton

    “Pro neutral.” Quote of the day.

  • http://www.dogmabytes.com/ C Peterson

    Atheists don’t all want belief systems to be treated equally in the government eye. At least, I don’t, and I’m an atheist.

    Atheists don’t have any common beliefs, politics, or philosophical positions!

  • Dave The Sandman

    “Atheists don’t all want belief systems to be treated equally in the government eye.”

    I do. I want governments to treat all belief systems and faiths with an equal amount of disregard, indifference and suspicion.

  • http://www.dogmabytes.com/ C Peterson

    I get that. Many atheists do. But “atheists” in general do not, simply because they have no common beliefs at all. It’s not good to keep portraying atheists as if they do.

  • http://www.amazon.com/God-Awful-Worst-Religious-Leaders-Western/dp/0989961419/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1408543857&sr=8-1&keywords=roger+bauman Roger Bauman

    This is more of a circle jerk than an interview.

  • Dave The Sandman

    Less of a circle jerk as there are only two chuckleheads

    More like what we Brits call Gobshite Tennis.

  • Lando

    The old ‘Dutch Rudder,’ perhaps?

  • MNb

    May I remind you, as a Dutchman, that neither Ol’ Hambo nor Elisabeth Hasselbeck is a compatriot of mine and both likely never have visited my country?

  • Lando

    lol; I would suggest not googling that term at work.

  • Lisa Ham

    Jesus vs. Santa wasn’t this already solved on South Park? Really, a choice between two fictional characters. The true choice given was “Do I want to look like a greedy consumerist or do I want to look kind and charitable?”

  • Lisa Ham

    although to be fair, I can’t remember who won on SouthPark.

  • http://youtu.be/fCNvZqpa-7Q Kevin_Of_Bangor
  • Lisa Ham

    thanks!

  • Malcolm McLean

    Jesus live in Palestine in the 1st century, Santa in the 4th century in Myra (now Demre, Turkey). Both well-attested historical figures.

  • Spuddie

    Santa is, Jesus not so much. the attestation of Jesus’s existence came several centuries after any possible credible primary source.

  • Malcolm McLean

    Er no. You’re the atheist equivalent of a creationist.

  • http://127.0.0.1 3lemenope

    When it comes to figures of that amount of temporal distance, “well-attested” gets weaselly pretty fast. It is best to compare how much evidence has survived in sources whose provenance is confirmed, and compare that to the amount and quality of evidence one ought to expect given the claims made about the figure at issue.

    On those grounds, Jesus is somewhat well-attested compared to other contemporary figures of similar prominence, which is no guarantee that he did exist, since he could easily be a composite character of several similar individuals, as many historical figures are if one identifies them by the claims made about them, but the quantity and quality of attestation slides it into the more-likely-than-not territory that there was a radical Jewish preacher in that region at that time who had some ideas similar to those that are traditionally attributed to him.

    Which is only one position in a fun historical debate that runs the gamut from plausible arguments of him being a basically fictitious character to him being mostly intact on message and some of the mundane acts (the supernatural public acts and consequences, like the earthquakes and the zombies rising in Jerusalem, are pretty right out due to their startling character and absolute lack of independent record). As a theological claim, you can understand how either way you slice it, it would be less-than-impressive to a person who is not already committed to believing it on personal grounds.

    All of those positions, BTW, are more responsive to and situated within the bounds of evidence than creationism.

  • Spuddie

    You mean someone who lies repeatedly to reinforce ridiculous preconceived ideas and attacks critical thought in order to browbeat others into accepting their religious ideas as true? I can’t even think of an atheist equivalent to that. Only a magical thinking uncritical dogmatic believer could cough u something so mendacious.

    You are not disputing what I said, just flinging poo like the monkey you might claim is not related to you.

  • http://mad-humanist.tumblr.com/ The Mad Humanist

    Hardly.

    There really is no independent evidence for the existence of Jesus.

    That said I happen to think Jesus was some sort of historical figure, because he becomes more deific not less as you go through later gospels. This is the opposite of what you would expect from mythicist theories.

  • MNb

    “all belief systems to be treated equally”
    For someone who knows the Truth that’s an inconceivable idea.

  • Jean

    Less than 2%? Really? Isn’t there something wrong with that number?

  • http://bearlyatheist.wordpress.com/ Bear Millotts

    what’s the atheists’ message? There is no God? When you die that’s the end of you? So everything’s just meaningless and hopelessness?”

    Nah, the atheists’ message is, and has always been “We don’t believe in your fairy tale. Stop trying to make it law.”

  • Heidi Laws

    thank you!

  • Octoberfurst

    Well what did you expect from Hasselbeck? She works at Fox and she is a right-wing Christian so of course Ham is going to get the kid gloves treatment and be fawned over.

    But what really gets me is Ham saying that atheist want to “impose their religion of atheism” onto society. Uhhh has he looked at his own religion? This is sort of a pot meet kettle moment. Christians try to shove their views on to society all the time. We are just asking for the government to take a neutral stance.

  • http://youtu.be/fCNvZqpa-7Q Kevin_Of_Bangor

    Because their bible tells them to do so. They feel as if we need saving.

  • Pitabred

    Anything that isn’t actively promoting Christianity is persecution. There will be no dissent. The only different opinions allowed are what flavor of Christian you call yourself, and of course Evangelicals are the only right kind of Christian. Duh.

  • Malcolm McLean

    The problem is that what I call the Wicca argument is an atheist argument. If you say that all religious claims must be treated exactly equally, It’s like saying that “TV can cover political parties, but it must treat all parties equally”. So the Democrat and the Republican running for president get a minute to out their case. Then a million other hopefuls also declare their intention to run for president and demand their one minutes. So the effect of the law is that no Presidential candidates may be covered at all. On the other hand the man who argues that America shouldn’t be a democracy, he;s not a political candidate. He can have a whole hour.

  • bribase

    An “Agressive billboard campaign” eh, Ken?

    Let’s not forget who cast the first stone here, shall we?

    http://adland.tv/files/imagecache/storyinside/Ifgoddoesntmatter.jpg

  • baal

    I really don’t like having guns pointed at me. It’s an admission that we shouldn’t listen to your words and should fear your power.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    Republican Jesus would approve of that message, no doubt.

  • KMR

    I just don’t get the whole meaningless and hopelessness = atheism message they like to propagate. Granted if horrible shit happens and your life is forever changed negatively as a result, yeah I can see where believing in a comforting heaven is a huge benefit. But most people don’t have crazy awful horrible shit happen to them. It’s normal crap they go through and religion is just a pain in the ass for that since it adds an added level of guilt and condemnation to everyday life. But then it’s hard for me to remember what it’s like to be in the bubble. I remember it’s distorted in there but once you’re out you forget the level of distortion pretty quickly.

  • WallofSleep

    They’re enamored with the stench of their own farts, and cannot conceive of how anyone can function in this world without first acknowledging that said farts smell of roses.

  • KMR

    Well if it’s the only thing you allow yourself to smell then I guess it does smell pretty good. You have nothing else to compare it to.

    [Sigh] It’s such a shame they don’t know what they’re missing.

  • http://rolltodisbelieve.wordpress.com/ Captain Cassidy

    I genuinely think that saying obvious bullshit stuff like that is part of how Christians demonize and dehumanize non-Christians. Sub-humans don’t understand stuff like meaningful living and hope. But the sheer number of non-believers who clearly do understand such ideas is going to make this kind of self-delusion backfire bigtime when it hits critical mass. This kind of lie only works if there aren’t examples contradicting it all over the place and if the people saying the lie can keep their listeners isolated.

  • Raising_Rlyeh

    ” So everything’s just meaningless and hopelessness?”

    You know I am just tired of this argument. Things have meaning by what we give them. You can look at the brief romances and friendships that we spend our lives with as meaningless, but that is a depressing view. We only get a brief few years, cosmically speaking, and yes that is it, but it is better to actually live your life than to think that you have to deny everything because you will get to live forever afterwards.

    Also, with scientific advances it may be possible for us to become nearly immortal. I personally do not want to live forever, but the idea of your mind inside a robotic body is interesting. I would want to be able to end it whenever I want to. The question also comes up as to whether you would still be able to experience life the same. Would you be able to taste, touch, feel the wind?

    Anyway, yes life is short and there is nothing afterwards, but that doesn’t make things bad. To quote the Doctor: “The way I see it, every life is a pile of good things and bad things. The good things don’t always soften the bad things, but vice versa, the bad things don’t always spoil the good things and make them unimportant.”

