CNN Publishes Fake Hate List — Targeting Well-Known Christian Groups

By Todd Starnes Published on August 18, 2017

Many Christian organizations are fearful for their safety after CNN published a bogus “hate map” concocted by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

“Here are all the active hate groups where you live,” CNN’s headline declared.

The list included among others American Family Association, Family Research Council, Alliance Defending Freedom, Liberty Counsel and Pacific Justice Institute.

American Family Association blasted the CNN story calling it a “sham news article that could easily incite violence and place AFA employees and supporters in harm’s way.”

Liberty Counsel President Mat Staver demanded an immediate retraction — calling CNN’s report “false, defamatory and dangerous.”

“Liberty Counsel is not a hate group,” he said. “The false ‘hate’ label is very damaging to our reputation and is a safety risk to our staff. Liberty Counsel is a Christian ministry, and hates no one.”

Conservatives and Christians have good reason to be worried. In 2012, Floyd Lee Corkins opened fire inside Family Research Council headquarters in Washington, D.C. A security guard was shot and wounded.

The domestic terrorist told police he wanted to kill as many employees as possible to intimidate opponents of same-sex marriage. Corkins brought along Chick-fil-A sandwiches, which he intended to smear on the faces of dead staffers.

So what does this have to do with CNN’s story? Corkins told authorities that he picked his target using the Southern Poverty Law Center’s so-called “hate map.”

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins appeared on my nationally syndicated radio show Thursday to condemn CNN for using material from an organization that is “an attack dog of the Left.”

“They are not a neutral arbiter that is calling balls and strikes. They are on the field — playing. They are pushing an agenda and anyone who opposes them — they slap a label on them,” Perkins told me. “They (SPLC) are inciting violence and it needs to stop,” he added.

Liberty Counsel pointed out that had CNN done due diligence they would have discovered that the SPLC hate map has been widely discredited. The Federal Bureau of Investigation removed the SPLC as a resource in 2014 — during the Obama Administration. And Liberty Counsel reports that in 2016 the Justice Department reprimanded SPLC’s lawyers for repeating “hate” misinformation.

Shortly after I called out CNN on my nationally syndicated radio show, they issued an editor’s note:

The headline on this story has been changed to more closely align with the content of the piece, which clearly indicates that the data on hate groups is from the Southern Poverty Law Center. This story has also been updated to provide direct links to the full list from the SPLC as opposed to publishing the entire list here.

That’s not good enough.

CNN must retract the entire story and publicly vow to never again use Southern Poverty Law Center’s inflammatory propaganda.

The cold hard reality is that CNN is responsible for placing a target on the backs of well-respected conservative groups and Christian ministries.

We can only pray there’s not another Floyd Corkins lurking in the shadows — and reading CNN’s bogus report.

 

 

Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. His latest book is The Deplorables’ Guide to Making America Great Again. Follow Todd on Twitter @ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.

Originally published on ToddStarnes.com. Reprinted with permission.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Lee Phillips

    Would like to see a list of sponsors of CNN and SPLC. So I would be able to make sure and not contribute to their Satanic activities.

  • Boommach

    White supremacists, black supremacists, BLM, the enviro greenies, the warmers, and ALL leftists worship a god who is the antithesis of the Truth. We are dealing with evil.

  • Christine Wright

    They have done this to good groups such as the Clarion Project.. They are nothing even close to an “anti-Muslim hate group”.. education and advocating around the world for the rights of people (such as saying it’s wrong to call for the murder of gays,and or murder them for being gay) and speaking on the topic of extremism, almost always using Muslims as sources and or writers.. to target people like this is WRONG! Just plain wrong..

    and Shoebat? He’s a former Muslim and while I don’t agree with him lots of the time I also wouldn’t call him a “hate group” either.. I think he’s in it for the money.. but yeah, going after former Muslims now for speaking against Islam? Ridiculous… maybe splc wants to be an arm of the Islamic State now?

    This type of thing should be well beneath any news organization to address, outside of calling out the ludicrousness of this hit list.

  • Boris

    It’s ironic that these Christian organizations that have words like “liberty” and “freedom” in their names always want to restrict the citizen’s freedoms and liberties. Except for the freedoms and liberties of white Protestant males of course. When you are a member of a religion that teaches that everyone who is a non-Christian deserves eternal torment you are a member of a hate group. The entire Christian superstition is a hate group by every definition of the term. Christians, please don’t tell us you love us, we all know you only say it because you believe you’ve been commanded to by a magical wizard. We unbelievers know love is an uncontrollable emotion that can not be commanded into existence. That’s why we say, “Love the Christian, hate the Christianity.”

