Sunday, January 11, 2009 | Reason : Interviews | print version

Print | Comments |

Richard Dawkins on board with a pro-atheist message

by Richard Dawkins, LA Times

Reposted from:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-dawkins-qa12-2009jan12,0,1625954,full.story

'The God Delusion's' author, a backer of a British Humanist Assn. bus ad campaign, talks about the collision of science and religion.

By Henry Chu
11:59 AM PST, January 11, 2009
REPORTING FROM OXFORD, ENGLAND -- All they are saying is give atheism a chance.

Earlier this month, 800 buses rolled out of depots across Britain plastered with advertisements cheerfully informing people that "there's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

Sponsored by the British Humanist Assn., the ad campaign is the brainchild of a comedian who had seen Christian messages on buses, looked up the websites of the organizations behind them and found warnings that, as a nonbeliever, she was destined to go to hell.

The new ads have attracted little controversy in Britain, a secular country that finds religious fervor a tad awkward. Perhaps the biggest kerfuffle has been over the word "probably" in the slogan, which the British advertising authority said should be thrown in to keep the ad from being potentially misleading, on the grounds that no one can say with 100% certainty that God does not exist.

The campaign's highest-profile backer is Richard Dawkins, a biology professor at Oxford University and the author of "The God Delusion," a defense of scientifically based atheism that became a bestseller in Britain and the U.S. Dawkins pledged to match donations to the campaign up to $8,250 -- a figure that was quickly reached.

Passionate but gentlemanly, with a professorial air, Dawkins spoke recently with The Times in his Victorian-era home in Oxford.

Were you surprised that so many individual donors responded to the campaign to mount bus advertisements?

I'm surprised and delighted but also somewhat embarrassed. The original target was 5,500 pounds [about $8,250], which I offered to match and we thought that we'd be lucky to get. . . . It would have been enough for buses for a brief period in London.

What happened was huge numbers of people gave small sums -- 10 pounds, 15 pounds. . . . The final figure is something like 130,000. That's why I said I was embarrassed, because that is too much money to spend on a bus campaign. That much money would have been better spent doing something else. . . .

I was actually in favor of diverting the money to something else, which I thought the donors would approve. But other members of the group felt that [as] the money had been given for the bus campaign they were legally obliged to spend it on that campaign.

Click here to continue reading the interview:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-dawkins-qa12-2009jan12,0,3974830.story?page=1

Posted: Sunday, January 11, 2009 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 138 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #317329 by gyokusai on January 11, 2009 at 9:25 pm

Nice! And I liked the insertion of "probably" from the start, for the same reasons that Richard now cites.

I love this campaign.

^_^J.

Other Comments by gyokusai

2. Comment #317331 by Fuller on January 11, 2009 at 9:27 pm

I still prefer 'almost certainly'. But it's all good.

Hey, new book in September! Can't wait.

Other Comments by Fuller

3. Comment #317336 by gyokusai on January 11, 2009 at 9:36 pm

Yeah looking forward to that, too! But I'm also anxious to see that children's book Richard's been talking about for quite some time now...

I mean, look at the 1991 Royal Institution Christmas Lectures! Isn't it lovely how Richard talks with children? This book is going to be, like, totally marvelous.

^_^J.

Other Comments by gyokusai

4. Comment #317353 by mnphenow on January 11, 2009 at 10:10 pm

"I mean, look at the 1991 Royal Institution Christmas Lectures! Isn't it lovely how Richard talks with children? This book is going to be, like, totally marvelous."

No doubt. I can't wait. A perfect gift for my godchild!

Other Comments by mnphenow

5. Comment #317356 by gyokusai on January 11, 2009 at 10:19 pm

Indeed!

Now, back on topic, I wouldn't call "enjoy your life" hedonistic, and even if it were, I don't think that would necessarily be a bad thing. Plus, "Spend your life doing good," in the context of religulous overkill, sounds a bit like what advertisers are fond of calling a "me too!" message---and some idiots might even swoop down on it as a "me too! but cheaper!" and foam about it.

I think some "cross-over" might have done nicely though. For example:

"There's probably no God. Now stop worrying, do good, and enjoy your life."

Or maybe:

"There's probably no God. Now stop worrying, enjoy your life, and help others enjoy their lives too."

Or something along these lines.

