The judeo-christian-islamic-satanist axis of irrationality and creationism.

By Andrea B.

This is my opinion on this issue.

Every atom in my body, apart from the hydrogen atoms were created in nuclear fusion reactions in first and second generation stars over the last fourteen billion or so years. The atoms were blasted across the galaxy by supernova explosions, eventually they came together to form the earth and eventually ended up in me, built into there present structure by my DNA/RNA.

In about four billion years from now, long after I have died and the human race is long forgotten, the atoms in my body will be ripped of the outer layer of this planet by our dying sun as it expands into a red giant. They will be reduced to plasma as they have there electrons stripped of them by the radiation in space and travel through the galaxy, until they take part in the next cycle of life several billion years from now.

Religion is a new phenomena. It was created by man. It appears to act as a social control mechanism, very similar to sociology, psychiatry and psychology, which appear to be the new religions to control people. The average species only lasts something like five million years. So religion and God as the religious refers to some human construct which has become an ideology, will die in the next few million years. However the atoms that make up my body will still exist and travel throughout this galaxy in the next cycle of life, long after the irrelevant stupidity of religious fundamentalists is no longer even a historical footnote.

To sum up, the fundamentalists are trying to stand against the reality of how irrelevant they really are. They are to be pitied due to there lack of education and inability to face up to the reality of life. All they are is a creation by a DNA molecule, which tricks them into believing certain things, so as to maintain its ability to reproduce itself.

The point of all life on Earth is to reproduce our DNA and to constantly evolve our DNA into forms which give it a better chance of survival. At present there appears to be no other point to the existence of life.

Basically what I am saying is that a complex chemical in out body called DNA which has as its entire aim to replicate itself, tricks us in all sorts of ways, such as love, hate, conquest, submission, etc. so as to create opportunities for the molecule to replicate.

The point of the universe is to me unknown and maybe it is just is, with no point. I do believe that in the eons to come we may possibly seed it with life, if there is not already life there.

I have sometimes wondered if life is the universe trying to make sense of its self.

What we have in present society is irrationality, idiotically deranged and professional imbecility. We have the irrational who blow themselves up to be with virgins and the irrational who drop bombs on third world regimes which they put there in the first place because there latest decision has negatively affected there control of oil. We have the idiotic ideas of religious leaders who believe that a concept called god speaks to them and through them, such as there idiotic idea of intelligent design. We have the psychologists, psychiatrists and sociologists who are professional imbeciles who believe they can impose there deranged belief systems onto minority groups in society. Just take a look at the proposals in the revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual V, by the American Psychiatric Association.

Regarding intelligent design is at its very core, a recoiling in horror from the truth. It is a banner around which the ignorant gather. It is an excuse to be proud of their own ignorance.

Intelligent design comes from a view that the world is immovable, static, forever unchanging and a fear of change. That God made it this way, and filled out all the niches perfectly, and by God that will never ever change. Now, any intelligent person could look at this world for the dynamic and varied place that it is, see the beauty of Nature, and know that everything is changing all the time and realize that evolution makes perfect sense.

Unfortunately, this view of a static universe is prevalent in Christianity and the entire judeo-christian-islamic-satanist axis of irrationality which is in turn prevalent in North America. You can witness this in the surprised faces of people in America when their trailer homes get ripped apart by a tornado when they live in Tornado Alley as they think that praying to a mythical social construct, such as god will protect them.

It is this attitude that has permeated the public consciousness, particularly in the United States and is now spreading out from the US due to cultural domination. It is this attitude that can have people seriously questioning whether evolution is taking place. This championing of ignorance, this vilification of learning, the learned, and the people whom are becoming learned.

Damn the entire creationist, judeo-christian-islamic-satanist axis of irrationality lot of them, I say.


Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.-Thomas Jefferson (1743 – 1826)


12 Responses to “The judeo-christian-islamic-satanist axis of irrationality and creationism.”

  1. Jennifer Gopinathadasi Woodward Says:

    Well Andrea, to me you are 25 years late but at least you have noticed and articulated several essential elements or aspects of the current state of national and world affairs and of the “zeitgeist” (i.e. the so-called common knowledge) of our times (i.e. what “the masses” of people will believe, say, do if you get them to admit it). But you can look at the apparently deplorable state of human affairs in several ways! It is really awfully; it is so very threatening to some many institutions, people, policies, lives and life-styles, etc. On the other hand, HEY!, at least for what it is worth “they” (the legions of idiots and bigots and small minded people) are being MORE HONEST and OPEN about what they think and feel and do or not do for the benefit and preservation of governments, human-kind, and now all life on Planet Earth!

    I do think your cosmic perspective of the life of the atoms in your current body is intriguing, and true, but irrelevant. If you have any notion or observations of “spirit” and “soul” in yourself and others, then you may want to consider what some authors of some ancient religions claim (1) that we reincarnate life after life and (2) that the goal (IMO A goal) of life is to “transcend” (w/o drugs, but doing so at will) this exceedingly long but in all respects temporary material existence. Whatever is or is not the “reality” of this claim, the experiences and speculations about such things persist in the human psyche generation after generation. And let’s face it, our “psyche” and our interpretations of our experiences in THIS life are all that we really know, ideological belief systems all set aside.

    More “down to earth” and socio-politically speaking I want to remind you that it is early in year two of a POST Reagan-Bush-Gingrich 30 years-too-long era in which the radical right have tried their damnedest to “bury” the former soviet union and any work-alike countries in “uber pure cut-throat capitalism”, a zealot’s more mundane ideological movement and grand social experiment of it’s own kind! It failed. In spite of the stupidity at large, no one is going to forget it for the rest of this century — unless the dumbing down activities become more draconian!

    The efforts of the radical right have been heavily funded by the rich, now super-rich. As in: they definitely got their beyond-all-expectations return on their investments times 100 or 1000 as of the bank bailout of 2008-09. To “their” credit, it has been a brilliantly conceived if also maliciously orchestrated effort of mass media take-overs and 30 years-too-long brainwashing coupled with the destruction of US public education and in general the nation-wide dumbing down and greater DIS-empowerment of the US population, maybe of Canada, and much of the western EU as well. And in the US for certain these efforts have included the “gaming” aka corruption and twisting of the states and nations laws and regulations — including those of finance, civil and criminal law — to serve the financial and political ends of this tiny minority of would-be plutocrats, the heads of a few super banks and global corporations who want to rule the world. How novel! And what a waste of their money (I hope).

    Recall that they enlisted the equally zealot but much less educated, much more bigotted religious folk on the far right to help make all of this happen. But if I were a right winger evangelist or a “fundie” in 2010, and had a glimer of the intelligence “god/dess gave me”, untarnished by group-thing, I’d feel utterly betrayed by this “movement” by now!

    So whilst you contemplate “the stars” and cosmic time and the exploding stars and super novae, the latter an interesting fantasy projection of your likely intense anger and frustration by the way, consider that WE ARE AT A NADIR that could get worse before it gets better. BUT HOPE for the advent of “the better” exists, is evident — if also very tarnished in “muck” flung about by the ignorati, who are becoming at least more outspoken and “honest” in their ways, potentially. So if you look around and think about the possibilities before us, things are looking UP!

    Now what band wagon do you want to be on? What can you do to help the push “upwards”? And until “the messiah comes” whoever or however that kind of “better” happens, where is the peace of mind and body within yourself? Can you get there and stay there for long satisfying periods of time? YOUR time in THIS life?


    • Suzan Says:

      There are on gods. No messiahs. When you die you die and your atoms become just another part of the universe. No gods, No masters.

  2. Dennis Says:

    Very Interesting article, thank you for sharing it

  3. Angela Says:

    “the stars” and cosmic time and the exploding stars and super novae”

    It’s an interesting way in… these can of course be projections of emotional states, but not necessarily, they are also representative of underlying structures of reality. Each to their own I think, some are good at politics and society, others take your approach. I just hope you don’t get too caught up in the apocalyptic aspects of cosmology. A nice cure for this are the paintings of John Martyn, have a good look at them and eventually you will start laughing. x

  4. Edith Says:

    As usual, Andrea,

    You make many valid,interesting points. As usual, I have some reservations. Your piece about the Vatican’s relationship with the Nazi’s led me to do a lot of reading. I found what you wrote and linked to very informative. I found a lot that was written by Michael Phayer and at least one other person, whose name I can’t remember, that backs up many of your assertions when it comes to Croatia. I think you might have over simplified things a bit, though, when the larger picture is taken into view. I don’t remember you bringing what was going on in Poland into the picture but, then again, this subject is one I think you are far more passionate about than I.