    • Christine Wright

      The thing about Christianity, is that it teaches God is the one who does the deciding, not man. The punishment, should there be any, is done by God AFTER someone dies. So, even if I think you will go to Hell for not accepting Christ as your savior, neither does that ever affect how I will treat you. Our God doesn’t tell anyone they have to kill a man for his beliefs, quite the contrary in 1 Corinthians 5:12 It says : “What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside.” A Christian doesn’t damn anyone to Hell.. nor hurt anyone for what they believe. It cannot be considered hate, and if it bothers you for someone to honestly believe your going to Hell after you die, that is your problem not theirs. A person ‘s free to believe whatever they like… you might believe I’m crazy, if it bothers me, it’s my problem not yours. Belief is belief is belief. You can allow it to mean something to you, or choose not to. It’s not an action which can hurt.

      • Boris

        Christianity’s teachings come from men, not from any God. Christianity proves it has no compelling evidence for its claims by having to resort to threats to induce belief. It’s a con, preying on the widely held fears and superstitions of people and offering them a solution it does not have. The only reason the Christian superstition survives is because the dead can’t come back and demand a refund.

        • Christine Wright

          You are free to believe anything you like, God doesn’t force anyone, which is the awesome thing about God.. God invites people to a relationship with Him, in which men are free to decide if that is something they want. Those who choose the relationship have empirical knowledge, and those who don’t choose a relationship are free to enjoy their own freedom of choice.

          The Word of God comes from God, some men may not understand it and therefore distort it’s intended meaning (no one likes to look ignorant) others may abuse it for their own gain, but that doesn’t change the fact it’s His Word. Of course, this is my belief and again, a belief is a belief is a belief. Mine is no less valid than yours.

          • Boris

            The Bible is not the Word of God. It’s the words of backward, superstitious, animal sacrificing primitives. There’s not a shred of evidence that anything in the Bible even might be true. The Passover event described in the Bible is total fiction. No Passover, no Passover lamb. POOF. Pick up a science book if you want the truth.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            What do you mean no evidence when talking about the bible please explain and give an actual explanation and real scholars ?! Do you believe science is the only way to truth

          • Boris

            When I say there is no evidence to support any of the claims or stories in the Bible that doesn’t require an explanation or any real scholars. That means that there would be a mountain evidence for a tragic event in which every first born child and animal in Egypt all died on one night. There isn’t any, the story is religious fiction, NOT an historical reality. None of the stories in the Bible can be verified. We cannot verify the existence of ANY of the major figures in the Bible either from Adam to Jesus and everybody in between. Finally historical narratives do not contain dialog, people all speaking to each other in complete sentences. The Bible is 100 percent fiction. Science is the only path to knowledge. There is no other way. Revelations and philosophies are nonsense, time wasters.

          • tether

            You really need to quit listening to what people say and do some research of your own. Here are some examples of evidence of Jesus and Paul.
            First Jesus,
            This is from Tacitus a Roman Historian
            Nero fastened the guilt … on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of … Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome.

            Next from a letter from Pliny the Younger to Emporer Trajan,
            They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food – but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

            Or how about this from Josephus a first century Jewish Historian.

            On two occasions, in his Jewish Antiquities, he mentions Jesus. The second, less revealing, reference describes the condemnation of one “James” by the Jewish Sanhedrin. This James, says Josephus, was “the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ.
            And this earlier one that is debated by scholars some argue that is was edited some time after the original.

            About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he … wrought surprising feats…. He was the Christ. When Pilate …condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared … restored to life…. And the tribe of Christians … has … not disappeared.

            How about the Babylonian Talmud that said,

            On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald … cried, “He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy.”

            Lucian Samosata, a Greek satirist

            The Christians … worship a man to this day – the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account…. [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.

            Now how about St. Paul or the Apostle Paul,
            St Clement wrote this in about 95 AD.
            “Let us set before our eyes the good Apostles. …By reason of jealousy and strife Paul by his example pointed out the prize of patient endurance. After that he had been seven times in bonds, had been driven into exile, had been stoned, had preached in the East and West, we won the noble renown which was the reward of his faith, having taught righteousness unto the whole world and having reached the farthest bounds of the West; and when he had borne his testimony before the rulers, so he departed from the world and went unto the holy place, having been found a notable pattern of patient endurance.”