  • $84687101

    Yep. What atheism requires we recognize is that all meaning is constructed. Theirs just happens to be constructed around the religious musings of bronze age sheep herders, whereas ours is constructed around centuries of scientific and philosophical advancement. The result is that there’s centers on pleasing an invisible man in the sky and his priests, while ours (well, mine anyway) centers on having fun and learning while enabling as many other people to do the same as possible.

  • Randy Wanat

    I love how they find the batshittiest wackadoo creationist jacktard as the “opposing view” regarding an atheist billboard. Is this how you defend your faith? By getting the biggest reality-denying loon available to jibber-jabber his nonsense on your airwaves?

  • Brian T Hall

    if 67% are saying Jesus Christ is the reason for the season.. then that means 33% are people who truly don’t really believe in Jesus.. that means the none believers are really growing in the USA… I can agree with one thing with Ham, atheism is a smell minority, but there is one big hole in that argument.. A atheism is only one style of none belief in a god.. There are I think 100 different styles of none belief labels… that means Fox New and Ham are desperate, and this news story is clothed to make Christian looked special, but once you strip off the clothing of the news story, we the none believers are winning, its good news for secularism culture…

  • Rain

    Atheists have a message of [insert straw men here], ergo Jesus. Brilliant.

  • Rain

    The Bible says [insert total illogic here], therefore automagically it’s not total illogic. Wonderful.

  • Don Gwinn

    “I mean, what’s the atheists’ message? There is no God? When you die that’s the end of you? So everything’s just meaningless and hopelessness?”

    The fact that Ken still doesn’t know what the message is after all these years would seem to indicate a need for more advertising, not less.

  • TW

    Wow! This is the first time I’ve run across you anywhere. I am all for truth and the Truth, which is really what concerns me. I just read your ‘spit’ on Ken Ham and FOX and you portray yourself as a ‘friendly’ atheist. If you claim to be truthful, then do be truthful…be freindly. That was rude and the other point I have is that Christmas actually was founded/established as a celebration of the birth of Christ so why insist on trying to wrestle it away from what it is. Set up some atheist celebration to nothing or no one in particular and I’ll be looking to see if that takes hold. Celebrate the perfection that man has achieved that has us killing our unborn, euthanasia, sky high rates of divorce and dysfuntional families, wars and crime. If the KKK or some other hate group wanted to use Martin Luther King Day to sell their garbage that would be wrong. All secular historians of the day when Jesus Christ was here confirm He lived even if you don’t agree with man’s need or His message for man. Fess up to what you’re really up to. I was cynical when I was young but I now understand beyond the shadow of any doubt. By the way, I’m not selling myself as the friendly anything. I put the premium on truth.

  • baal

    “I put the premium on truth.”
    heh. no. You don’t.

    If you did, you’d have argued from blog title. Also, xmas looks like a total squatting by xtians on preexisting mid-winter celebrations. So I think you’re the one not willing to deal with actual facts a.k.a. Truth.

  • Svelaz

    Respectfully your assertion is not really accurate for many reasons. It is not really known when Jesus was born or even where. The closest it’s been decided of his birth date is in June. His birthplace has been in question as well. An Israeli archeological team has determined that the current Bethlehem could not have been Jesus’s birth place since most of the archeological evidence corresponds to a town much younger than jesus’s time. There IS however a different Bethlehem in Galilee that more closely matches the time of Jesus. This poses a problem since Jesus must come from the Bethlehem of Judea in order to be declared as coming from the birthplace of kings. Plus there is also the problem of Nazareth. Every individual at the time was identified from where one was born.
    Christmas was we know it today is entirely based on Pagan tradition as is the Christmas tree. If you want to know about truth as you put it maybe you need to sum up the courage to really research the history of this very fine Pagan holiday.

  • Richard Thomas

    Does anybody have an Empty Bottle?

  • Eddie

    I am now dumber for having heard that.

    You can expect a call from my lawyer. Surely I have some sort of case…

  • WalterWhite007

    Actually Ken Ham is such a moron that atheists should thank the FSM that he is a spokesperson for christians!!!! He almost never utters a factual statement.

  • Brian

    What perfect timing @1:15 when Ham asks “what is their message” and billboard to the right lists some reasons for the season: charity, family, friends.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X