Login |
New User
Books
Read the 1st Chapter!
The Greatest Show On Earth: The Evidence For Evolution
The God Delusion
Over 1.5 million copies sold
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
Climbing Mount Improbable
by Richard Dawkins
Print
MnIndy interview: Unrepentant science-heathen PZ Myers still intends to prove 'this cracker is nothing'
by Minnesota Independent
Thanks to SPS for the link.
http://minnesotaindependent.com/view/mnindy-interview
MnIndy interview: Unrepentant science-heathen PZ Myers still intends to prove "this cracker is nothing"
By Paul Schmelzer
Once a Lutheran altar boy, University of Minnesota biology professor Morris P.Z. Myers has fallen from grace -- at least in the eyes of some Catholics and the conservative Catholic League. One of the more prominent atheist voices in America, Myers wrote a blog post on the furor sparked by a Florida college student who smuggled a communion wafer out of mass and, once found out, received threats of harm and death. Catholics believe the bread, once blessed by a priest, has been transformed into the substance of Christ's body and blood. Myers doesn't buy it. He wrote that if readers of his blog send him a consecrated host, "I'll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare."
I reached him this morning to discuss the controversy that has resulted in several thousand comments at his blog -- some calling him a "Jewboy," others announcing his need for prayer, and still others calling for his death.
Minnesota Independent: The incident with college student Webster Cook comes as religious passions everywhere are incredibly inflamed —- Shiites and Sunnis, Evangelicals and atheists, etc. Does this say anything about the state of religion?
PZ Myers: I think this is a symptom of the weakness of the religious in this country right now. Religion is actually fading a little bit. It's still strong,and it's still out there and there's still a vocal political realm, but I think people know that there are people actively challenging religion now.
I think there's also a growing discontent with what the religious have done in politics. The Bush administration is a perfect example of political cronyism and political advocacy built largely on the support of the religious right, and look where it's gotten us. People are disillusioned. So [religious people are] worried. I think they've got reason to be worried. We're going to see an increasing weakness of the church. This is them lashing out. It's a disparate ploy to be relevant and to be important again... They're looking for somebody to take their ire out on.
MnIndy: I was raised Catholic, was an altar boy, and attended Catholic grade school and college. While I was taught to be reverent with Catholic symbols and artifacts, I also learned of a powerful god, totally unlike this fragile one that can be damaged by a non-believer's mishandling of a communion wafer.
Myers: It's actually kind of sad. I grew up in a church, although I'm, of course, no longer a member of a church, but it is kind of weird to see this going on right now. The messages I've been getting in my email have just been insane. People who say this cracker is literally and physically the body of their god and that I'm doing this great act of heresy and sacrilege and horror -- even though I didn't actually do anything to it -- is disturbing. It's like discovering there are witch doctors lurking in your community and they've been doing weird practices.
MnIndy: What about the stories of US military personnel urinating on and otherwise abusing copies of the Koran in Iraq? Were you outraged by that, or is that a different version of this for you?
Myers: There's a subtle difference there -- maybe an important difference. I don't favor the idea of going to somebody's home or to something they own and possess and consider very important, like a graveyard -- going to a grave and desecrating that. That's something completely different. Because what you're doing is doing harm to something unique and something that is rightfully part of somebody else -- it's somebody else's ownership. The cracker is completely different. This is something that's freely handed out.
MnIndy: Do you see a parallel between this case and the furor in Denmark (and later the Islamic world at large) over cartoonists' depictions of Mohammed? It seems unlikely that these Catholics would take kindly to being compared to Islamic extremists, but death threats over the fate of a host suggests it's not an unfair characterization.
Myers: Of course! Both are demands that quirky sectarian peculiarities be given undue respect by those who don't believe in them. Furthermore, the majority of the email I'm receiving is making it explicit: they are telling me that I should not abuse their sacred icon, but that I should instead go do something sacrilegious with the Koran.
MnIndy: William Donohue's Catholic League really drove the anger over this. How do you see their role? Genuine protector of the faith? Or is this one of those red-meat issues that drives donations? Some other factor?
Myers: Bill Donohue's salary. This is Donohue's stock in trade: demagogic manufactured outrage to get the faithful to send him money to protect their religion from largely imaginary threats... threats that he conjures up.
Constantine's Sword is a book (and now a documentary) written by James Carroll, a former Catholic priest. It's a personal history of the unpleasant history of the church and anti-semitism, and shows that Catholicism has benefited from fueling an image of itself as always threatened by unbelievers -- Jews, Muslims, Satanists, atheists -- and that this reliance on hatred of the other has damaged the virtue of the faith. (Carroll is still a devout Catholic -- he just deplores the distortion of a message of love into a message of fear and hate.) The idea that Jews, for instance, want to steal consecrated wafers as an element of evil Jewish rites has been circulated fairly often, as a preliminary rationalization for oppression.
Curiously, many (but still a minority) of the email messages I have received have 'accused' me of being Jewish, addressing me as "jew boy" or "liberal pinko jew."
MnIndy: Are you concerned for your safety?
Myers: Well, most of the ravers who threaten me with horrible fates are far away, hiding in the safety of their mothers' bedrooms, hurling vituperation anonymously across the internet. These are largely frustrated losers who are venting. If (and I do not have reason to suspect anyone has gotten this demented) someone were serious about doing me harm, they wouldn't be sending me lurid warnings.
But really, the majority of the angry emails threaten nothing but to assault me with prayer.
MnIndy: Has the outrcry over your your post given you second thoughts about getting a host and treating "it with profound disrespect and heinous cracker abuse, all photographed and presented here on the web"?
Myers: The response has done nothing but confirm it: I have to do something. I'm not going to just let this disappear. It's just so darned weird that they're demanding that I offer this respect to a symbol that means nothing to me. Something will be done. It won't be gross. It won't be totally tasteless, but yeah, I'll do something that shows this cracker has no power. This cracker is nothing.
http://minnesotaindependent.com/view/mnindy-interview
MnIndy interview: Unrepentant science-heathen PZ Myers still intends to prove "this cracker is nothing"
By Paul Schmelzer
Once a Lutheran altar boy, University of Minnesota biology professor Morris P.Z. Myers has fallen from grace -- at least in the eyes of some Catholics and the conservative Catholic League. One of the more prominent atheist voices in America, Myers wrote a blog post on the furor sparked by a Florida college student who smuggled a communion wafer out of mass and, once found out, received threats of harm and death. Catholics believe the bread, once blessed by a priest, has been transformed into the substance of Christ's body and blood. Myers doesn't buy it. He wrote that if readers of his blog send him a consecrated host, "I'll show you sacrilege, gladly, and with much fanfare."
I reached him this morning to discuss the controversy that has resulted in several thousand comments at his blog -- some calling him a "Jewboy," others announcing his need for prayer, and still others calling for his death.
Minnesota Independent: The incident with college student Webster Cook comes as religious passions everywhere are incredibly inflamed —- Shiites and Sunnis, Evangelicals and atheists, etc. Does this say anything about the state of religion?
PZ Myers: I think this is a symptom of the weakness of the religious in this country right now. Religion is actually fading a little bit. It's still strong,and it's still out there and there's still a vocal political realm, but I think people know that there are people actively challenging religion now.
I think there's also a growing discontent with what the religious have done in politics. The Bush administration is a perfect example of political cronyism and political advocacy built largely on the support of the religious right, and look where it's gotten us. People are disillusioned. So [religious people are] worried. I think they've got reason to be worried. We're going to see an increasing weakness of the church. This is them lashing out. It's a disparate ploy to be relevant and to be important again... They're looking for somebody to take their ire out on.
MnIndy: I was raised Catholic, was an altar boy, and attended Catholic grade school and college. While I was taught to be reverent with Catholic symbols and artifacts, I also learned of a powerful god, totally unlike this fragile one that can be damaged by a non-believer's mishandling of a communion wafer.
Myers: It's actually kind of sad. I grew up in a church, although I'm, of course, no longer a member of a church, but it is kind of weird to see this going on right now. The messages I've been getting in my email have just been insane. People who say this cracker is literally and physically the body of their god and that I'm doing this great act of heresy and sacrilege and horror -- even though I didn't actually do anything to it -- is disturbing. It's like discovering there are witch doctors lurking in your community and they've been doing weird practices.
MnIndy: What about the stories of US military personnel urinating on and otherwise abusing copies of the Koran in Iraq? Were you outraged by that, or is that a different version of this for you?
Myers: There's a subtle difference there -- maybe an important difference. I don't favor the idea of going to somebody's home or to something they own and possess and consider very important, like a graveyard -- going to a grave and desecrating that. That's something completely different. Because what you're doing is doing harm to something unique and something that is rightfully part of somebody else -- it's somebody else's ownership. The cracker is completely different. This is something that's freely handed out.
MnIndy: Do you see a parallel between this case and the furor in Denmark (and later the Islamic world at large) over cartoonists' depictions of Mohammed? It seems unlikely that these Catholics would take kindly to being compared to Islamic extremists, but death threats over the fate of a host suggests it's not an unfair characterization.
Myers: Of course! Both are demands that quirky sectarian peculiarities be given undue respect by those who don't believe in them. Furthermore, the majority of the email I'm receiving is making it explicit: they are telling me that I should not abuse their sacred icon, but that I should instead go do something sacrilegious with the Koran.
MnIndy: William Donohue's Catholic League really drove the anger over this. How do you see their role? Genuine protector of the faith? Or is this one of those red-meat issues that drives donations? Some other factor?