            8/23/97 AD Ignatius of Antioch wrote
            “I do not enjoin you as Peter and Paul did. They were Apostles, I am a convict; they were free, but I am a slave to this very hour.”

            Polycarp, Wrote this to the Philipians,

            “For neither am I, nor is any other like unto me, able to follow the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul, who when he came among you taught face to face with the men of that day the word which concerneth truly carefully and surely; who also, when he was absent, wrote a letter unto you, into the which if ye look diligently, ye shall be able to be builded up unto the faith given to you, which is the mother of us all, while hope followeth after and love goeth before–love toward God and Christ and toward our neighbor. For if any man be occupied with these, he hath fulfilled the commandment of righteousness; for he that hath love is far from all sin.”

            This took about 10 minutes to find. Do your own homework before you open your mouth because there are plenty of examples out there.
            Keep in mind they didn’t write history books back then so all we have to go on are letters and the such.

            You might also want to consider that the New testament if filled with letters from the apostles to the various churches. They were in deed written under the direction of the Holy Spirit whom we all need to get to know.

            You asked and I presented a few examples. I am done. If you really want to know the truth then do the research. Unless of coarse you are just a troll wanting to argue.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            Don’t he listed Gerald Massey as a credible historian and source.

          • Boris

            Why isn’t Gerald Massey a credible historian? Come on step up to the plate and tell us all. Your scholars don’t like Massey because he doesn’t agree with them. He knew more than they do. Especially about Egypt and all the other dying and rising god men you don’t know about. That’s it. You’re in so far over your head it’s ridiculous. You don;t know anything about science or your retarded religion. And Christianity is truly the most retarded thing ever invented by humans.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            Gerald Massey was a 1800s poet and a pseudo and amateur self taught Egyptologist. No modern scholars in biblical, Greco-Romans or ancient Egyptian field and studies trusts or sees him as someone as highly recommendable.
            “Come on step up to the plate ”
            You mean how you 1. Couldn’t tell, state or give any evidence to support your thesis on theology web. 2. Made up nonsense along the way. 3. Refused to debate certain people, even though there were people willing to set up a formal debate with you and 4. Some how claimed victory through this ?!
            This is actually retarded.

          • Boris

            You gave no reason for WHY no modern scholars in biblical, Greco-Romans or ancient Egyptian field and studies trusts or sees him as someone as highly recommendable. Massey’s work on the history of Egypt is the most comprehensive study ever done on the subject and outside of Christian propagandists and fairy believing “scholars” Massey is very well respected. Again Massey’s work proved that Christianity is borrowed from other older religions and you don;t like it. So cry wah wah wah all the way home. Frank Turkel banned me from his website as soon as he remembered who I was. I made him cry before and I would have done it again. Just like you’re crying right now. Boy.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            I did, Massey was a poet and self taught Egyptologist not an actual Egyptologist who had spent time studying the field like others had done at the time. No one goes to him as an actual source. He is also out of date in terms of modern scholarship that has since found more archeology and understands more in it’s historicity.
            “Massey’s work on the history of Egypt is the most comprehensive study ever done on the subject and outside of Christian propagandists and fairy believing “scholars” Massey is very well respected. ”
            Really ? According to whom ?
            “Again Massey’s work proved that Christianity is borrowed from other older religions and you don’t like it. ”
            According to whom ?

            Mr Holding already stated he did not ban you from his websites. As for crying I have no knowledge what you are talking about.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            No, if it is necessary it doesn’t need a cause. Plus, someone still has to collapse the wave function to physical reality.

            Alos, who said everything needs a cause?

          • Boris

            What is it that is necessary? Your mistake is saying that “someone” had to do something. Something did something. There was no one around to do anything when the universe began to expand. It happened quite naturally. Your “wave function” and “physical reality” are what we call woo woo. You have no idea what you are talking about. You’re a scientific ignoramus. You believe in 900 year old people, demons, talking snakes and donkeys, snakes that turn into sticks, witches who contact the dead, angels and who knows what else other people have packed your head with. Don’t pretend to know anything about the real world. You already proved you don’t.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            Quantum mechanics requires observations, and that takes us back to conscious observers​ as John von Neumann and Henry Stapp have pointed out. Calling it woo woo is not an argument. Trying to insult the Bible is not an argument.

