Monday, January 12, 2009

For Goodness Sake

I think some atheist started this and, SPAG bless you, but you should have known you'd only get THEM riled up. But the new thing in DC is for various groups to buy signs, on the sides of DC buses, fighting over whether on not you should believe in the xian god. I mean, we could have bus signs telling people to use condoms or to read poetry or to recycle, but, no, we've got dueling bus signs encouraging people to believe or disbelieve in the xian god, because, you know, that's where we all look for spiritual guidance: bus signs.

The latest round, paid for by the xians, features a picture of the old xian god with a flowing beard touching Adam's (thanks, I see, no women. This doesn't involve me, right?) hand and bears the legend: "Why believe? Because I created you, for goodness sake! ~God."

And, see, here's this thing that the xians are ALWAYS doing that I find just incomprehensible. You should believe in the xian god because some people who believe in the xian god say that he created you. So you should believe in him.

Let's say that I don't believe in your god. How is it supposed to convince me to believe in your god for you to quote your god to me? Can you not, even for a minute, even for the sake of "winning converts," which, apparently, is like winning points in World of War or something, can you not, for the love of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, understand that, if I don't believe in your god, telling me what your god said or what it says in your holy book is, well, unlikely to convince me? Xians do this all the time and it's arguably the stupidest thing that anyone has ever done, ever.

You should wear bright red lipstick! Why? Because it says right here on this tube of bright red lipstick that you should wear bright red lipstick!

You should seek wisdom from tarot cards. Why? Because it says right here on this deck of tarot cards that it will reveal wisdom to you!

You should vote for pro-choice candidates. Why? Because it says right here on this website of pro-choice candidates that you should vote for them!

You should be naked in your rites. Why? Because it says right in the charge of the Goddess, written by Doreen Valiente, that you shall be free from slavery, and as a sign that you be free, you shall be naked in your rites.

What? That didn't convince you to be naked in your rites? But it SAYS right in the Charge of the Goddess . . . .

Really, guys, you're just convincing everyone else that, well, you're not very bright. If that's all you've got, if that's your A Game: you should believe in our god because it says in our holy book that he created you, if that's it, then, well, go home. Look in the mirror. Be ashamed.

Devotional art found here.


1Watt said...

Watch the U.K. papers, the atheists are putting signs on buses. The ministry in charge of averts on buses is going to rule on whether or not god exists soon.

sott'Eos said...

Here is a very funny (and perhaps slightly NSFW) dialog of that circular logic:

nanoboy said...

I think it goes back to the more coercive nature of Christianity's recent past (and in some places, current way of being.) If your village or whatever is wholly Christian, then there is pressure to be part of the fold, lest you are discriminated against in some way. By pointing out that the traditional sources point to God existing or whatever, people are telling you that you need to get back into line.

It certainly doesn't make sense in modern Washington, D.C., where there is a diversity of belief. The old authorities no longer have their influence there to the degree that they used to.

I think it's an attempt to take what they learned in their sermons and apply those teachings to conversion. It doesn't work well, of course, and I'll bet that someone who is better trained in missions would find better ways.

Incidentally, my sister has a degree in Missions from Ouichata Baptist University. She's a very devout Christian, and I'll bet she would agree very much with your post here. (I'm personally a deist, so I have even less orthodoxy to follow than a neopagan or what-have-you.)