When I complain about conservative Christian fuckwits and their woman-hating, gay-bashing, right-shredding ways and liberal Christians tap me on the shoulder and whisper, “Pssst. We’re not all like that,” then they set about complaining—to me, in private, in hushed tones—about how much they resent conservative Christians for claiming to speak for all Christians. “Not all of us are hateful,” they assure me. “That’s great,” I respond. “But don’t tell me. Tell them.”
The author of the blog WTFWJD? is doing just that:
My name is Jocelyn and I like to blog. I also like Jesus. I also really don’t like the majority of Christians, because they’re a bunch of hypocritical fuck-nuts…. What I do here is pretty simple: I find news stories about shit Christians pull; then I find a corresponding Bible verse that says that’s not OK; and then I post it here and let the hilarity ensue.
WTFWJD? is an entertaining read.
I want to call this the funniest shit ever but that would be an insult to ACTUAL FUNNY SHIT.
No thank you, evan.
You make a good point about our ability to become enraged from a vantage point of safety, because we can hide our identity. Rage, just doesn’t work for me. I prefer respect, because I want to understand.
Yeah, Evan, whatever. Point is, you’re still getting just as worked up over what’s going on here as the people you’re criticizing for it.
It’s funny. America’s actually become considerably more violently partisan since the advent of blogs and internet forums to function as a kind of rage amplifier.
Blogs and internet forums mean that for the first time, people are able to say what they feel and think to the person who’s opinion they’ve violently disagreed with for decades without having to worry about ruining Thanksgiving dinner because of it. So what? I hardly care who’s getting angry, I care that more conversations are happening between people who disagree than used to happen. I care that people are being exposed to more ideas that they may find objectionable and being forced to deal with them. So the results are ugly. Big whoop. I’m sorry it offends your delicate sensibilities, but if you can’t handle it, I highly suggest you remove yourself because you’re not going to make it change any time soon, kid.
did anyone else get the feeling that sgiffy’s real faux pas in this thread was the sin of “coming down to where you work and smacking the dick out of your mouth”? dude, it’s her day in the sun, let it go man. so you don’t believe in God… big whoop, me neither. do you want a medal? a parade? why don’t you do something interesting like Jocelyn did and then we’ll pay attention to you?
@ 50 – You’re getting angry over yourself getting angry. In this world of meta-everything, is that “meta-anger”?
Lee, I love you.
Bet you regret pimping her blog now, huh?
@Jocelyn
Give Richard Dawkins a chance. If you’ve garnered your impression of him from the pop media you probably don’t realize what an earnest and intelligent guy he is. He’s also unfailingly polite in any situation in which he isn’t either formally engaged in an argument or being aggressively confronted. I don’t know; I’m not on the receiving end of his disapproval so I suppose I have an easier time seeing his good points.
Anyway, I really would be dishonest if I said I could understand your beliefs, but you seem smart and cool and even if I think your beliefs are weird I am glad you’re actually living by them. Keep up the good work.
@49
Please don’t try to lay historical atrocities at the feet of atheism. The communists were atheistic but that doesn’t mean they did anything in the name of atheism. False equivalence. Nobody’s denying that atheists can be dicks too, but that doesn’t mean you need to smear my general lack of beliefs with the crimes of communist zealots.
@evan
I’m afraid if you think that blogs and forums are the driving force behind increased polarization you must not have been paying very close attention to the news media, especially political talk shows and talk radio, during the last forty years or so. Modern politics began their trend toward today’s unpleasant tone before there was an internet.
Fuckin’ thanks!
@58- I actually don’t mind Dawkins, usually. I do, however, think his position that atheism in inherently superior to everything else is pretty douchey. I used to think that people had to be atheists to be intelligent as well, but then I got my head out of my ass and realized the truth: most people are retarded, regardless of what they believe. But anyway, I do often enjoy Dawkins. He’s just an asshole, which in the end is OK with me.