    As for this article I would like to quote something from Wikipedia:

    “Both Dennett and Steven Pinker argue that too many people who are opposed to science use the words “reductionism” and “reductionist” less to make coherent claims about science than to convey a general distaste for the endeavor, saying the opponents often use the words in a rather slippery way, to refer to whatever they dislike most about science.”

    I don’t think I am as erudite as you but this is what my criticism would be about the argument you make. It seems reductionist to me. I would like to note, also, that what I know about Stephen Pinker reinforces my doubts about the veracity of Pinker’s views as per the quote, above, from Wikipedia.

    As an aside, maybe I should mention I was reading about Meister Eckhart last night and what D T Suzuki had to say about Eckhart’s concept if “isness” – very interesting, I thought. Somebody wrote in reply to me about something I said relating to Eckhart, that where “God” is concerned their concept was that of a “prcocious twelve year old”, that “God is that which man can’t comprehend”. I got no disagreement from this person, however, when I said Thomas Jefferson was accused of being an atheist many times and that he definitely must have seen a need for “freedom from religion”.

    You asked for feedback. I hope you don’t mind that I have my own opinions. Everybody seems to have them.

  5. Zoe Brain Says:

    We can’t exclude emergent properties when we talk about “purpose”.
    Complex systems exhibit properties different from what would expect by examining the sum of their parts. We see this in all areas of physics.
    Various subtle experiments have convinced me (anyway) that theism is inconsistent with this universe. Deism may not be, but I think that’s unprovable either way, so is useless as a hypothesis.
    As for “intelligent design”, “creationism” etc, that’s like trying to describe the large hadron collider and it’s purpose in terms of Lego blocks and fingerpainting.

  6. Mish Says:

    I tend to agree. Irrational beliefs are a threat to human survival, and represent an unwillingness to confront things like life that is vulnerable, finite, subject to the elemental forces, and without purpose. Since I gave up my own faith, things have become much simpler for me, and the irrationality that governs so much conflict and bigotry more evident. Belief in extreme religious views should be treated as a mental health issue, using de-conversion therapy to help secularise the individual and assist their re-integration into normal society (in a similar way to what happened when people were rescued from the religious that started to proliferate in the 1970s). Talking of which, most New Age beliefs are just as bad. I am sure that we are the way the universe becomes conscious, aware of itself, and that any purpose there is comes from our constructing a purpose – same with ideas about good and evil, these just happen to be things we like or dislike.

    There is no good or evil in a nebula where stars are born, just as there is none when a lion brings down a zebra. How we reach a judgment about what is right and wrong is more difficult, and may not necessarily be due to whether things are aesthetically pleasing to us or not. We see gassing 6 million jews as evil because it disgusts us, and people are homophobic because the thought of two men having sex disgusts them. I could say that neither are wrong beyond our feeling that there is something wrong about them – but actually, deep down, I do feel that there is something morally wrong with killing 6 million people, or homophobia, than my feelings that it is wrong. That is why I looked to religion when I studied Philosophy, because I could find no other basis for forming moral judgments. The reality is, I don’t think there is such a basis, beyond what we agree to abide by socially. Clearly, a lot of people didn’t find the idea of killing 6 million jews problematic at one point – people who for the most part had rejected religion in favour of an ideology based on Darwinism – if they had found it problematic, it would never have happened. This is the trouble with trying to live rationally. What stops you becoming a psychopath like Hannibal Lecter? To us he seems insane, and yet in the novels, he is perfectly rational, but without a conscience. How do we know when our self-contained rationality has led us down some blind alley – with no reference point to guide us back again?