^_^J.

Other Comments by gyokusai

6. Comment #317368 by DalaiDrivel on January 11, 2009 at 10:49 pm

So, ironically, you have an evangelistic zeal about this.

As a science teacher, it is an important thing. "Evangelistic" would be an unfortunate word, if it suggested loyalty to some sort of book. It's loyalty in my case to scientific evidence.

"Zeal" I'm happy to live with.

The cheeky bugger to suggest that analogy!

Granted it's been done before.

I feel there are two ways this type of slight can be answered- very carefully and/or very wittily.

I think RD was straight-forward and left no loose ends to tear at.

"Evangelistic" does, incidentally, refer to loyalty to a particular book.

I would have liked, if I were in RD's place, to go on the offensive and accuse the interviewer of insinuating that atheism is a religion and embarrass him with an explanation of why it is not. It would very probably have been unwise though because I imagine the explanation would have been deviously distorted...

As for the "zeal," I applaud Dawkins and can proudly say that he's rubbed off on me!

Other Comments by DalaiDrivel

7. Comment #317377 by Layla Nasreddin on January 11, 2009 at 11:24 pm

From the article:

Do you worry that you might be causing people a lot of angst, since for many people religion is an important part of their identity?

It doesn't worry me very much. I don't have that much sympathy if people get their consolation from an illusion. I wouldn't wish to shatter the illusions of somebody on their deathbed or something, but I think on balance, people should be more thick-skinned.

Oooh, harsh...I like it! Speaking of harsh (well, sort of), I also liked these remarks from an Irish Times article on the bus campaign a lot (note the dismissal of those offended by it as "pathetic cry-babies!"):

Revered writer and evangelical atheist Richard Dawkins - who is vice president of the BHA - told The Irish Times that an almost identical campaign beginning on buses in Barcelona next week had the Spanish Catholic church "shrieking in horror - surely an inspiration to the Irish to follow suit and then go further".

[...]

Dawkins, in a characteristic response when asked for his view on those who might be offended at such advertisements, said they were "pathetic cry-babies". He says the bus campaign has raised "an astounding £130,000, almost all of it in small donations from thousands and thousands of ordinary people, sick and tired of being taken for granted as docile, religious sheep".

In fact, Dawkins says the British and Spanish slogan "doesn't go far enough . . . For Ireland, I would suggest: 'There's no such thing as a Catholic child. Protect your children from priestly indoctrination - until they are old enough to decide for themselves.'"

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

8. Comment #317382 by Tom Morris on January 11, 2009 at 11:44 pm

Congratulations on the bus campaign. I have seen about six buses in London with the message on them, although I have yet to ride one of our non-theistic buses. They've certainly rattled the hypersensitive components of the religious community, which is fun.

That said, I think that the ASA stuff is ridiculous. Surely, a non-religious message is basically a political message. Political messages aren't bound by the same rules as adverts for products and services. There is a difference between "There is no God" and "Scientifically proven to make your whites whiter!".

If the ASA requires "probably" to be added, then surely, we should start insisting that this level of doubt is added to all political statements. "The Conservative Party may possibly be better for Britain than Labour". "We can't guarantee it, but you might pay lower taxes if you vote for us". "Under Labour, you probably won't catch MRSA, but, well, you might!" And we should do it for the religious adverts too. Surely, if we take this to the logical extreme, all adverts should start having error bars.

Other Comments by Tom Morris

9. Comment #317384 by memeweaver on January 11, 2009 at 11:48 pm

"Evangelism" has been used as a purely marketing term for decades now, quite long enough to shrug off any particular attachment to a creed.

see for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_evangelist

Other Comments by memeweaver

10. Comment #317397 by DalaiDrivel on January 12, 2009 at 12:22 am

Memeweaver,

Nice name. It evokes some intriguing imagery in my opinion and suggests influencing norms and behaviour. Very cool :)

Thanks for your correction. I've never heard of evangelism used outside a religious context, or without the intention to link something with religion.

It would seem from my own tentative personal experience, that in a purely technical sense, "evangelism" can bear other connotations, but in the sense of practical everyday application, attempts to utilise these connotations will lead to confusion and false association.

This is my own personal experience though. Therefore, it desperately requires corroboration!