I also don’t think that anyone was Laurel was trying to lay blame for the communist revolution in Russia on atheists in general. She was merely saying that not all big historical atrocities were committed by religious people, which is an argument that gets thrown around.
Anyway, it’s cool if you don’t understand my beliefs. I’m not sure how you can think they’re weird though since you don’t know what they are. Dan kind of made an assumption when I said I liked Jesus that it follows then that I must be Christian. I don’t really know how to describe what I am, but I certainly do not belong to any organized religion.
@33: “What I’m doing in disagreeing with these people is trying to prove that you pretty much can make the bible say whatever you want (which is why I have such a love/hate relationship with it), so using it as absolute proof of anything is pretty silly. It’s an exceptionally flawed document.”
Then why are you bothering to quote it at all?
@33: “I embrace the notion that people can believe whatever the fuck they want. “
Unless, as sgiffy @29, they “…don’t think that you’re right in your belief.”
@33: “…there is nothing wrong with disagreement. Me disagreeing with someone who, say, uses their personal faith as a way to prevent/attempt to prevent others from having what should be basic human rights, however, is a little different than you saying it’s bullshit that I like Jesus.”
You are against the personal beliefs of others which you believe are bad
yet you become abusive when your own personal beliefs are questioned.
No, 61, you’re not. I think you’re just missing the point a little bit.
There are a few points in quoting it at all, at least in the case of my blog. First of all, it’s to entertain myself and to learn a bit more about the Bible, which, until recently, I hadn’t looked at in years. There are stories in there that make sense and ones that don’t, and which ones are which is really dependent on who you ask. I think it’s funny to take someone who uses the Bible as an excuse to do things like campaign against gay marriage and reproductive rights, and show them that the verses they cite not only don’t really mean what they say they mean, but are totally contradicted at other points in the Bible anyway. I think they have far less of a point than I do, but anyway…
Again, I think you miss the difference. Someone says to me “I am Christian. I believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins, and that’s why all of America is going to Hell.” Yeah, I’m going to argue with them. Not about Jesus, but about the Hell part. The same goes for any religion (or lack thereof). Arguing the basics (dieties or no dieties, life after death or no life after death, etc.), I think, is not cool. But when people use their religious beliefs to be intolerant assholes, I think it’s appropriate to take issue.
I know it’s a ridiculous point to make, in the end, because I’m a total intolerant asshole when it comes to intolerant assholes, so it’d be pretty rich of me to say I’m better than anybody. It’s that every atheist who argues that atheism is inherently superior to all other systems of belief reminds me of this evangelist dude who used to stand outside one of the bigger halls at the university I went to and scream about how we were all going to hell for not believing in his particular brand of Christianity.
So, in conclusion, what people believe is irrelevant, unless they are dicks about it. And evangelist atheists piss me off as much as evangelists of any other belief system. Rock.
Jocelyn,
I just want to thank you. You are a wonderful, passionate person who doesn’t know what to believe. You are among the few brave ones in America today who aren’t afraid of saying “I don’t know everything and neither does anyone.”
A long time ago one of my college professors told me to only listen to people who are willing to say “I don’t know” as a complete response to a question. He has been proven right thousands of times in my experience. Anyone who thinks they know what is going on and how it all works, is full of shit.
Good luck young lady. I will continue to read what you have to say.
Yes, thanks Jocelyn. In particular, thanks for bringing back the baby from the dumped-out-bathwater of the bible, and saying “you can pick and choose” when everyone else is saying I can’t. The atheists and the fundies both. And a lot of people in between.
I can pick and choose what to believe – or respect – any time I want, from any source I want. Does it have to be “proven” for me to believe it? No. And “proven” is in quotes because there are so many standards of proof as to make the word practically meaningless. Every single thing I believe is hunch-based. Sometimes I really don’t know, but all else is hunch, from “sun coming up tomorrow” to “mutations responsible for evolution are not random”.
