News:

When one conveys certain things, particularly of such gravity, should one not then appropriately cite sources, authorities...

Main Menu

Aurora shootings result of ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs

Started by fester30, July 20, 2012, 04:55:12 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Ali

Quote from: The Black Jester on July 20, 2012, 11:44:26 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
I think these reactions say a lot about both the fickle and selective  nature of human empathy and human beiings'mechanisms for coping with the arbitrariness and brutality of human existence. More children starved to death in Africa today than died in the cinema, but no - one is blinking an eyelid. Is it because we can more closely relate to people who share our kinds of lives, or is it the impact of the more immediate and intense media exposure, or the shattering incongruity of  purposeless slaughteri in such an innocuous setting?

You are, of course, entirely correct. There is much to condemn about the "fickleness" of our empathic responses to this situation.  And I suspect each of your suggestions as to the reason for our vituperation would bear up under analysis.  To say that the difference between the two circumstances is that in the one case, a human agent intended to engage in willful slaughter, and carried out his intention, and in the case of starvation in Africa, multiple human agents neglected to act to save innocent children, is perhaps to indulge in an ultimately meaningless distinction - meaningless, at least, to those who suffered death by either means.  Should we, therefore, entirely dismiss the role of human intention when considering callousness of any kind, either of omission or commission?

Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
In fact, whoever did this is no more than the product of nature and nurture; the world produces psychopaths or what we might  emotively term monsters athe  wrong set of circumstances will  trigger off these kind of atrocities on their part. The idea that people can be truly responsible for what they  become entails either swallowing  notions of free will which vindicate the notions of heaven and hell , or subscribing to a secular notion of the ghost in the machine, the person who magically invents themselves out of nothing.

Harris makes substantially this argument in his latest book on free will.  It does seem that the notion of contra-causal free will is hopelessly confused, and the compatibilist arguments that attempt to reconcile biological determinism with the notion seem more confused still.


Honestly, I think it's kind of a dick move that whenever someone indicates that they are sad about a death, sure as taxes someone will come along and try to make them feel like an asshole for it by pointing out an even worse tragedy that they are apparently ignoring in favor of the shiny new tragedy.  Here's some Truth.  I do feel bad about children starving to death in Africa.  I feel bad about innocent people that have died in Afghanistan, and Iraq, and in Norway, and in Israel, and every fucking where where people are dying all day every day since time immemorial.  But I can't feel equally bad for all of those people everywhere all at the same time because the world is big and the deaths are inifinite, and if I try, my heart will probably burst in my chest, and then my family and community will feel extra bad about me for a moment, forgetting for a moment to feel extra bad about someone else, and then some jerkface will come along and point it out and make them feel crappy for it.  Enough.  Stop making people feel bad about the way they feel bad.  You know I love you E_R, but I stand firm in my position that chastizing people for feeling too badly about tragedy A and not badly enough about tragedy B is a pointless and mean spirited activity.

En_Route

Quote from: Ali on July 21, 2012, 12:06:00 AM
Quote from: The Black Jester on July 20, 2012, 11:44:26 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
I think these reactions say a lot about both the fickle and selective  nature of human empathy and human beiings'mechanisms for coping with the arbitrariness and brutality of human existence. More children starved to death in Africa today than died in the cinema, but no - one is blinking an eyelid. Is it because we can more closely relate to people who share our kinds of lives, or is it the impact of the more immediate and intense media exposure, or the shattering incongruity of  purposeless slaughteri in such an innocuous setting?

You are, of course, entirely correct. There is much to condemn about the "fickleness" of our empathic responses to this situation.  And I suspect each of your suggestions as to the reason for our vituperation would bear up under analysis.  To say that the difference between the two circumstances is that in the one case, a human agent intended to engage in willful slaughter, and carried out his intention, and in the case of starvation in Africa, multiple human agents neglected to act to save innocent children, is perhaps to indulge in an ultimately meaningless distinction - meaningless, at least, to those who suffered death by either means.  Should we, therefore, entirely dismiss the role of human intention when considering callousness of any kind, either of omission or commission?

Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
In fact, whoever did this is no more than the product of nature and nurture; the world produces psychopaths or what we might  emotively term monsters athe  wrong set of circumstances will  trigger off these kind of atrocities on their part. The idea that people can be truly responsible for what they  become entails either swallowing  notions of free will which vindicate the notions of heaven and hell , or subscribing to a secular notion of the ghost in the machine, the person who magically invents themselves out of nothing.

Harris makes substantially this argument in his latest book on free will.  It does seem that the notion of contra-causal free will is hopelessly confused, and the compatibilist arguments that attempt to reconcile biological determinism with the notion seem more confused still.


Honestly, I think it's kind of a dick move that whenever someone indicates that they are sad about a death, sure as taxes someone will come along and try to make them feel like an asshole for it by pointing out an even worse tragedy that they are apparently ignoring in favor of the shiny new tragedy.  Here's some Truth.  I do feel bad about children starving to death in Africa.  I feel bad about innocent people that have died in Afghanistan, and Iraq, and in Norway, and in Israel, and every fucking where where people are dying all day every day since time immemorial.  But I can't feel equally bad for all of those people everywhere all at the same time because the world is big and the deaths are inifinite, and if I try, my heart will probably burst in my chest, and then my family and community will feel extra bad about me for a moment, forgetting for a moment to feel extra bad about someone else, and then some jerkface will come along and point it out and make them feel crappy for it.  Enough.  Stop making people feel bad about the way they feel bad.  You know I love you E_R, but I stand firm in my position that chastizing people for feeling too badly about tragedy A and not badly enough about tragedy B is a pointless and mean spirited activity.

I wasn't seeking to castigate anybody for feeling how they do. It was an observation of fact, of how humans deal with tragedy and what are the triggers for feelings of empathy. We are more  creatures of emotion and instinct than we would often care to acknowledge. I am not in the business of trying to establish hierarchies of suffering and even if I was, nobody would take a blind bit of notice of me. You ascribe to me rather more influence and persuasivenes than I have at my command if you really think anybody felt a stab of self- laceration having read my post.
Some ideas are so stupid only an intellectual could believe them (Orwell).

Ali

I think what it comes down to, is that a whole world full of dying and suffering people is too big and overwhelming.  But 12 people just trying to see a movie in a theater that I know and have been to; that I can get my arms around.  It's not a big sociological mystery. 

Maybe you should give yourself a big high five that you're more important than you think since you made me feel bad enough to comment on it.  :D

En_Route

Quote from: Ali on July 21, 2012, 12:37:18 AM
I think what it comes down to, is that a whole world full of dying and suffering people is too big and overwhelming.  But 12 people just trying to see a movie in a theater that I know and have been to; that I can get my arms around.  It's not a big sociological mystery. 

Maybe you should give yourself a big high five that you're more important than you think since you made me feel bad enough to comment on it.  :D

I'm sure the evolutionary psychologists can explain it , because they can explain everything.
I thought you were moved to commenti, not because you felt bad but because you were aghast at the high dick content of my post.
Some ideas are so stupid only an intellectual could believe them (Orwell).

Ali

Quote from: En_Route on July 21, 2012, 12:41:39 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 21, 2012, 12:37:18 AM
I think what it comes down to, is that a whole world full of dying and suffering people is too big and overwhelming.  But 12 people just trying to see a movie in a theater that I know and have been to; that I can get my arms around.  It's not a big sociological mystery. 

Maybe you should give yourself a big high five that you're more important than you think since you made me feel bad enough to comment on it.  :D

I'm sure the evolutionary psychologists can explain it , because they can explain everything.
I thought you were moved to commenti, not because you felt bad but because you were aghast at the high dick content of my post.

I do have an eye for high dick content, it's true.  :D

The Black Jester

Quote from: Ali on July 21, 2012, 12:06:00 AM
Quote from: The Black Jester on July 20, 2012, 11:44:26 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
I think these reactions say a lot about both the fickle and selective  nature of human empathy and human beiings'mechanisms for coping with the arbitrariness and brutality of human existence. More children starved to death in Africa today than died in the cinema, but no - one is blinking an eyelid. Is it because we can more closely relate to people who share our kinds of lives, or is it the impact of the more immediate and intense media exposure, or the shattering incongruity of  purposeless slaughteri in such an innocuous setting?

You are, of course, entirely correct. There is much to condemn about the "fickleness" of our empathic responses to this situation.  And I suspect each of your suggestions as to the reason for our vituperation would bear up under analysis.  To say that the difference between the two circumstances is that in the one case, a human agent intended to engage in willful slaughter, and carried out his intention, and in the case of starvation in Africa, multiple human agents neglected to act to save innocent children, is perhaps to indulge in an ultimately meaningless distinction - meaningless, at least, to those who suffered death by either means.  Should we, therefore, entirely dismiss the role of human intention when considering callousness of any kind, either of omission or commission?

Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
In fact, whoever did this is no more than the product of nature and nurture; the world produces psychopaths or what we might  emotively term monsters athe  wrong set of circumstances will  trigger off these kind of atrocities on their part. The idea that people can be truly responsible for what they  become entails either swallowing  notions of free will which vindicate the notions of heaven and hell , or subscribing to a secular notion of the ghost in the machine, the person who magically invents themselves out of nothing.

Harris makes substantially this argument in his latest book on free will.  It does seem that the notion of contra-causal free will is hopelessly confused, and the compatibilist arguments that attempt to reconcile biological determinism with the notion seem more confused still.


Honestly, I think it's kind of a dick move that whenever someone indicates that they are sad about a death, sure as taxes someone will come along and try to make them feel like an asshole for it by pointing out an even worse tragedy that they are apparently ignoring in favor of the shiny new tragedy.  Here's some Truth.  I do feel bad about children starving to death in Africa.  I feel bad about innocent people that have died in Afghanistan, and Iraq, and in Norway, and in Israel, and every fucking where where people are dying all day every day since time immemorial.  But I can't feel equally bad for all of those people everywhere all at the same time because the world is big and the deaths are inifinite, and if I try, my heart will probably burst in my chest, and then my family and community will feel extra bad about me for a moment, forgetting for a moment to feel extra bad about someone else, and then some jerkface will come along and point it out and make them feel crappy for it.  Enough.  Stop making people feel bad about the way they feel bad.  You know I love you E_R, but I stand firm in my position that chastizing people for feeling too badly about tragedy A and not badly enough about tragedy B is a pointless and mean spirited activity.

Ali, my apologies if any of my subsequent comments in this vein contributed to the general dickishness.  Not my intention.
The Black Jester

"Religion is institutionalised superstition, science is institutionalised curiosity." - Tank

"Confederation of the dispossessed,
Fearing neither god nor master." - Killing Joke

http://theblackjester.wordpress.com

Ali

Awww, it's okay.  I've had my little storm of temper and am feeling revived and refreshed. Sorry I implied that you and ER were pulling a "dick move." *Snick*

En_Route

Quote from: The Black Jester on July 21, 2012, 12:47:37 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 21, 2012, 12:06:00 AM
Quote from: The Black Jester on July 20, 2012, 11:44:26 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
I think these reactions say a lot about both the fickle and selective  nature of human empathy and human beiings'mechanisms for coping with the arbitrariness and brutality of human existence. More children starved to death in Africa today than died in the cinema, but no - one is blinking an eyelid. Is it because we can more closely relate to people who share our kinds of lives, or is it the impact of the more immediate and intense media exposure, or the shattering incongruity of  purposeless slaughteri in such an innocuous setting?

You are, of course, entirely correct. There is much to condemn about the "fickleness" of our empathic responses to this situation.  And I suspect each of your suggestions as to the reason for our vituperation would bear up under analysis.  To say that the difference between the two circumstances is that in the one case, a human agent intended to engage in willful slaughter, and carried out his intention, and in the case of starvation in Africa, multiple human agents neglected to act to save innocent children, is perhaps to indulge in an ultimately meaningless distinction - meaningless, at least, to those who suffered death by either means.  Should we, therefore, entirely dismiss the role of human intention when considering callousness of any kind, either of omission or commission?

Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
In fact, whoever did this is no more than the product of nature and nurture; the world produces psychopaths or what we might  emotively term monsters athe  wrong set of circumstances will  trigger off these kind of atrocities on their part. The idea that people can be truly responsible for what they  become entails either swallowing  notions of free will which vindicate the notions of heaven and hell , or subscribing to a secular notion of the ghost in the machine, the person who magically invents themselves out of nothing.

Harris makes substantially this argument in his latest book on free will.  It does seem that the notion of contra-causal free will is hopelessly confused, and the compatibilist arguments that attempt to reconcile biological determinism with the notion seem more confused still.


Honestly, I think it's kind of a dick move that whenever someone indicates that they are sad about a death, sure as taxes someone will come along and try to make them feel like an asshole for it by pointing out an even worse tragedy that they are apparently ignoring in favor of the shiny new tragedy.  Here's some Truth.  I do feel bad about children starving to death in Africa.  I feel bad about innocent people that have died in Afghanistan, and Iraq, and in Norway, and in Israel, and every fucking where where people are dying all day every day since time immemorial.  But I can't feel equally bad for all of those people everywhere all at the same time because the world is big and the deaths are inifinite, and if I try, my heart will probably burst in my chest, and then my family and community will feel extra bad about me for a moment, forgetting for a moment to feel extra bad about someone else, and then some jerkface will come along and point it out and make them feel crappy for it.  Enough.  Stop making people feel bad about the way they feel bad.  You know I love you E_R, but I stand firm in my position that chastizing people for feeling too badly about tragedy A and not badly enough about tragedy B is a pointless and mean spirited activity.

Ali, my apologies if any of my subsequent comments in this vein contributed to the general dickishness.  Not my intention.

Don't fret. Compared to my big swinging dickishness, yours was tiny.
Some ideas are so stupid only an intellectual could believe them (Orwell).

The Black Jester

Quote from: En_Route on July 21, 2012, 12:50:32 AM
Quote from: The Black Jester on July 21, 2012, 12:47:37 AM
Quote from: Ali on July 21, 2012, 12:06:00 AM
Quote from: The Black Jester on July 20, 2012, 11:44:26 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
I think these reactions say a lot about both the fickle and selective  nature of human empathy and human beiings'mechanisms for coping with the arbitrariness and brutality of human existence. More children starved to death in Africa today than died in the cinema, but no - one is blinking an eyelid. Is it because we can more closely relate to people who share our kinds of lives, or is it the impact of the more immediate and intense media exposure, or the shattering incongruity of  purposeless slaughteri in such an innocuous setting?

You are, of course, entirely correct. There is much to condemn about the "fickleness" of our empathic responses to this situation.  And I suspect each of your suggestions as to the reason for our vituperation would bear up under analysis.  To say that the difference between the two circumstances is that in the one case, a human agent intended to engage in willful slaughter, and carried out his intention, and in the case of starvation in Africa, multiple human agents neglected to act to save innocent children, is perhaps to indulge in an ultimately meaningless distinction - meaningless, at least, to those who suffered death by either means.  Should we, therefore, entirely dismiss the role of human intention when considering callousness of any kind, either of omission or commission?

Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
In fact, whoever did this is no more than the product of nature and nurture; the world produces psychopaths or what we might  emotively term monsters athe  wrong set of circumstances will  trigger off these kind of atrocities on their part. The idea that people can be truly responsible for what they  become entails either swallowing  notions of free will which vindicate the notions of heaven and hell , or subscribing to a secular notion of the ghost in the machine, the person who magically invents themselves out of nothing.

Harris makes substantially this argument in his latest book on free will.  It does seem that the notion of contra-causal free will is hopelessly confused, and the compatibilist arguments that attempt to reconcile biological determinism with the notion seem more confused still.


Honestly, I think it's kind of a dick move that whenever someone indicates that they are sad about a death, sure as taxes someone will come along and try to make them feel like an asshole for it by pointing out an even worse tragedy that they are apparently ignoring in favor of the shiny new tragedy.  Here's some Truth.  I do feel bad about children starving to death in Africa.  I feel bad about innocent people that have died in Afghanistan, and Iraq, and in Norway, and in Israel, and every fucking where where people are dying all day every day since time immemorial.  But I can't feel equally bad for all of those people everywhere all at the same time because the world is big and the deaths are inifinite, and if I try, my heart will probably burst in my chest, and then my family and community will feel extra bad about me for a moment, forgetting for a moment to feel extra bad about someone else, and then some jerkface will come along and point it out and make them feel crappy for it.  Enough.  Stop making people feel bad about the way they feel bad.  You know I love you E_R, but I stand firm in my position that chastizing people for feeling too badly about tragedy A and not badly enough about tragedy B is a pointless and mean spirited activity.

Ali, my apologies if any of my subsequent comments in this vein contributed to the general dickishness.  Not my intention.

Don't fret. Compared to my big swinging dickishness, yours was tiny.

Bwah!!!  :D
The Black Jester

"Religion is institutionalised superstition, science is institutionalised curiosity." - Tank

"Confederation of the dispossessed,
Fearing neither god nor master." - Killing Joke

http://theblackjester.wordpress.com

markmcdaniel

Quote from: fester30 on July 20, 2012, 04:55:12 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/20/louie-gohmert-aurora-shootings_n_1689099.html

So Congressman Louis Gohmert (R), Texas, thinks that the decline of Christianity in America leads to such tragedies as the Aurora, Colorado shooting.  Then he wonders out loud where the gun owners were to shoot the guy.

There were several people with guns in Arizona when Congresswoman Giffords was shot, and not a single one of them did anything to stop that lone gunman. 

As for the place of God in all this, perhaps he should talk to George Zimmerman, who claims his killing of Trayvon Martin was God's will.  Was it also God's will that placed this shooter in a crowded movie theater with tear gas and weapons?
I have already posted about Rep. Gohmart's comments about the Aurora shootings in the Batman shooting thread and will not repeat them here. am going to comment on the second part of his statement that an armed civilian could have stopped this situation from getting as horrible as it did. I would be among the first to admit that an armed civilian, in the right place at the right time, has the potential to stop an all ready bad situation from getting even worse, however what unfolded in Aurora was not one of those situations. Engaging in a firefight in a dark, crowded theater with people fleeing for there lives, an opponent wearing body armor and with smoke and tear gas being used is one of the few scenarios that I can thing of to make a terrible tragedy even more horrendous. 
It appears to me (whether rightly or wrongly) that direct arguments against Christianity and theism produce hardly any effect on the public; and freedom of thought is best promoted by the gradual illumination of men's minds which follows from the advance of science - Charles Darwin

I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the object of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a god, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotism. - Albert Einstein

Religion is a by product of fear. For much of human history, it may have been a necessary evil, but why was it more evil than necessary? Isn't killing people in the name of God a pretty good definition of insanity. - Arther C. Clarke

Faith means not wanting to know what is true. - Friedrich Nietzsche

fester30

Quote from: markmcdaniel on July 21, 2012, 03:35:01 AM
I have already posted about Rep. Gohmart's comments about the Aurora shootings in the Batman shooting thread and will not repeat them here. am going to comment on the second part of his statement that an armed civilian could have stopped this situation from getting as horrible as it did. I would be among the first to admit that an armed civilian, in the right place at the right time, has the potential to stop an all ready bad situation from getting even worse, however what unfolded in Aurora was not one of those situations. Engaging in a firefight in a dark, crowded theater with people fleeing for there lives, an opponent wearing body armor and with smoke and tear gas being used is one of the few scenarios that I can thing of to make a terrible tragedy even more horrendous. 

Armed civilian in the right place and time... and with the right training.  There's no guarantee any armed civilian has enough training with a firearm to know anything about clearing fields of fire so that they don't accidentally shoot the wrong person.  In Arkansas, they have to take just enough training to know how to load, charge, and unsafe their weapon, and squeeze the trigger at a target.  Also, without the proper training in emergency situations, people tend wind up as part of the bystander effect, which happened in Arizona.  They stand and watch, and even may think they should do something, but just freeze.  Like a street full of people walking by a person getting beat up by someone else.  "I'm sure someone has called the cops already, let's get out of here."

Tank

Quote from: Ali on July 21, 2012, 12:49:56 AM
Awww, it's okay.  I've had my little storm of temper and am feeling revived and refreshed. Sorry I implied that you and ER were pulling a "dick move." *Snick*

(((Ali)))
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

markmcdaniel

Quote from: RunFromMyLife on July 21, 2012, 02:44:52 PM
This is a slight derail but similar enough to post here I think. Agendas are fun!  >:(

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/hate-group-leaders-use-colorado-massacre-to-attack-gay-people/news/2012/07/20/44108

It makes me want to vomit.
Are there depths that these "people" will not sink to in order to push their agendas. I want the vomitorium when you are finished.
It appears to me (whether rightly or wrongly) that direct arguments against Christianity and theism produce hardly any effect on the public; and freedom of thought is best promoted by the gradual illumination of men's minds which follows from the advance of science - Charles Darwin

I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the object of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a god, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotism. - Albert Einstein

Religion is a by product of fear. For much of human history, it may have been a necessary evil, but why was it more evil than necessary? Isn't killing people in the name of God a pretty good definition of insanity. - Arther C. Clarke

Faith means not wanting to know what is true. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Sandra Craft

Quote from: En_Route on July 20, 2012, 06:27:51 PM
More children starved to death in Africa today than died in the cinema, but no - one is blinking an eyelid.

I think it's a bit much to assume that.  People can be concerned about more than one thing at a time, and starvation all over the world is an old and ongoing problem -- whatever we might be doing to try to help end it, there isn't much new that can be said about it.  The shooting in Aurora tho is brand new and naturally going to get a flurry of comments.
Sandy

  

"Life is short, and it is up to you to make it sweet."  Sarah Louise Delany

markmcdaniel

Quote from: fester30 on July 21, 2012, 07:42:42 AM
Quote from: markmcdaniel on July 21, 2012, 03:35:01 AM
I have already posted about Rep. Gohmart's comments about the Aurora shootings in the Batman shooting thread and will not repeat them here. am going to comment on the second part of his statement that an armed civilian could have stopped this situation from getting as horrible as it did. I would be among the first to admit that an armed civilian, in the right place at the right time, has the potential to stop an all ready bad situation from getting even worse, however what unfolded in Aurora was not one of those situations. Engaging in a firefight in a dark, crowded theater with people fleeing for there lives, an opponent wearing body armor and with smoke and tear gas being used is one of the few scenarios that I can thing of to make a terrible tragedy even more horrendous. 

Armed civilian in the right place and time... and with the right training.  There's no guarantee any armed civilian has enough training with a firearm to know anything about clearing fields of fire so that they don't accidentally shoot the wrong person.  In Arkansas, they have to take just enough training to know how to load, charge, and unsafe their weapon, and squeeze the trigger at a target.  Also, without the proper training in emergency situations, people tend wind up as part of the bystander effect, which happened in Arizona.  They stand and watch, and even may think they should do something, but just freeze.  Like a street full of people walking by a person getting beat up by someone else.  "I'm sure someone has called the cops already, let's get out of here."

Agreed training should be required. In thus case I doubt that any amount of training would have improved the situation.
It appears to me (whether rightly or wrongly) that direct arguments against Christianity and theism produce hardly any effect on the public; and freedom of thought is best promoted by the gradual illumination of men's minds which follows from the advance of science - Charles Darwin

I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the object of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a god, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotism. - Albert Einstein

Religion is a by product of fear. For much of human history, it may have been a necessary evil, but why was it more evil than necessary? Isn't killing people in the name of God a pretty good definition of insanity. - Arther C. Clarke

Faith means not wanting to know what is true. - Friedrich Nietzsche