Here`s the dictionary.com definition of "evangelism":

e⋅van⋅ge⋅lism
/ɪˈvænd�\'əˌlɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [i-van-juh-liz-uhm] Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. the preaching or promulgation of the gospel; the work of an evangelist.
2. evangelicalism.
3. missionary zeal, purpose, or activity.
Origin:
1620–30; evangel 2 -ism
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

Other Comments by DalaiDrivel

11. Comment #317400 by rundmc on January 12, 2009 at 12:28 am

Yay for bumper sticker identity politics.

Other Comments by rundmc

12. Comment #317427 by Friend Giskard on January 12, 2009 at 1:03 am

There is a logical pathway from religion to doing atrocious things. I don't think there's a logical path that leads you from atheism to that kind of thing.
Of course there are atheists who do terrible things. But I don't think you can derive it [from atheism itself].

This is true enough, but in the interest of not being (wilfully?) misunderstood, one should always add that is there is no logical path from atheism to doing good deeds either.

Other Comments by Friend Giskard

13. Comment #317430 by andersemil on January 12, 2009 at 1:03 am

I've got a bumpersticker for classic cars: "There's almost certainly no God, so who needs airbags??"

Other Comments by andersemil

14. Comment #317449 by RightWingAtheist on January 12, 2009 at 1:30 am

I like the casual sound of "probably", and also the Dunkin' Donuts motif.

Other Comments by RightWingAtheist

15. Comment #317451 by sbooder on January 12, 2009 at 1:32 am

Dose anyone know what the original religious ads were that sparked the idea in the comedian for the Bus campaign, please?

Other Comments by sbooder

16. Comment #317452 by Rosbif on January 12, 2009 at 1:32 am

I was interested that the Prof was embarrassed by the success of the fund-raising and thought that the money could be better spend on something else.
There are of course, many good causes and ads on buses may not serve an immediate need for many who are suffering. However, I would argue that if it gets people thinking/talking and listening to reason, then in the future there will be a much larger group of people to provide secular help to others. Churches raise hugh sums of money for their causes due to weight of numbers which gives them political power as well as free advertising by putting the word "Christian" in front of any aid group or good cause.
I see nothing wrong in spending £140,000 on bus ads if it generates interst in reason and non-religion. If it swells the ranks of the thoughtful, then it is indeed doing a lot of good and in the long term, is probably better for the world's crises than the Help-for-Souls campaigns of religion.

I would love to see this campaign continue throughout the year with a veriety of slogans which are designed to bring people towards the reasoned-side even if they do not state the entire athiest point of view in a single phrase.
I think humour and non-alienating slogans will serve us better than stating conclusion which may seem obvious to someone who has studied the evidence but seem strident to the easily offended.
Of course. any thing that offends Steven Green is probably worth considering.

But who else could be offended by:
"There are probably no ghosts, so turn the light out and go to sleep"
"There are probably no monsters, so stop looking under the bed before lights-out"
:)
These mixed with the current slogan and others regarding other long redundant dieties may make people realise the true level of evidence for the current in-fashion belief systems.

Other Comments by Rosbif

17. Comment #317457 by PJG on January 12, 2009 at 1:45 am

My husband and I (damn, I sound like the queen) thought this campaign was a bit silly at first. Having spent many happy hours (exaggeration) critiquing religious adverts, we didn't think it would do anything to help people see reason or change their opinions - the threat of our local church that non-believers would burn hasn't changed ours!

We were wrong.

This campaign has clearly raised the issue of God's existence and we will now be donating to the campaign.

If anyone wants to criticise donations to this cause as being money that should be given to charity, I would like to say that we already give a great deal to charity and how we spend our money is our business. I don't give money to a church in order to maintain buildings that are only used by a few people, but don't condemn people who do, it's their choice.

Other Comments by PJG

18. Comment #317466 by tims on January 12, 2009 at 1:56 am

Congratulations with this fantastic campaign.
Maybe there will be a day that we can see some wise words on buses all over the world.
I also agree with "gyokusai" about the "cross-over" versions .
Please continue this great ideas , i love it !!!

Other Comments by tims

19. Comment #317469 by bamboospitfire on January 12, 2009 at 1:59 am

A great interview. Professor Dawkins's treatment of the usual needling (but, in this case, good-humoured) questions is completely effortless.

I love the tinted specs.

By the way, did anyone notice the deeply ironic advertisement on the third page of the article'

RAPTURE

No smoking.
No gaming.
No distractions.

PLATINUM
HOTEL - LOUNGE - SPA
LAS VEGAS

877.211.9211

Can we dare to hope that one day all the fundies will be transported bodily to Arizona' ;-)

Other Comments by bamboospitfire

20. Comment #317495 by Richard Dawkins on January 12, 2009 at 2:48 am

There is a logical pathway from religion to doing atrocious things. I don't think there's a logical path that leads you from atheism to that kind of thing.
Of course there are atheists who do terrible things. But I don't think you can derive it [from atheism itself].

This is true enough, but in the interest of not being (wilfully?) misunderstood, one should always add that is there is no logical path from atheism to doing good deeds either.

Yes, I said that, but he couldn't record everything, and I guess he must have omitted it. He was a very nice fellow, by the way.

Richard

Other Comments by Richard Dawkins

21. Comment #317535 by SurfDude on January 12, 2009 at 4:10 am

Good article. Not a hint of a sneer from the interviewer. Sounds like he is either a credible journalist, a rationalist, or both.

Could it be that the voice of reason in the US is gaining in confidence a little?

Other Comments by SurfDude

22. Comment #317543 by Johnny O on January 12, 2009 at 4:39 am

Passionate but gentlemanly, with a professorial air

At last, someone that recognises the fact that RD isn't the shrill, reductionist, that people who disagree with him, make him out to be.

Good article.

Other Comments by Johnny O

23. Comment #317556 by richpierce on January 12, 2009 at 5:17 am

Regarding having more money to spend on a bus campaign, my two cents is to make January "give atheism a chance" month. Next year in January, spend the money on bus posters again; that is, do the same thing, but not necessarily with any fanfare, and again every January until the money is used up.

Other Comments by richpierce

24. Comment #317563 by Deek on January 12, 2009 at 5:25 am

Well I had a nasty shock. I clicked onto the LA times article and glanced at the main photo and caption. Somehow I misread it dreadfully and my mind inserted the phrase "Richards Dawkins and wife Polly Toynbee"

My immediate thought was "bloody hell! no gentle breakfast banter over the kippers in that house then"

I'm not normally so slapdash but what on earth could have been distracting me?

Other Comments by Deek

25. Comment #317573 by Christopher Davis on January 12, 2009 at 5:40 am

"Can we dare to hope that one day all the fundies will be transported bodily to Arizona' ;-)"---comment #19, by bamboospitfire

Hey now! Them's fightin' words!

If all the fundies show up here, I'll have to move back to Alabama where the weather is not near as nice. Of course if all the fundies are here then the roads in Alabama would be a lot less crowded...but no, send those weak-minded simpletons somewhere else, I love my desert paradise.

Other Comments by Christopher Davis

26. Comment #317581 by richpierce on January 12, 2009 at 5:53 am

...the ad campaign is the brainchild of a comedian who had seen Christian messages on buses, looked up the websites of the organizations behind them and found warnings that, as a nonbeliever, she was destined to go to hell.

Just read the question/answer regarding "relax" about whether this is an appropiate phrase. I've read similar questions on YouTube and some people are belittling the slogan because they don't understand what motivated this part of the slogan. (That's my guess anyway.) Was the phrase "Now stop worrying and enjoy your life" inspred by Ariane's experience as described in her letter (previously posted here) and by the interviewer in the introduction?

If this is true, then whenever asked this kind of question, the answer should refer to other messages Ariane saw on buses, after which she "looked up the websites of the organizations behind them and found warnings that, as a nonbeliever, she was destined to go to hell." Which if true, would definitely be a cause for worry.

Other Comments by richpierce

27. Comment #317584 by Vadjong on January 12, 2009 at 6:05 am

I love the colloquial tone in this interview.
That is definitely the best attitude to adopt in the face of all the angst ridden relibabble (together with some cruelly incisive wit about the obvious conundrums in belief systems).
Be normal and keep it simple.

Other Comments by Vadjong

28. Comment #317607 by Disbelief on January 12, 2009 at 6:37 am

Is Britain a secular country? I thought not.

Other Comments by Disbelief

29. Comment #317625 by bamboospitfire on January 12, 2009 at 6:57 am

Christopher Davis - I'm sure there would be a suitable spot somewhere in the state. Not necessarily near to, well, anything really. :-)

Other Comments by bamboospitfire

30. Comment #317627 by mixmastergaz on January 12, 2009 at 7:00 am

Much as I approve of the ads, after reading this I agreed with Richard that the amount raised could perhaps be better spent on other things...but then I couldn't think on what I would rather spend it! (Obviously I can think of plenty of worthy causes, but the donations were made with the intention of promoting atheism/reason. I'm wondering what other means might achieve that particular end)

I'm having same vague, unformed thoughts about this whole business. It seems to me that this is an opportunity of sorts. Rather like the people attending Richard's lectures that he describes in the above article, I think this campaign has demonstrated to us that there are more of us than we realised, and that our spending-power is greater than we realised. But I'm wondering what we should do about it. This all started because Ariane Sherine had a bright idea and acted upon it; one idea that has now had truly international consequences and captured imaginations (as well as column inches and air-time).

Does anyone else have any good ideas(q.m.)

Other Comments by mixmastergaz

31. Comment #317641 by jimbob on January 12, 2009 at 7:11 am

Great to see the campaign doing well. One tiny change I'd have liked to have seen would have been "gods" [plural]. That way, the point about most people already being atheistic with regard to most deities in history could have helped get the basic message across.

BTW, off topic but worth sharing: I just heard a George W from his farewell press conference this morning. He told the assembled media that they had "misunderestimated him" during his presidency.

For once, it's hard to disagree with him! ;-)

Other Comments by jimbob

32. Comment #317643 by DamnDirtyApe on January 12, 2009 at 7:13 am

32. Comment #317641 by jimbob on January 12, 2009 at 7:11 am

That man is going to get that word in the dictionary, by hook or by crook.

29. Comment #317607 by Disbelief on January 12, 2009 at 6:37 am

Queen is technically head of state. I'd like nothing better than for the monarchy to be completely disbanded personally.

Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe

33. Comment #317656 by squinky on January 12, 2009 at 7:22 am

How about skywriting
There probably is no Allah so stop declaring jihad and enjoy your lives!
just outside the airspace of Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, etc. We can use programmed predator drones and when they get fired upon (outside that country's airspace) it will be an act of war, so lock on and fire.

Other Comments by squinky

34. Comment #317677 by FatherNature on January 12, 2009 at 7:49 am

One good thing about the word "probably" in the bus ad is that the next time a religious ad says something like "Jesus Saves" we now have a strong reason for insisting that it be changed to "probably saves", or better yet, "possibly saves".

A small victory, perhaps, but it's one more crack in an already damaged dam.

Other Comments by FatherNature

35. Comment #317682 by Mark Jones on January 12, 2009 at 7:55 am

Comment #317627 by mixmastergaz

It does seem a lot of money to spend on *advertising* of all things, but I don't think the atheist message has ever had so much coverage. It's actually sparking conversations in pubs amongst the still *sober* drinkers, not just the drunks!

It gives an opportunity to point out how *reasonable* the message is, so for that, it's been money well spent.

Other Comments by Mark Jones

36. Comment #317688 by aquilacane on January 12, 2009 at 8:00 am

"There's probably no god, so treat others as you'd like to be treated"

I like a complete usurpation. Though these words were never not the words of man, they still need to be taken back as a secular message.

Other Comments by aquilacane

37. Comment #317691 by aquilacane on January 12, 2009 at 8:04 am

Actually, I think this campaign just found it's growth channel, keeping it interesting while promoting the same message.

There probably is no god, now.... (fill in the blank)

There could be hundreds of obvious blanks

Other Comments by aquilacane

38. Comment #317710 by xmd on January 12, 2009 at 8:31 am

The Bus campaign again...

"I argued against that. I wanted a stronger statement.."

Was Dawkins one of the mentors of the campaign?

"I don't think that total atheism is a totally rational position"

Then atheism, or atheist are wrong words?
Maybe we are all agnostics after all (that is, if we are rationalists too).

Other Comments by xmd

39. Comment #317715 by xmd on January 12, 2009 at 8:41 am

"Do you worry that you might be causing people a lot of angst, since for many people religion is an important part of their identity?

It doesn't worry me very much. I don't have that much sympathy if people get their consolation from an illusion."

They can be angry for another reason.
Because they are theists does that mean they worry too much and don't enjoy life? In a way i think the campaign is patronizing.

Other Comments by xmd

40. Comment #317718 by cjnkns on January 12, 2009 at 8:53 am

I wonder what kinda of reaction this would have in the U.S.?
Most people here would probably go ape! :)

Other Comments by cjnkns

41. Comment #317720 by xmd on January 12, 2009 at 8:55 am

In America only with a bullett proof bus

Other Comments by xmd

42. Comment #317721 by flistr8 on January 12, 2009 at 8:56 am

PJG - good point. And probably the main point. The advertising campaign is now on the front page of the Los Angeles Times. Who would have thought?

And rundmc, what could be more perfect that getting the question of god and religion to the bumper-sticker level? WWJD? Pass on god no doubt.

I'm very happy with the LA Times and their ongowing willingness to print stories explaining the soulless heathen's POV. Good interview.

Other Comments by flistr8

43. Comment #317723 by TheAmericanAtheist on January 12, 2009 at 8:57 am

Do you worry that you might be causing people a lot of angst, since for many people religion is an important part of their identity?

It doesn't worry me very much. I don't have that much sympathy if people get their consolation from an illusion.

Honesty- I love it.

Other Comments by TheAmericanAtheist

44. Comment #317724 by xmd on January 12, 2009 at 9:06 am

I think that a similar campaign with Santa as the target would be worse.

Other Comments by xmd

45. Comment #317727 by Ardiem on January 12, 2009 at 9:09 am

I wonder what kinda of reaction this would have in the U.S.?
Most people here would probably go ape! :)

But presumably that's because they haven't been an ape yet and still need to go through that stage of evolution. ;-p

Other Comments by Ardiem

46. Comment #317728 by severalspeciesof on January 12, 2009 at 9:17 am

41. Comment #317718 by cjnkns

The response would probably be similar to this:
http://www.ffrf.org/news/2008/hatebillboard.php

BTW, is your avatar Frankus approved?

Other Comments by severalspeciesof

47. Comment #317729 by CaptainMandate on January 12, 2009 at 9:21 am

Now, back on topic, I wouldn't call "enjoy your life" hedonistic, and even if it were, I don't think that would necessarily be a bad thing.

I agree, there is nothing hedonistic about enjoying life but I can see why it's a bit of a bone of contention. The fact is, if your faith comes from Abraham, the very concept of being happy is borderline blasphemy. to the religious, if you're happy, God isn't

Maybe "now stop worrying and make something of your life" might be better but let's face it, after the comment about no god, anything you write will be taken as a direct insult to these willing victims so they'll twist it into something inherently evil

maybe in december we could do a xmas campaign "there's probably no santa, that's why your parents go shopping and there's ads for toys on tv.... now apply this logic to everything else you might have been told"

no mention of god there so presumibly that'll keep all the churches happy

[edit] xmd, didn't see your comment # 42 when i did wrote this

Other Comments by CaptainMandate

48. Comment #317730 by Szymanowski on January 12, 2009 at 9:21 am

The new ads have attracted little controversy in Britain, a secular country that finds religious fervor a tad awkward.

...?...

Other Comments by Szymanowski

49. Comment #317732 by jesusmasterbated on January 12, 2009 at 9:23 am

bamboospitfire: Las Vegas is in Nevada. But it would be nice to send all the fundies out west, let them wander the desert like their buddy moses. It would definitely make the mid atlantic coastal region a much nicer place to inhabit.

cjkns: that would be a riot. unfortunately most of the people in my country would not understand how the message could be true. after all its not in their favorite history book, The Bible.

Here's a question for everyone, are the general masses in most European countries as dumb as the majority of people here in America?

Other Comments by jesusmasterbated

50. Comment #317733 by severalspeciesof on January 12, 2009 at 9:25 am

48. Comment #317729 by CaptainMandate

maybe in december we could do a xmas campaign "there's probably no santa, that's why your parents go shopping and there's ads for toys on tv.... now apply this logic to everything else you might have been told"

no mention of god there so presumibly that'll keep all the churches happy

And in the spring you could include the Easter Bunny too!...

Other Comments by severalspeciesof

Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 3 | Next | Last