    Even though I have no idea what a moral compass looks like, I am still governed by some sense that some things are right and some things are wrong, and I am not sure why – nor how a rational framework sustains that.

    • Suzan Says:

      Based on Darwinism? WTF? Do you know anything what so ever about Darwin and “On the Origin of Species” or do you only know what the Christo-fascists and ignorant have claimed it said?

      The form called social Darwinism is actually the product of a chap named Spencer.

      For what it is worth the Nazis were good moral Christians who believed the blood libel that the Jews were Christ Killers, an ideology that was still being taught in the Catholic Church when I was a child in the 1950s.

      You ask or rather put forth the proposition that without a god there would be no morality since one would not have to fear eternal damnation. Does this mean your ethics or morality are based upon fear of punishment? If so then they are a pretty poor set of ethics.

      But back to evolution and the idea of survival of the fittest. This is often a poorly understood concept at best and tends to deteriorate from that misunderstanding. For example the fittest trait might well be one of co-operation among members of the same species presented by Darwin and elucidated in the later work of Kropotkin in “The Conquest of Bread.

      Hence the development of a humanist based ethics would further peace and co-operation over war since only the living prosper and pass on their genes.

      Superstitious belief in an imaginary TIA/Nemesis program that functions as cop and executioner for all eternity helps the powerful to go unchallenged in their position of power and ability to exploit but real ethics are a part of the survival of the fittest idea.

  7. Mish Says:

    Have you read Mein Kampf, part Two? from your comment I guess not. Nazism was social-Darwinist and eugenic, and like Nietzche the hierarchy saw Christianity as a weakness, the Bible as from an alien cultural tradition to that of the German Volk, seeing Sparta as a more appropriate ideology. It used religion and religious imagery (the mass-rallies were quasi-religious, the Furer was a Christ-figure), as well as neo-paganism; much of the church resisted Nazism longer than any other German institution, with many priests ending up in concentration camps.

    I never mentioned eternal damnation: it is not something I have ever associated with a belief in God (liberal Anglicans don’t).

    • Suzan Says:

      Social Darwinism has zero connection to Darwin. It is the ideology of Spenser and fascism. The Nazis banned abortion and preached Kuche, kinder Kurche (sp?) Kitchen, children, church. a version of the “traditional family values” being shoved down our throats by the extreme right wing neo-Nazis of today as well as the Christo-fascists.

      In fact anti-Semitism is endemic to Christianityhe Pope condone the rise of both Mussolini and Hitler.

      Christianity is at its core misogynistic. It treats women as less human than men. It matters not how liberal some sects are.

      Religion is an irrational belief in a non existent imaginary being that is used to support the elite.

      BTW this is an atheist blog.

  8. Andrea B. Says:

    @ Mish,

    Regarding your nonsense about the innocence of the Catholic Church.

    The Reichkonkordat and Croatia-Bosnia have the Vatican all over them.

    The Vatican was up to its eyes in what the nazi’s were up to.

  9. tinagrrl Says:

    “Social Darwinism” was an apology for the cut-throat “Capitalism” of The Gilded Age. It was meant to help the worst of The Robber Barons feel better about starving little children while screwing the servant girls.

    It really was a bastardization of Darwin, with little more than “survival of the fittest” crap twisted to make plutocrats feel better.

    It also helped that their various Pastors, Preachers, and Priests, lauded them as “pillars of the community”, “Paragons of Virtue”, and (here’s a good one) “The Elect of God”.

    In some ways, Veblen’s “Theory of the Leisure Class”, also used evolutionary ideas in a way quite different from Spencer and the other “Social Darwinists”. He was a bit of an antidote to the pompous Rich = Virtuous crap of the apologists.

    In fact the ideas we call “Social Darwinism” actually PREDATE Darwin, and were only called “Social Darwinism” well AFTER H. Spencer’s death.

    Most of the “survival of the fittest” crap being thrown around today is done so by half educated folks who do not bother to investigate where their claims come from, and how many times they have been refuted in the past.

    It seems to be a way to soothe the nagging feeling that screwing people out of everything they have worked for their entire lives is NOT a “good thing”.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: