Leave Atheists out of it, Verashni

I read an article titled "Leave God out of it, Zuma" on the Mail & Guardian website this morning. The article is written by a journalist with whom I studied and respect greatly. Verashni Pillay is an amazing writer and a gifted journalist and has been since our very first day at Rhodes University.I have said all these nice things about her because it just goes to show that no matter how talented you are there will always be complications when writing about religion and politics. Even the best of us [Verashni] will occasional battle.In the opening paragraph of the story Verashni manages to weaken her entire argument against Zuma by stating the following:

You know, it's difficult enough being a Christian these days. Not only are there the money-making quacks to avoid, we also have to put up with smug and ill-read atheists. A tough job, all in all.

I believe that the argument is weakened because Verashni singles out one group to take aim at another.Why is is that Verashni needed to firstly mention Atheists at all and secondly mention them in such a condescending and mocking tone? Hypocrisy? I think so. Verashni, how could you possibly consider writing an article criticising Zuma's opinion on religion while in the opening paragraph of that criticism take a jab at another group?There are a few things after the fact that bothered me a little bit more than the initial statement. In a reply to @gordonwells @michaelmeadon on Twitter Verashni believes she didn't make a generalization. I sort of agree but why single out the "smug Atheists"? Why not applaud the well-read ones? Here's that tweet: "True. Which is why I didn't make a generalization. I spoke about a small group of people called smug atheists."Then Verashni states that the comment was a throw-away: "Not sure i DID want that. It was just one throw-away line that they're ALL focusing on now. Sigh." If it was a throw-away comment then why put it in the opening paragraph or article at all? When not just leave it out? Why pick on Atheists of any kind?I agree with many of the comments in the original article but most of all what I'd like to add to the debate is that it's not OK to single out a group in a condescending way if you are an impartial journalist whether you are writing an opinion piece or not. If the shoe was on the other foot and I'd written an article and added in a throw-away: "I hate dealing with Cheats, murderers and cocky Christians". I imagine that the religious in the crowd would have a few things to say about that.It's the same thing. I don't like being bundled with "Money-making quacks" or "smug and ill-read Atheists". I am neither but now anyone who read her story thinks that Atheists are smug and ill-read.Verashni, if you think it's tough being a Christian in this world, walk a mile in my shoes.

Ron Luce - an extremist rallying teenage workers to promote his agenda

I have been watching an incredible expose on christians and the extremist christian warriors forming in the USA. Christina Amanpour takes on the leaders of these sects in various religions, not only christianity.God's Warriors is the title of the series. If these little children, teenagers and cooked up parents are the warriors then I want to know who I am battling? Is it them?On to Ron Luce. I think that in the series it noted that he has a school, a bible school on 42hectares of land. His students pay $650 per month to be at this school.Ironic his name don't you think, Luce? Short for Lucifer? Interesting.Anyways, I digress. Luce, let's call him Luce, he charges these kids to attend his school where they can't listen to any secular music, watch any rated movies or programmes and cannot read anything that isn't approved. That is scary isn't it? I think so. I also think that it is shocking that Luce has provided each student at his school with a computer and headset and asks them to sit, everyday, and preach the word of his lord to anyone they can get hold of on the phone.That sounds incredibly to me like slave labour. Hell, it sounds worse than slave labour because at least slaves are paid. These kids are paying to be his slaves.Throughout the entire programme on CNN there was a distinct lack of parental presence. All that I saw was young children shouting about the word of the lord, angrily fighting with gay people in San Francisco, violently protesting for their beliefs. I think it's great that these kids are involved and believe in something. But I am vehemently against brainwashing of any sort. These kids looked brainwashed.I cannot believe that anything this propagated can be good for anyone, for children, teenagers or adults. In fact, religion has done nothing for our world other than to create wars that have lasted centuries. Palestinians and Jews, The Crusades, US war on Iraq and many others. All inherently religious based wars. Where is the good?Now we are roping in our youth without giving them a choice or an alternative. This scares me, the Battle Cry and God's Warriors scare me, it is all very worrying.

Atheism and Christianity - someone needs to be right

I have been very cautious about bloging on this topic. The reasons are obvious. But I feel that it is time.It is no secret that I am an Atheist. Anyone who reads this blog will know that and I have no problem with others knowing it either. It is not something that I am ashamed of, as much of society dictates people in my position need to feel.I have been reading Jarred Cinman's blog on ThoughtLeader recently and he has made some great arguments on the topic, see "Why atheists are just plain right".My stance on religion (or lack thereof) comes under fire on a daily basis just about. I have no problem with this as I enjoy the topic and enjoy rational, reasonable debate around the topic.Note my use of the words rational and reasonable. There are some arguments that I will never accept as final from a christian; "Just have faith" is one of them and, "I simply believe" is another. Let me put it to you this way, I don't have faith and I don't believe. That is that.In the same way, I want to express something to those that challenge atheism and feel that we are wrong: We (atheists and christians) suffer from basic but opposite assumptions, I believe there is no god, you believe there is. At the end of the day this is where the argument starts and this is where it will always end. We do not believe the same thing. Simple.In my mind there is a very obvious reason for the raging debate however and this is where my post really starts. The reason is this:By the very nature that christians believe in the bible - which states that you need preach the word of god - they must innately believe that anyone who does not believe in the bible or Jesus or god is wrong. That's me. I'm wrong.Now I am taking a very scientific and analytical stance here. When I argue, I argue by asking what the difference is between my "wrongness" and how I perceive your beliefs to be "wrong"? There is no difference. Christians ask me to disprove the existence of their god, I ask them to prove it to me. They ask me to disprove heaven and I ask them to prove hell. There is no solution here.Yet without a solution we are lost. Why? Because one of us are wrong according to our belief systems.I am not going to continue providing examples, explanations and justifications as I think this is a very circular argument that will ultimately take us back to the starting point of differing belief systems. But why, why must I be wrong? Take a second and think, is it possible, for a split second, that you could be wrong?