And my hunch is that’s true for everyone. And if someone wants to convince me his hunch is true and mine is not, well, then that is just alright with me, but keep in mind that insults and screaming are not convincing, and coercion does not work in the realm of belief. Behavior maybe, but not belief.
I also like Libr8, which I found by clicking on Lauren’s name. Which I did because I agree with Lauren.
Thanks Dr. Jim and Phoebe!
I agree with Laurel too, but not so much into Libr8. I’ll have to let that be someone else’s hunch.
@ people arguing “Mao and Pol Pot were atheists, so atheists are responsible for atrocities too”:
I ask you to refer to the chap at #30, who stated religion itself is a social, not spiritual phenomenon. it exists to bring (or bind) people together in something. faith and myth can be religion, but in totalitarian societies, the state itself becomes the religion. if then a leader does away with God to serve his own purposes, that is not atheism, that is megalomania. atrocity is not commited in the name of ridding the world of God per se, but is really an extension of religious war, the State’s Reality vs Biblical.
as entertaining as people like Christopher Hitchens can be with their empowering, smarmy irreverance helping to take back the night for non-believers, a true atheist realizes that in the end they’re just shit. we are not important. we aren’t special. circle of life and all that jazz.
Project Libr8 is, incidentally, a website for anarchist COMMUNISTS. So no, I am not trying to blame all the “evils” of communism on atheism.
I am, in fact, referencing specific events regarding Bolshevik persecution of churches and individuals who chose to continue on with the whole Christian thing in the face of an officially atheist state. My point is, any belief system can be used to justify theocratic violence, and atheism is historically not an exception.
Mao and Pol Pot don’t enter into it in any way whatsoever, as they were not Russian Bolsheviks. Please follow the conversation at hand, or you’ll have to sit at the kiddies’ table.
Phoebe – thanks! Glad you’re interested.
Jocelyn – sorry it wasn’t your cuppa, but I’m curious: what do you mean by “someone else’s hunch”?
faith and myth can be religion, but in totalitarian societies, the state itself becomes the religion. if then a leader does away with God to serve his own purposes, that is not atheism, that is megalomania. atrocity is not commited in the name of ridding the world of God per se, but is really an extension of religious war, the State’s Reality vs Biblical.
Snarkiness aside… if I’m following your meaning, this is absolutely right and this is my point. An authoritarian state (or group which wishes to establish an oppressive authority over the population) doesn’t care what religious belief it uses because the only thing that matters is the aqcuisition of power. Whichever theological system appears to be the most fashionable at the moment becomes the means of doing this – historically, this has included atheism. (Though atheism was an incidental ideology and the majority of the Bolshevik takeover was fueled by a warping of political ideology, which can be just as powerful.)
@69 – Phoebe was talking about personal faith being based on hunches, and on people having different hunches. So like, that’s someone else’s hunch.
And yes, I think we all agree with Lee.
Jocelyn – see, to my method of thinking, politics and religion can’t be compared in that way. Religion can be personal and kept out of other people’s lives, but the political systems we favor and choose to implement cannot. Social contracts affect everyone. I can believe in my anarchist communism, but I can’t live it in the way I can live my choice of spiritual beliefs. I am forced to live in representative capitalist democracy until such time as society at large changes its mind about the social contract.
So while I keep my religious beliefs to myself (unless someone is particularly interested), I take action to convince others to sympathize with my political views and to take action to move them forward. I try not to be pushy – just put it out there and argue politely (most of the time – some issues require throwing the gauntlet down, but I doubt you and I would disagree on most of those), to let people make an informed decision, but I *am* trying to convert people because a society cannot operate with different, personal social contracts in the way it can operate with different, personal spiritual beliefs.
I also don’t think politics are a matter of a hunch in the way religion is – it’s social science, which is anything but exact, but it’s still a great deal more concrete than spiritual pursuits. And the effects of political systems are very real and we have to take responsibility for how they work and how to improve them.
See, it was a joke. Arguing politics is the spice of life.