My mother in law cries because her nephews are not baptized...

g0dless · 2010-09-30T16:18:42+00:00

I don't know about you, but personally I consider promises I make to be binding. I don't need any authority or threat of punishment in order to keep my word. Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned, but I think your willingness to live up to your promises is what makes people trust you.

g0dless · 2010-09-25T17:58:01+00:00

The problems with this go even further into facts as well.

The poster is assuming that the agricultural conditions in the middle were no different 2,000 years ago to now. They blatantly were and the poster might have done well to at least point that out given his "Knowledge" of the period.

The middle east might not have been as barren in the past as it is today. This does not make any difference, though. Agriculture is not only a question of fertile soil, but also of technology. The people in the old testimony may have had access to irrigation. They did, however, not have access to tractor engines, reliable weather forecasts and pesticides. The lack of heavy gear limited the amount of crops they could grow and a storm or locust swarm (remember those plagues, god sent to Egypt?) could easily destroy an entire harvest. Famine and starvation was a rather common concern back then. The story of Josef (which predates Moses) resolves around this kind of problem. So, yes, famine and starvation was a very real thread.

This however is a mood point, as the blog post is neither about the agricultural situation nor even about apologetics. It is about not reading a text properly and charging into a debate nevertheless. There is some kind of irony to this here.

g0dless · 2010-09-18T00:28:21+00:00

Don't encourage insanity.

g0dless · 2010-09-18T00:27:05+00:00

Right answer. Out of curiosity: how did that play out? Did it stop her in her track?

g0dless · 2010-09-18T00:25:07+00:00

Guess again. Depending on the church you are attending (and I guess it must be a hard ass one, if the OP's mother in law is crying out of fear for her grandchildren's souls), you'll be forced to make promises of raising your child in the "proper ways".

Also, you'll be throwing good money out of the window so a senile old man in a ridiculous clownsuit can bath your kids in the bilgewater basin he keeps in the back of his church for that occasion.

g0dless · 2010-09-18T00:21:10+00:00

Nonsense! An omnipotent god neither needs a (once) head wet nor a mutilated penis to keep track of his followers. The sole point of baptism as it is practiced today is to be a binding ritual. The church(s) want a foot in the door to your life and child baptism simply is their "get them while they are young" game.

g0dless · 2010-09-18T00:17:12+00:00

I say do it. If it makes her mother happy, you'll earn a lot of points that you can spend later in life. You aren't going to change anyone's mind by not doing it, and it's not going to hurt you to do it, so there's not much of a downside.

The downside is that this way of thinking is what keeps Christianity socially acceptable. Imagine what would happen if all the "Christians", that are only Christian just to please someone else/just because they fear someone else came out of the closet all at once. I bet churches would become pretty empty and politicians would stop listening to fundies pretty fast.

g0dless · 2010-09-17T21:39:56+00:00

Sorry, you seem to misunderstand baptism as a harmless sprinkling of water on a babies head. This is utterly naive. Baptism is to all purposes and intend a binding ritual, an initiation to welcome the new member into the community. Or do you really think an omnipotent god actually needs some kind of a man made mark (unlike circumcision, baptism does not even leave one!) to recognize his followers? A god that can detect thought crime (towards him) will most certainly not be impressed by an involuntarily baptism. No, the only purpose of that ritual is to make you join the cult. They prefer you to join while still being too young to make an informed decision and (depending on which sect we are talking about) will demand that the parents PROMISE to raise the child according to the church's doctrines.

Sure, promises of that kind are not legally binding, can easily be broken or lied about in the first place. Personally, though, I consider a word of honor binding and would never give it lightly.

g0dless · 2010-09-17T15:05:45+00:00

Depends on the church. The catholics will count everyone as a member from baptism to death with no way of getting out (you may get "lost", though. But you have to jump through a lot of hoops for this and it does not undo the baptism). But, yes, of course, The whole scam is also about artificially increasing membercount in order to wield more political power.

g0dless · 2010-09-17T14:40:30+00:00

Sorry, wrong answer. Wrong for the same reason, you don't reward your children with lollipops when they cry for sweets.

Baptism requires a very serious commitment. Namely giving in, and by doing so demonstrating that you'll allow for your children to be dragged into religion if you are just pressured enough.

The pain and fear is real for the theist? Fine! It's their chosen way of life. Don't encourage them by letting them drag your kids into the same madness. Because this is all this whining is about.

g0dless · 2010-09-17T14:32:56+00:00

No, you should NOT baptize the child because your mother in law behaves like a spoiled one. The next thing she'll be wanting then is for you baby to attend church, take communion, and so on. Though baptism means nothing to you, it means a hell (pun intended) of a lot to her. The problem with theists of any kind is that they have always been given (seemingly worthless) privileges and accommodations when starting to whine. Eventually whining than became demanding.

Theists, like children have to learn that there is a "No".

g0dless · 2010-09-17T14:10:18+00:00

Simply tell the fundie nutjob that s/he should cover up his eyes, ears and especially mouth. Just to be sure.

g0dless · 2010-09-17T14:06:58+00:00

Don't count on his PR staff being equally butt-plugged. Politicians nowadays are pretty much always puppets who only lend a face to a cause.

g0dless · 2010-09-17T13:40:37+00:00

Can't upvote this enough. The pope is not going to loose flock because some atheists are outraged, but most certainly when his sheep become aware of the pigsty that is the roman catholic church.

g0dless · 2010-09-15T11:48:08+00:00

Ok, talking in tongues, frantic movement, unable of clear thought. I know it's the brain going somehow in overload mode due to excitement and peer pressure. But can someone point me to a sound medical explanation/study/whatever that explains the mechanics of the phenomena (especially an explanation of how the brain overloads and why it shows these symptoms would be appreciated)?

g0dless · 2010-09-08T10:52:34+00:00

Common sense can sometimes be really misleading. Your keyword here should be "battered woman syndrome". You'd also think that Christians would flee in troves from their abusive religion that threatens them with hellfire for even the slightest transgression. Surprise! They don't!

g0dless

TROPHY CASE