Myers: Bill Donohue's salary. This is Donohue's stock in trade: demagogic manufactured outrage to get the faithful to send him money to protect their religion from largely imaginary threats... threats that he conjures up.
Constantine's Sword is a book (and now a documentary) written by James Carroll, a former Catholic priest. It's a personal history of the unpleasant history of the church and anti-semitism, and shows that Catholicism has benefited from fueling an image of itself as always threatened by unbelievers -- Jews, Muslims, Satanists, atheists -- and that this reliance on hatred of the other has damaged the virtue of the faith. (Carroll is still a devout Catholic -- he just deplores the distortion of a message of love into a message of fear and hate.) The idea that Jews, for instance, want to steal consecrated wafers as an element of evil Jewish rites has been circulated fairly often, as a preliminary rationalization for oppression.
Curiously, many (but still a minority) of the email messages I have received have 'accused' me of being Jewish, addressing me as "jew boy" or "liberal pinko jew."
MnIndy: Are you concerned for your safety?
Myers: Well, most of the ravers who threaten me with horrible fates are far away, hiding in the safety of their mothers' bedrooms, hurling vituperation anonymously across the internet. These are largely frustrated losers who are venting. If (and I do not have reason to suspect anyone has gotten this demented) someone were serious about doing me harm, they wouldn't be sending me lurid warnings.
But really, the majority of the angry emails threaten nothing but to assault me with prayer.
MnIndy: Has the outrcry over your your post given you second thoughts about getting a host and treating "it with profound disrespect and heinous cracker abuse, all photographed and presented here on the web"?
Myers: The response has done nothing but confirm it: I have to do something. I'm not going to just let this disappear. It's just so darned weird that they're demanding that I offer this respect to a symbol that means nothing to me. Something will be done. It won't be gross. It won't be totally tasteless, but yeah, I'll do something that shows this cracker has no power. This cracker is nothing.
Comments 1 - 50 of 492 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #211046 by ShavenYak on July 15, 2008 at 1:03 pm
There's a subtle difference there -- maybe an important difference. I don't favor the idea of going to somebody's home or to something they own and possess and consider very important, like a graveyard -- going to a grave and desecrating that. That's something completely different. Because what you're doing is doing harm to something unique and something that is rightfully part of somebody else -- it's somebody else's ownership. The cracker is completely different. This is something that's freely handed out.
Not exactly - the cracker is given by the priest in a ritual exchange. The priest says "This is the body of Christ", the parishioner affirms by saying "Amen". For PZ to get hold of a cracker, someone is going to have to either steal it, or lie to the priest and say they really believe it is Jesus.
Other Comments by ShavenYak
3. Comment #211047 by Auraboy on July 15, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Crazy catholics displaying anti-islamic and anti-semitic sentiments? Say it isn't so! Ha. It probably does bear repeating what PZ has noticed, the general religious outrage is then re-directed at another 'faith', 'how dare you descrate our crackers, now go piss on the Koran!'...It's wonderful to see the rainbow of faith shoot itself in the head. Other Comments by Auraboy
4. Comment #211048 by Ian Bamlett on July 15, 2008 at 1:04 pm
PZ was called evil, (amoungst other things) yesterday morning on my local talk radio station here in Pittsburgh, PA. Anyone who's interested I can send the audio.
But the point is, if it made it onto my local show - someone somewhere is pushing their campaign against PZ far and wide.
Keep up the good work PZ!
Other Comments by Ian Bamlett
5. Comment #211051 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Myers: The response has done nothing but confirm it: I have to do something. I'm not going to just let this disappear. It's just so darned weird that they're demanding that I offer this respect to a symbol that means nothing to me. Something will be done. It won't be gross. It won't be totally tasteless, but yeah, I'll do something that shows this cracker has no power. This cracker is nothing.
I am not at ease with this. Just because a symbol has no respect for one person, does that mean another should not show no respect. I think all this will show is that PZ (and many of us) are sure that the cracker is nothing. But will it further the argument?
I have blogged about this. I am happy for anyone to try and change my mind.
Other Comments by Steve Zara
6. Comment #211058 by Am I Evil? on July 15, 2008 at 1:21 pm
I just think that some people out there feel the need to be outraged about something... doesn't matter about facts or contexts, they simply have to have their fury fix. Steve, I look upon this as an experiment. Sure, PZ could leave it all alone and let it all blow over and I'm sure the world will keep on turning. But there's a side of me that's rather intrigued to see what happens next...
Call me selfish but there you are! :)
Other Comments by Am I Evil?
7. Comment #211061 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Comment #211058 by Am I Evil?But there's a side of me that's rather intrigued to see what happens next...
Me too, actually! But I feel guilt about that.
Other Comments by Steve Zara
8. Comment #211062 by Auraboy on July 15, 2008 at 1:23 pm
It's an interesting point to be sure. I suppose it may not further the argument to have the cartoons of Mohammed, but in a society that allows freedom to insult (if not threaten) then I guess PZ should be able to get hold of a cracker and dismiss it's holiness in the same way I should be able to get hold of a satirical picture of Mohammed or Jesus and display it on the internet. I guess I see it coming down to a pretty basic matter of principle. Of course I would be happy to admit my point isn't deeply thought through yet. Other Comments by Auraboy
9. Comment #211067 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Comment #211062 by AuraboyI think it is the whole "getting hold of a cracker" that I feel uneasy about. It implies some breach of trust by someone at some point. Drawing satirical pictures is something that can be done alone. It isn't directly invasive of a ritual.
If PZ "blessed" some bread himself, or something like that, I would not feel so uneasy.
Other Comments by Steve Zara
10. Comment #211069 by irate_atheist on July 15, 2008 at 1:29 pm
5. Comment #211051 by Steve Zara -
Steve, are you seriously saying we should respect their absurd belief that the cracker has turned into a Jewish zombie?
Are you seriously suggesting that we - in any way - kow-tow or tug our forelocks to the people that brought us the Inquisition and, more recently, child rape on a large scale.
Seriously Steve, because that's what - in effect - you're saying. I've shifted my position on this from being very much aligned with you to thinking, 'No, fuck 'em. These people are aligned with apologists for child-rapists. These people are free to leave their fantasy-land anytime. Neither they, their imbecilic rituals nor their beliefs deserve our respect.'
This is not some 'Sealed Knot' playing out some harmless fun re-enacting a civil war battle. This is not an amateur dramatics group laying on a production of MacBeth. This is a bunch of adults who are credulous, gullible and stupid enough to actually believe that a piece of bread not only symbolises but is literally the body of their dead but not-dead man-god-son.
When left unchecked and unchallenged, these people - as has been shown time and again throughout history - are a mortal danger to themselves and others.
Like a run on a bank, they need to be stopped in their tracks at every opportunity. Otherwise the madness spreads.
Other Comments by irate_atheist
11. Comment #211070 by shemp333 on July 15, 2008 at 1:31 pm
I've got a suggestion. Upon getting ahold of one of these crispy christ crackers.... feed it to a friendly parrot. Polly wanna cracker? I'll bet he does. I imagine this won't be too offensive but gets the point made. Anybody got any other ideas? Other Comments by shemp333
12. Comment #211073 by Auraboy on July 15, 2008 at 1:34 pm
I did agree that the slight subterfuge required to get hold of the cracker could and possibly should be considered the only slightly worrying point - however as this whole scenario was brought up with a student making a protest against funding of a Catholic institution, I guess it's tough. The wafers are readily handed out. It's like someone handing me a free copy of the Koran in the street, I'm free to put it in the nearest bin if I want, it's been given to me. If I broke into a Mosque to steal a copy of the Koran, then, yeah, I see the point but I don't think this applies here. Other Comments by Auraboy
13. Comment #211074 by David J on July 15, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Cheesy Crispy Christ Crackers?
Rice Crispy Christies?
Christ-its?
Christs Ahoy?
Other Comments by David J
14. Comment #211075 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Comment #211069 by irate_atheistSeriously Steve, because that's what - in effect - you're saying.
Not really no. What I am saying is that we recognise that something has meaning for someone else. That is all.
This is a bunch of adults who are credulous, gullible and stupid enough to actually believe that a piece of bread not only symbolises but is literally the body of their dead but not-dead man-god-son.
We had better be really careful we aren't in the least bit credulous, gullible or stupid ourselves then, as there might be just a bit of hipocrisy.
We should argue our case recognising that everyone can occasionally be credulous, gullible and stupid sometimes. We make the case that rationalism helps cope with that.
Other Comments by Steve Zara
15. Comment #211082 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Of course, if Steve actually holds that a cracker is the flesh and blood of a deity, well, that's just plain fucking crazy!
Decades ago, I used to be a Catholic. I have to say I never really understood that bit.
Comment #211073 by Auraboy
The wafers are readily handed out. It's like someone handing me a free copy of the Koran in the street,
Not really. It is as if you went to a Koran-handling ceremony at which you knew it was normal practise to treat the book well, and according to certain customs. It isn't stealing, but it is a breach of trust.
Other Comments by Steve Zara
16. Comment #211083 by Ian Bamlett on July 15, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Comment #211051 by Steve Zara:
I am not at ease with this
Steve, you are without doubt the most excessively polite person I have ever 'met'. I suspect this is what gives you a sense of unease; it's just not in your make up to cause offense. This is an admirable quality but as a modus operandi in our dealings with the faithful it is a disaster. Deference and respect for beliefs we do not share is EXACTLY what the theists have counted on for untold generations. It's got to stop.
Surely you have heard the argument time and time again that religion should have no special right to respect that is not accorded to other beliefs on matters of, say, politics or sporting affiliation? I am sure you agree with this. I think therefore it must be the idea of 'direct action' which troubles you. If toasting a cracker in a Bunsen burner or melting it in an acid bath (two ideas for you PZ) is the best we can do then we have long way to go.
Other Comments by Ian Bamlett
17. Comment #211084 by David J on July 15, 2008 at 1:42 pm
You could have the wafer carbon-dated to see if it really became Jesus' body from 2000 years ago. Or you could have it tested for Jesus' DNA. This reminds me of the magical Masonic underpants worn by the Mormons. They say it protects them from harm, but some guy on Youtube got a pair and shot them full of holes with his pistol. I say submit the wafer to scientific examination. Other Comments by David J
18. Comment #211085 by MatthewJBarnard on July 15, 2008 at 1:43 pm
I'm actually not sure how I feel about this, to be honest. Is it really right to go out of your way to do something that you know offends so many people? Certainly PZ has every right to tell anyone he wants about the fact (and it is a fact) that it's a cracker, but might it not be crossing the line to put a video of the cracker being "desecrated" online? What purpose does it serve? It seems to me that the point is to anger people.If, as argued above, this is just being used by the Catholic Leage as a tactic to garner donations: why help them out?!
Other Comments by MatthewJBarnard
19. Comment #211087 by bugaboo on July 15, 2008 at 1:43 pm
5. Comment #211051 by Steve ZaraI think I maybe with you here on this Steve. I guess its like trying to convince some parent that his wife and children are stupid and ugly (to paraphrase H.L Mencken) Its not going to achieve that much.
Although it might persuade some sitting on the fence within Catholicism that what they are expected to believe is nonsense. I often think that many within that church simply flex their belief muscles at each other wanting to be perceived as more virtuous . "I REALLY believe in the transubstantiation but doubt that YOU have enough faith". Some, eventually, will come to their senses and this may help.
Other Comments by bugaboo
20. Comment #211088 by William1w1 on July 15, 2008 at 1:44 pm
I can see your position Steve Zara, but I'm afraid I have to agree with Irate. Besides, if covertly stealing a cracker can get this kind of response, then it has to be done, and often. That way, maybe the Catholics will loosen their firm hold on 'crackergods'. It's the same idea as ridiculing Islam excessively in order to hopefully modernize a lot of them. Hitchens made a good point about the whole thing in one of his speeches about the issue (that issue being the Muslims, not the crackergods).Other Comments by William1w1
21. Comment #211089 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Comment #211083 by Ian BamlettSurely you have heard the argument time and time again that religion should have no special right to respect that is not accorded to other beliefs on matters of, say, politics or sporting affiliation?
I fully agree. However, what seems to be implied is that people who are religious have less rights.
If someone were to show their contempt for a football team by buying dolls of that team's mascot and, say, burning them, and videoing the result, I would think that rather a crass thing to do. It would give me an icky feeling.
It turns out I was wrong about the original "offender". What he did was decent, and above board. It was a targetted protest against funding of religious ceremonies at a particular site, and against a particular group who knew about this. Good for him.
Other Comments by Steve Zara
22. Comment #211091 by irate_atheist on July 15, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Steve - don't get me wrong, I understand where you're coming from. It's that, in this particular instance, I have little to no sympathy whatsoever with the aggrieved party.
The damgae their cult leaders and followers have done - and in many instances continue to do - to humanity is almost uncalculable.
I am of the opinion (opinion, please note) that your sympathy is misplaced and your empathetic feelings would be better directed to a group of individuals who are more deserving of them.
The action was a bit 'crass' but I have no time for the whining of the lunatic 'victims'. They choose to believe in this absurdity, they should expect to have the piss taken out of them. If only it was done more often and more publicly.
Other Comments by irate_atheist
23. Comment #211093 by Epinephrine on July 15, 2008 at 1:46 pm
I don't go out of my way to upset people - whether about religion or other topics. I can see Steve's point about being uncomfortable getting a communion wafer dishonestly, I'd feel similarly guilty asking for a free bible to deface. One I had purchased, sure. If it was given to me, and I hadn't requested it, fine.
However, I do see why PZ might feel he needs to do this - the reaction that some Catholics had to the issue needs to be addressed, the folly pointed out. We didn't start this to upset anyone, they upset us, by treating a person with less respect than a bit of stale bread. They continue to rant about how sacred bread is, and threatening people over it. That's what deserves a challenge - the idea that the bread is sacred, or special, or endowed with supernatural properties.
I don't care one way or another about desecrating the wafer, but the notion that it is magical or special needs to be addressed. The fact that anyone can think it is reasonable to threaten another person over it is ludicrous. The discourses on gluten content, and that gluten free hosts can't be used? This type of idiocy needs a spotlight shone on it. I would bet that many who call themselves catholic have no idea that the church believes that the host actually becomes Jesus, but only if there's sufficient gluten.