          • Boris

            Being purposely vague and using meaningless terminology is woo woo. No one has to witness something to know what happened or more importantly what did not happen.

          • Boris

            You’ll never learn anything about science listening to people who themselves do not understand it and more importantly don’t want YOU to understand it. For once you get a whiff of science religion gets flushed down the toilet where it belongs and always has. Read ’em and weep.
            Richard P. Feynman (Nobel Prize, 1965):
            Nature does not know what you are looking at, and she behaves the way she is going to behave whether you bother to take down the data or not (Feynman et al., 1965).
            Murray Gellmann (Nobel Prize, 1969):
            The universe presumably couldn’t care less whether human beings evolved on some obscure planet to study its history; it goes on obeying the quantum mechanical laws of physics irrespective of observation by physicists (Rosenblum and Kuttner 2006, 156).
            Anthony J. Leggett (Nobel Prize 2003):
            It may be somewhat dangerous to explain something one does not understand very well [the quantum measurement process] by invoking something [consciousness] one does not understand at all! (Leggett, 1991).
            John A. Wheeler:
            Caution: “Consciousness” has nothing whatsover to do with the quantum process. We are dealing with an event that makes itself known by an irreversible act of amplification, by an indelible record, an act of registration. Does that record subsequently enter into the “consciousness” of some person, some animal or some computer? Is that the first step into translating the measurement into “meaning” meaning regarded as “the joint product of all the evidence that is available to those who communicate.” Then that is a separate part of the story, important but not to be confused with “quantum phenomena.” (Wheeler, 1983).
            John S. Bell: From some popular presentations the general public could get the impression that the very existence of the cosmos depends on our being here to observe the observables. I do not know that this is wrong. I am inclined to hope that we are indeed that important. But I see no evidence that it is so in the success of contemporary quantum theory.
            So I think that it is not right to tell the public that a central role for conscious mind is integrated into modern atomic physics. Or that `information’ is the real stuff of physical theory. It seems to me irresponsible to suggest that technical features of contemporary theory were anticipated by the saints of ancient religions… by introspection.
            The only ‘observer’ which is essential in orthodox practical quantum theory is the inanimate apparatus which amplifies the microscopic events to macroscopic consequences. Of course this apparatus, in laboratory experiments, is chosen and adjusted by the experiments. In this sense the outcomes of experiments are indeed dependent on the mental process of the experimenters! But once the apparatus is in place, and functioning untouched, it is a matter of complete indifference – according to ordinary quantum mechanics – whether the experimenters stay around to watch, or delegate such ‘observing’ to computers, (Bell, 1984).
            Nico van Kampem:
            Whoever endows with more meaning than is needed for computing observable phenomena is responsible for the consequences. (van Kampen, 1988).

          • Shaquille Harvey
          • Shaquille Harvey

            Also, You just quotes a bunch of experts. I can do that too, but you need to accompany an actualy argument and evidence.

          • Boris

            Yeah I know how you Bible thumpers hate experts. Yet you refer to your own “experts” all the time. ROFL! It just doesn’t get any dumber than you.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            I’m referring to scientific experts qualified in specific fields. Give an actual argument, not typically atheist sound bites.

          • Boris

            No you are not. The people you mentioned are Christians. This means we cannot believe a word they say. Sorry that’s the way we are in the real world. You do not get to sit at the same table as we adults. Now go play with your toys.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            1. Did you bother to watch the link I sent ?
            2. Excluding Christians?! Not only is this atheistic snobbery but special pleading; denoting and excluding a whole worldview but excepting your worldview.
            3. Using name calling and false statements is not an argument. Show how the video misinterpreted the Kochen-Specker theorem ​or misrepresents the evidence.
            Also, actually better – tell and state them to the person behind the video here;
            https://www(dot)facebook(dot)com/inspiringphilosophy/

            If you’re going to actually give an intelligent statement, give an actual and credible argument not cheap atheist rhetoric.

          • Boris

            I did not watch any videos from apologetic websites. It’s all lies. We exclude Christians because they don’t give a rip about anything but their stupid religion and will tell as many lies as it takes to try to defend it. I don’t need arguments. I have evidence for what I believe. You don’t which is why you have to defend your superstitions with arguments. The First Cause Argument, The Design Argument, The Moral Argument, The Fine Tuning Argument. The Ontological Argument were all developed because you believers have no evidence for your beliefs. Not a shred. NOTHING. If you did you wouldn’t have to try to foist all these stupid and logically flawed arguments on us and yourselves. So come back when you have evidence instead of arguments. You can’t so goodbye Loser.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            So no evidence as per usual !?
            Just cheap, useless atheist sound bites.
            I love how you keep claiming to win yet provide nothing but ad hominem attacks and fallacies.
            You provide no evidence nor actual arguments. No intelligence here per usual.

          • Boris

            Evidence for WHAT exactly? I’m not the one making any claims. YOU are.

          • Boris

            ROFL!!!! Not one of those people was alive anywhere near the time Jesus supposedly lived. None of the secular accounts mention Jesus by name only that there were Christians at that time. You have proved the sheer desperation of your position. Thanks. Jesus never existed. com should help.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            An historian does not need to be alive for modern day historians to recognise that person as historical.

          • Christine Wright

            This is your opinion. Mine is no less worthy an opinion than yours. That is the beauty of a free country, I get to believe as I please, and so do you. 🙂 as for science I read that too and I believe it’s done a great deal of good for the human race, but it’s not my God.

          • Boris

            Your God does not exist

          • Christine Wright

            I cannot see how your opinion in any way or manner should trump or supersede my belief. I have the right to believe whatever I like.. my opinion based on my own experiences are mine to hold, just as yours are yours to hold, and it seems you feel as if your opinion should mean more somehow than my own.. I’m not here to convince you of my beliefs, on the contrary it doesn’t bother me at all what you believe.. Yet, it seems to bother you that I have a belief that is not your own.

          • Boris

            The difference between you and me is that I do not have any beliefs. Only guesses. Educated guesses.

          • tether

            You might want to check your secular historical records. There are documented records outside the bible of Jesus His crucifixion, and there were hundreds of witnesses to His resurrection.
            Ask yourself this, would you die for a lie? Would you willingly die to perpetuate a lie? The 11 of the 12 disciples died brutal deaths for what you call a lie. They weren’t all together in one place at one time. Some died alone with no one but their accusers there and yet they still refused to denounce Jesus knowing that they were about to die because of it. All they had to do was keep quiet and not preach the gospel and they would have been fine. But they chose to not keep quiet because they knew the truth and wanted everyone else to know the truth as well.
            Then don’t forget that the old testament was written long before Jesus was even born yet it prophesied of His coming birth, and his brutal death. It also prophesied of His return and the events to come.
            There are many biblical prophesies that have come to pass and the rest will indeed come to be as well. It is impossible for God to lie. If God says it is raining it does because He is truth.

          • Boris

            Now let’s see those documented records. What are they and who documented them? Actually there are no documented records at all that mention Jesus Christ or any of his disciples. The disciples are not witnesses to anything, they are all part of the same story. There are no records of any of the disciples doing anything least of all being martyrs. In Myths of Persecution Candida Moss proves that the Church just made up all the stories about persecution to excuse their own persecutions of heretics. Jesus Christ never even existed.

    • Shaquille Harvey

      Please state what science can determine and what methodology can prove love is real and true ?

      • Boris

        Define “love.” A potent example of how Christianity manipulates language to distort reality is the use of love, which translates to obedience: “If you love me, you will keep my commandments…He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me” (John 14:15, 21). Just as truth is torn away from the realm of fact in Christian speak, love is removed from the realm of human affections. Human love is disparaged as frail and fickle, while agape – unselfish, altruistic love that is from God love – is held up as ideal. This can appeal greatly to converts disappointed with human relationships. Yet, it has little to do with what we usually think of love: affection, sharing thoughts and feelings, caring accepting, forgiving, empathizing touching listening, giving, respecting, helping, appreciating, supporting, and so on. It is a mental activity of adhering to a code. A Christian “loves” a sinner because God “loves” the sinner and one must follow suit. Love to the Evangelist is simply a willingness to put up with a sinner in order to obey the commission to preach the gospel. Thus the Christian can say, without noticing the inconsistency, “I love the sinner, but not the sin.” To the uninitiated, this is a strange kind of love that tries to divorce persons from their activities and then judges those activities with amazing ferocity. In this type of love, there is no desire to know or be known, which in our everyday understanding, underlies the condition of love. Normally the development of intimacy in human relations involves increasing levels of self-disclosure ans mutual acceptance based on equal standing. In contrast, the Christian preaching the gospel is by no means acting vulnerable, while working hard to find a vulnerable spot in the potential proselyte. In other words for atheists love is real. For the religious it’s fake. You only love yourselves. Got it?

        • Shaquille Harvey

          Agape while altruistic I would also state as transcended and unconditionally. While it may not always “support” the person in question it loves them no matter what their fault is and aids them to do what is right for person, health, mentally, physically, spiritually etc. Christian love very much speaks on forgiveness and restoration and does not speak on “a willingness to put up with the sinner” that would be speaking of tolerance now, and Christians as a majority aren’t using this term a lot compared to other groups who actually are.
          The love you defined, while empathy and respecting may be good qualities as well however, sounds more putting up with the person and their faults, not saying anything in fear of rejection and basically agreeing with the people who have opinions and views similar to yours. As if the case then where is the need to do what is ultimately good for the person while loving them no matter what especially in cases such as drug addicts and so on?

          “In other words for atheists love is real. For the religious it’s fake. ”

          How especially if the atheist happens to be a materialist ? How can things like love and forgiveness exist in a materialistic world and universe if at the end we are all molecules and motion ? What science and scientific methodology can determine again and corroborate the findings of the two in reality?

          • Boris

            Your questions ignore what happens when organisms live socially. Since humans are social animals and they benefit from interactions with others, natural selection should favor behavior that allows us to better get along with others.
            First of all if you actually wanted the answers to these questions you could read the scientific literature on the subject. There’s plenty of it. However when Bible thumpers ask these kinds of questions you’re not doing it because you want to learn. You do it hoping that your critic won’t know the answers and you can then try claim that only your God can explain things like love and morality. It used to be believed that God was behind every natural occurrence, hurling lighting bolts, causing earthquakes, droughts, famines and death. We now have the real explanations for all these natural occurrences. So you believers are becoming increasing desperate clutching at anything you can and trying to still say God must be given credit for something. You claim this or that doesn’t have a naturalistic explanation so God must have done it. That is a classic example of the Argument from Incredulity. Just because we may not have a naturalistic explanation for something currently does not mean we won;t find one in the future. Humans didn’t have an explanation for lightning. Now we do. When Ben Franklin wrote about his lightning experiments Christians threatened him for trying to usurp God’s power. You’re just like them in every way.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            “Your questions ignore what happens when organisms live socially. Since humans are social animals and they benefit from interactions with others, natural selection should favor behavior that allows us to better get along with others. ”
            Since when ? What science do you have for this assertion? what would and are the basis for this happening and why? What of also survival of the fittest in this as a whole ?

            “First of all if you actually wanted the answers to these questions you could read the scientific literature on the subject. There’s plenty of it. ”
            I could say the same to you with reading books on science and it’s history. Since you state philosophy is nonsense you should also read books on both philosophies and its relationship to science. while you’re it, perhaps read actual peer reviewed articles and highly acclaimed historical books on the biblical texts, Jesus, and learn what is actually going on in modern scholarship with actual scholars not second hand or out of date ones.

            “However when Bible thumpers ask these kinds of questions you’re not doing it because you want to learn. You do it hoping that your critic won’t know the answers and you can then try claim that only your God can explain things like love and morality. ”
            So please explain as an atheist where does love come from ? What is love ? What science can determine and verify love and prove it? Where do you as an atheist get your morality from ? What is the objective basis for it? Why is it objectively good and right ? Where does it come from and can it be verified too?

            “It used to be believed that God was behind every natural occurrence, hurling lighting bolts, causing earthquakes, droughts, famines and death. We now have the real explanations for all these natural occurrences. ”
            This is a straw man on all Christians here. Some Christians of course do believe this but not all Christians do or did.

            “So you believers are becoming increasing desperate clutching at anything you can and trying to still say God must be given credit for something. You claim this or that doesn’t have a naturalistic explanation so God must have done it. That is a classic example of the Argument from Incredulity. Just because we may not have a naturalistic explanation for something currently does not mean we won’t find one in the future. ”
            So you state Christians are giving credit to God and state it as an argument from incredulity yet you do some what of the same, by making a non sequitur by stating we don’t know but it must be or have been naturalistic.

            “Humans didn’t have an explanation for lightning. Now we do. When Ben Franklin wrote about his lightning experiments Christians threatened him for trying to usurp God’s power. You’re just like them in every way.”
            What ? What evidence do you have for this assertion?

          • Boris

            In America the earthquake of 1755 was widely ascribed, especially in Massachusetts, to Franklin’s rod. The Rev. Thomas Prince, pastor of the Old South Church, published a sermon on the subject, and in the appendix expressed the opinion that the frequency of earthquakes may be due to the erection of “iron points invented by the sagacious Mr. Franklin.” He goes on to argue that “in Boston are more erected than anywhere else in New England, and Boston seems to be more dreadfully shaken. Oh! There is no getting out of the mighty hand of God.”

            Why does our sense of objective morality require a supernatural source? Morality is based in choices and choices are rooted in values. For humans, the most basic choice is between life and death, so the ultimate value is life. Anything which protects, enhances and improves human life is termed “good” that which harms or destroys it is “evil.” So my basis for morality is objective because it is based on the value of human life itself. This leads to a far more compassionate and rational system than that of a deity whose whims cannot be understood and who is not constrained in any manner by the commands he gives to others. Your morality is subjective to the extreme because it is established by a being whose motives and very nature are absolutely beyond human comprehension which makes it impossible to discern any moral law beyond, ”God wills it.” This is why religious people are so dangerous and Christianity has such a violent and bloodthirsty past. You have no basis for morals or ethics.

            Survival of the fittest is Nature’s rule, not ours. Since we discovered how natural selection works we have been able to work towards the survival of everybody including the unfit and infirm. An easy example is bad eyesight. 10,000 years ago bad eyesight would have gotten you killed very early in life before you could reproduce and pass those bad genes to your progeny. However with glasses people can now pass their bad genes onto their children which sort of reverses the process of evolution. To counter this we are working on ways to make it so people do not pass bad traits and characteristics to the next generation. Science is the process by which all of this occurs. The days of your evil and false and regressive religion standing in the way of scientific progress are over forever. Had this religion never gotten started we would have been on the moon 1400 years ago and found a cure for all cancers about 1200 years ago. The needless suffering the world has endured because of the Christian hatred and fear of science is the greatest evil the planet has ever known. Atheism is inevitable and when we are the majority in about 5 years you Bible thumpers had better hope we do not treat you the way you have treated us for 2000 years. There are probably quite a few ex-Christians who would not mind using about 20 million of you to toast their marsh mellows.

          • tether

            So you think that since we now know how lightning is formed that God is not the source?
            Who do you suppose created the earth, and everything else in the universe? Even if you believe in the big bang theory who caused the bang?

          • Boris

            Vacuum fluctuation caused the Big Bang. Pick up a science book. The universe itself is uncaused.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            By what science are you basing this on ?
            What evidence?

          • Boris

            The proof is based on a special set of solutions to a mathematical entity known as the Wheeler-DeWitt equation. Now what’s your evidence that the universe came into existence because a wizard did a magical incantation? Come on with it. Step up to the plate. Or will you fold like your cult leader Frank Turkel did?

          • Shaquille Harvey

            The Wheeler-DeWitt equation calculated the wave function of the universe and shows it is timeless, it doesn’t show it is uncaused. The collapse​ of the wave function to the physical universe is still necessary and you need an observer for that.

          • Boris

            If the universe is timeless it doesn’t need a cause. Duh. You are truly a scientific ignoramus. If everything needs a cause then what caused God? If a cause is not necessary to explain the existence of God then it isn’t necessary to explain the existence of the universe either. Being a Bible believer automatically makes you wrong about EVERYTHING.

          • tether

            Science is flawed it is of men. Science told us the earth was flat. Science told us we evolved from apes, yet if we need an organ we can’t use tissue from an ape but we can use tissue from a pig. Science is nothing more than theories.
            The universe is uncaused according to man but not according to the Creator. But man thinks he is smarter than the creator.

          • Boris

            You owe your continued existence to science, not any God. Humans are a species of ape and all of your whining will never change that. In science a theory is an explanation of the facts. Common descent is a fact. The Theory of Evolution explains the fact of common descent. Every Christian college and university in the world that teaches life sciences teaches this. Your own academic community thinks you’re nuts. I agree.

Inspiration
Football Rivalry? Not Among Brothers and Sisters in the Lord
Al Perrotta
More from The Stream
Connect with Us