Personally, I'm all for attacking the idea, not the object. I'm not sure if there's a way to disentangle the two.
Other Comments by Epinephrine
24. Comment #211095 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Comment #211091 by irate_atheistYou are starting to change my mind.
I would be happier if PZ did what he does as a specific protest about something to do with the Catholic church.
But just doing it because "it's just a cracker" won't achieve much, I think.
Comment #211093 by Epinephrine
I don't care ione way or another about desecrating the wafer, but the notion that it is magical or special needs to be addressed.
Sure, but I don't see how this achieved it. The original Cook protest was effective because he made use of the fact that those in the Church had a certain belief.
Just stating that "it isn't magical" doesn't deal at all with the belief that it is.
However, I have no idea how to adress that belief....
Other Comments by Steve Zara
25. Comment #211097 by irate_atheist on July 15, 2008 at 1:50 pm
22. Comment #211089 by Steve Zara -
We know they would trample on your rights if they could. Hell - some would even have you stoned to death.
Some of them might even support Chelsea if they thought they could get away with it.
Other Comments by irate_atheist
26. Comment #211100 by Gregg Townsend on July 15, 2008 at 1:53 pm
18. Comment #211084 by David J
David,
My step-father had a spark from arch welding land on his jeans and burn through the fabric only to light his nylon "Jesus jamies" on fire. The doctor who patched up his burn told him the would would have been the size of a match-head if he hadn't been a Mormon. As it turns out, the burn was the size of a skillet!
Some protection.
Other Comments by Gregg Townsend
27. Comment #211101 by Quetzalcoatl on July 15, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Steve-
I would be happier if PZ did what he does as a specific protest about something to do with the Catholic church.
But just doing it because "it's just a cracker" won't achieve much, I think.
It's not just "it's just a cracker" any more though, is it? It's become "it's not just a cracker, and the barrage of abuse I've received has convinced me that something should be done".
Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl
28. Comment #211102 by Auraboy on July 15, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Well some people are deeply offended by the burning of their national flag. I don't generally go out of my way to burn flags to be honest I have better things to do but it doesn't offend me unless they burn people. I really have been handed both free bibles and Korans and it should be perfectly within my right to do what the fuck I want with them. Personally I don't deface books and in these past cases I chose to hand them back with an explanation that I'd actually already read these texts and didn't believe them or want them. However, if I wanted to I could walk away and burn the books to make a point. Other Comments by Auraboy
29. Comment #211103 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Comment #211097 by irate_atheistNo, not all. I have friends who are Catholics. One even came to my civil partnership ceremony.
Thanks all for the discussion. It has been useful. I think my mind has nearly been changed. I am definitely wavering.
Other Comments by Steve Zara
30. Comment #211105 by bugaboo on July 15, 2008 at 1:56 pm
IrateThere are (at least) two approaches available: The full frontal assault and a "pincer movement " if you will. Remember that there are a lot of children involved who may be more amenable to the "good cop " approach. Don't you think?
Other Comments by bugaboo
31. Comment #211106 by Ian Bamlett on July 15, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Well, I can tell you now, if PZ 'desecrates' the cracker I am posting a You tube vid as soon as I possibly can after him doing the same.
Only reason not to do it now is I am a nobody. But I would do it in solidarity with PZ.
Damn right.
Other Comments by Ian Bamlett
32. Comment #211107 by Auraboy on July 15, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Of course I don't believe PZ Myers would have been so adamant in this display if it weren't for the well organised hate campaign against first the student and now himself. Sometimes mutual respect breaks down and making a stand is all you have left in the argument. Other Comments by Auraboy
33. Comment #211108 by Gregg Townsend on July 15, 2008 at 1:57 pm
24. Comment #211091 by irate_atheist
The action was a bit 'crass' but I have no time for the whining of the lunatic 'victims'. They choose to believe in this absurdity, they should expect to have the piss taken out of them.
Some things just need to be posted twice!
edit- emphasis added
Other Comments by Gregg Townsend
34. Comment #211109 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Comment #211101 by QuetzalcoatlIt's not just "it's just a cracker" any more though, is it? It's become "it's not just a cracker, and the barrage of abuse I've received has convinced me that something should be done".
I guess I am not sure what this does. Shows that PZ is not afraid of a cracker... knew that already.
Other Comments by Steve Zara
35. Comment #211111 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Comment #211108 by Gregg TownsendI think that in a free, democratic society, people should be free to believe in absurdities. Even PZ has said that.
I think if PZ targetted a protest against specific nasty aspects of the Catholic church that everyone implicitly supports by being a member, that would be a positive thing.
But if we are going to ridicule people just for believing absurdities, we are going to have little time for anything else.
Other Comments by Steve Zara
36. Comment #211112 by clodhopper on July 15, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Sometimes I think like Irate that, oh boy, have they got this coming to them. But then it's all about changing hearts and minds isn't it?
I remeber the last time someone tried to change my mind using ridicule and humiliation it turned out to be a very bad strategy effectively closing off all communication and leading to entrenched positions.
Oh, I don't know.
Other Comments by clodhopper
37. Comment #211113 by Auraboy on July 15, 2008 at 2:02 pm
It's scientific. If PZ Myers is struck by lightning we know he was wrong. Dead wrong. Other Comments by Auraboy
38. Comment #211116 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 2:04 pm
I remeber the last time someone tried to change my mind using ridicule and humiliation it turned out to be a very bad strategy effectively closing off all communication and leading to entrenched positions.
Exactly.
Comment #211115 by Brian English
Brilliant Brian. A protest like this is unlikely to cause congnitive discomfort, only emotional discomfort. Which may be satisfying to cause but...
Other Comments by Steve Zara
39. Comment #211121 by decius on July 15, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Comment #211113 by AuraboyIt's scientific. If PZ Myers is struck by lightning we know he was wrong.
No, that would just be the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. :)
Other Comments by decius
40. Comment #211123 by Cluebot on July 15, 2008 at 2:08 pm
I also suspect further acts of "host desecration" will serve the message of the hatemongers, who could not wish for a better target to fix their followers' outrage upon. Given the present day cultural convention for blind acceptance of religion, even the sane may be persuaded by watered-down versions of the rhetoric.
The really important question is whether this will strengthen or weaken that cultural convention.
That may depend upon how abject the response is. There lies the problem: The power to tip the scales the way we want lies in the wrong hands, and they are not necessarily stupid enough to serve our needs.
Still, this whole sordid affair should give Pat Condell something to talk about. :)
Other Comments by Cluebot
41. Comment #211126 by decius on July 15, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Am I the only one experiencing an unusual sluggishness in page loading here? Other Comments by decius
42. Comment #211127 by Epinephrine on July 15, 2008 at 2:11 pm
I don't think that believing in an absurdity is a huge problem, so long as it doesn't interfere in how you play with others.
If you assault people and threaten them over offenses to cereal products, you may have an issue.
I'm not convinced that anyone should simply desecrate hosts, as pointed out, it accomplishes little. It doesn't make any convincing point, except exposing the rather ridiculous beliefs to public attention. If there had been no outcry, or people had simply plead that Cook return it, rather than assault him, I think that the whole thing would be over.
I am a bit torn over the issue, I don't think that doing hurtful things with no point is the right way to behave, but if the manner in which it is done benefits society by helping cure the delusional? I'm curious as to what PZ has in mind, and whether it will be helpful or simply insulting. I'm not sure what one can accomplish with the wafer, but if good can come from it then I support him. If it's simply to offend, I'm not.
Other Comments by Epinephrine
43. Comment #211128 by Auraboy on July 15, 2008 at 2:12 pm
I'd argue that ridicule and satire is the essential first ingredient in positions that are already entrenched. Rational argument has effectively been outlawed by one side already. Changing positions may require deep and thoughtful argument but the problem is the atmosphere of outrage should someone question this is already here. It's not entrenchment fostered by ridicule, it's already in place. I'd humbly suggest that satire helps at least some people laugh at the situation, maybe even some Catholics who can see how disturbing the over-reaction is with death threats. Other Comments by Auraboy
44. Comment #211129 by Gregg Townsend on July 15, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Steve and Brian,
I was especially pleased with irate's comment that
The action was a bit 'crass' but I have no time for the whining of the lunatic 'victims'.
To be clear, my opinion is PZ was 'crass' with his initial threat and is still being crass with continuing to threaten. I stated on another thread that I would no more do this than eat a pork sandwich in a Synagogue. I believe it doesn't win us an attentive ear to attack people's sacred cows. Still, I have no sympathy for the overreaction of the so-called victims of the great cracker conspiracy.
That's why I reposted irate's post.
Other Comments by Gregg Townsend
45. Comment #211130 by Logicel on July 15, 2008 at 2:13 pm
An Eucharist supposedly was desecrated awhile ago on youtube by The Science Pundit (I have not watched it, it was mentioned on Pharyngula).I, myself, could not pretend to be a Catholic in order to spirit away a wafer. It would feel icky to do that, even though I am considered a Catholic by the Church, because I was baptized and confirmed. However, one needs not to be in a state of sin, and if so, must be confessed before receiving the host, so I don't fit the bill. The rules are dumb and meaningless, but those are the rules governing the so-called free giving out of wafers.
Despite all that, I still agree with PZ, that at this point, if he does get a consecrated wafer (and how can he prove that it is?), he needs to follow through and desecrate it.
Other Comments by Logicel
46. Comment #211133 by clodhopper on July 15, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Little 'uns don't get the 'choice'. I didn't. I was told to go to church and told to pray and told to do this that or the other. I was told what to believe; I had it drummed into me day after nauseating day. My insides screamed out to question it all but it was either ignored or not tolerated. You go through painful transition undoing all this potent conditioning. People can be anywhere or nowhere on this road to change and deserve all the help we can give em. Other Comments by clodhopper
47. Comment #211134 by Gregg Townsend on July 15, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Decius,
I'm having the same difficulty. Coupled with my slow typing skills the conversation has moved on before I even join it.
:)
Other Comments by Gregg Townsend
48. Comment #211142 by Cartomancer on July 15, 2008 at 2:21 pm
I've said this before, but I really do have a hard time believing that the grief and upset touted by catholics over this incident is at all genuine. I've tried running through all kinds of analogous situations in my mind, and there's one thing that just doesn't add up here - these people are living in 21st century America. If they were some isolated tribe worshipping a totem pole festooned with human skulls, and this was the only life they had ever known, there would be very good grounds to desist from ridiculing them. If they were born and raised in a poor muslim country with little or no access to television, the internet or modern science education, similar comments would apply. In such cases there is little doubt that the offense the people would feel is entirely genuine - in their minds there isn't even a shred of doubt that the dodgy metaphysics of their beliefs is true.
But these people are Americans. With the internet. That's how they heard about it in the first place. There is no way on earth they could be ignorant about the fact that their metaphysical account is not universally held and respected. They go about their daily lives surrounded by people who couldn't give two hoots about host desecration, and the KNOW this.
In fact, I would go further and say that it is almost impossible to believe that they sincerely and truly believe in the metaphysics themselves. I have never met any Roman catholic in the modern west who really, genuinely, believes in transubstantiation. Oh, many of them profess to believe in it, but that's because their religion tells them that they should. They feel they SHOULD believe it, that believing it is somehow a virtuous and noble thing to do. They make such a fuss when someone bursts their bubble because they can't actually believe it, they know it's silly medieval nonsense and incompatible with everything they know about physics. They make all the noise to cover up their nagging uncertainty - the more vocally and outrageously offended they appear the more chance there is that noboby will notice their own doubts.
As Dan Dennett says, there aren't any good reasons for even a basically educated person to believe in god anymore, but there sure are a lot of reasons to pretend you do.
What we are seeing here is not the same as the medieval rioting and pogroms directed against jews. Yes, there's the same element of attempted scapegoating, but the medievals really did believe there was something deeply metaphysically wrong with host desecration, whereas modern catholics only feel that they SHOULD believe it. Because their priest told them to in Sunday school. Because that's what catholics are supposed to believe.
It matters because the argument for respecting weird but sincerely held beliefs is based on the fact that callously ridiculing them would cause deep personal grief and upset. I do not think that belief in transubstantiation among modern western catholics is a sincerely held belief, and the only harm that exposing and ridiculing it will cause stems from exposing people as frauds and pointing out something about them that they do not want publicised - that they pretend to believe these things out of slavish deference to self-appointed and morally bankrupt authorities.
Yes, some degree of tolerance and compassion should be extended to people like this. But not compassion and respect toward what they claim to believe - respect and compassion that they are so empty and uncertain that they feel the need to put up this ridiculous societal pretense in the first place. And people who issue vocal death threats via email have discarded their right to this tolerance in my opinion.
Other Comments by Cartomancer
49. Comment #211143 by Steve Zara on July 15, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Gregg-I agree with you, and Brian, and Clod.
Other Comments by Steve Zara
50. Comment #211145 by Hal in Howell on July 15, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Maybe PZ's "demonstration" should be to get any ol' cracker and not a genuine bona fide "god cracker" and say it is a "god cracker" and publicly hold it hostage in a baggy.I know it is a bit deceptive, but how ridiculous the god-botherers would look, after all the righteous indignation, when it is eventually revealed that PZ actually bought the cracker at Tesco or Wal-Mart or where ever. PZ would have not committed any "desecration" and the god-botherers would be forced to admit they couldn't tell the difference between the Tesco and the Divine Cracker (well, they would never admit it, and would not believe that it wasn't a "god cracker", but it would cause much consternation and confusion.) Just a thought.
Other Comments by Hal in Howell
Comment Entry: Please Login
Register a new account
Upcoming Events:
DVDs
'The Genius of Charles Darwin: The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'The Genius of Charles Darwin' DVD
'The Enemies of Reason: The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Richard Dawkins: Appearances & Events 2007-2008' DVD
'Enemies of Reason' DVD
'Root of All Evil?' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
'Voices of Science' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
1. Comment #211045 by Nails on July 15, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Quality words from a man of wisdom.
Just grow up guys, it's only a wafer.
(Think of Alvin & the Chipmonks: "It's a raisin, Dave!")
Other Comments by Nails