There’s a tipping point between pointing out the absurdity of beleif when it’s funny and just representing the beleif and it’s scary.
THis one really straddles the line, but it’s closer to the scary for me because of the opening line of being persecuted – that beleiver mentality of being attacked is really bizarre when they act like they are still a minority cult and the Coliseum is open for business.
If xtian beleivers in the US want to know what persecution really looks like, they should look at what their group does to gays and lesbians
Very nice point, Nina. For that matter, gays and lesbians aren’t always treated well by secular society, at least in the US. Still, tolerance and awareness of homosexuals as people does seem to be increasing here, even at the current “two steps forward, one step back” pace.
Happy Turkey Day to my fellow USAmericans and wishing a day of fine eating and family to all others!
Well, NO ONE is always treated well by ANY society, assuming they are not identical. But yeah, the persecuted line is the really freaky part; everytime someone opposes state-mandated prayer in schools or suggest that maybe churches shouldn’t get to drive up property values in nice neighborhoods by not paying property taxes, it’s horrible persecution. I bet those with a dark sense of humor in Israel find that hilarious.
Blasphemers! It is Mithras’ real birthday and you should all be celebrating it.
After all, he died for your sins (after having been born to a virgin and, as the sun god was worshipped in mid-winter and shown with a sunny glow -ie halo- about his head.
That newfangled jewish imposter must be exposed for what he is. And cruxified or something….
Whoah, I had always assumed London as a background (assumption based on the bias of most UK media). But looking at the new digitally enhanced scenery: Pennines? Lake District? Are J+M talking with northern accents? This is where Muslim and (nominal) Christian culture rub up against each other most roughly of course. Nice one Author.
I am surprised to see Mo. Is he not going on the hadj? Is he perhaps scared of catching the “Mexican” flu (mustn’t mention the trotter’s name, it is haram).
Curiously on an Irish political debate site people from a Christian background are adopting this tone against those who are saying that in the light of current child abuse revelations (and the role of the hierarchy in covering up this abuse) the church should not have any role in state sponsored education.
There IS mention of gays/lesbians in the bible. They’re mentioned in the same chapter as fir trees/logs, giant rabbits, chocolate eggs containing actual chickens and dinosaurs.
Quick question(s); are atheists willing to accept the traditions of polytheism as long as it is apparent that the traditions of certain monotheisms have been used to cover them up? Is it OK to discredit one religion by citing another? Is paganism acceptable? Is the enemy of my enemy my friend?
I only ask because the same was done at Easter.
Given that some other religions (namely Hindu) have been vilified on this site before, I was wondering if it’s only religions currently mass practiced that have to take it up the jacksy 😀
r00db00y, of course I can’t speak for anyone else but I think the Christmas thing is mostly about the fact that Christians pick one of the meanings that have been tacked onto the holiday over the years and insisting that everyone respects it as the true meaning of Christmas. In years to come when the cult of yellow sock wearers is supplanting the commercialism of Retailmas I will point out to all the outraged retailers that it wasn’t always Retailmas anyway. Then I will go out on my second-hand hoverboard wearing nothing but yellow socks in defiance of Toys R Us.
I find it really funny here in the States when Christians get all worked up about the lack of religiosity in the Christmas season! They don’t know their early American history well because celebrating Christmas was outlawed in many places (primarily the New England states) until the 19th century. Those Christians opposed to it largely considered the holiday “Papist” and refused to commemorate it.
– ‘Accept’ in what sense? Why do you expect any one atheist to be able to answer for all the others?
– How is it possible not to?
– ‘Acceptable’ in what sense, and to whom?
– Depends on the circumstances. How can anyone else tell you the answer?
– Well we’re talking about christmas now, but what difference does it make whether it’s easter or christmas?
The site’s called ‘Jesus and Mo’ in case you missed it. Sometimes other religions are addressed. In what way does not systematically and specifically criticizing every religion the human race has ever invented reduce the validity of the criticisms of these particular two (or three if you prefer)?
‘Vilified’ is an exaggeration. ‘Mocked’ would be more accurate.
How would you distinguish between intelligent, ironic criticism and mockery on one hand, and ‘taking it up the jacksy’ on the other? Why do you feel religions practiced by large numbers should be exempt from either?
I have no problem with Christians wishing to celebrate the birth of their Lord and Savior over the midwinter period. I do have a bit of a problem when they seek to monopolise the festivities by claiming that only they know the true meaning of Christmas and that we should all celebrate it their way or not at all. The festive season also generally brings a rash of non-stories from the tabloid press about evil PC types wanting to rebrand Christmas as Winterval and to spoil all the Christian’s fun, these have become utterly tiresome over the years.
On the subject of cards, I quite like the slightly unusual cards from http://www.hedinghamfair.co.uk that have a somewhat pagan feel and have info about various bygone Christmas traditions on the back.
The traditions of any religion are no more acceptable than other religions owing to the type of religion. All religions have the same evidence – none – and thus are all equally not valid.
That said, some traditions are more acceptable than others based on assessing their benefit/harm ratio.
Brother Daniel
Romans 1:26 says “unnatural” or “against nature”. The only other mentions of women doing unusual sex are regarding bestiality. No indication of girl-on-girl. Anywhere.
@RB I think we may have got our purposes crossed?
I would not use one religion to discredit another. However, by pointing out the similarities between lots of disparate religious beliefs across time and space, many of which have had no opportunity for cross polination, I claim that there is a prima facie case for saying that these beliefs answer to a deep human need (to make sense of an otherwise unust universe?), rather than are a response to an external truth (Christ is risen?).
For example, if I describe a redeemer god as someone with a magical birth, who died for our sins and was resurrected and will bring justice to the downtrodden I could be describing Christ. I could also be describing Krishna son of Devi (Hinduism); Quetzlcoatl of the Mexica; Mithras of the Pagans/ Persians; Attis of the Galatian Phygians; Osiris of the Egyptians; Dionysus of the Greeks; Zoroasta, or (some versions of) the Buddha. In some cases these are clearly the same person (e.g. Dionysus comes from Osiris) but in other cases they arise separately. For example, Mithras predates Christ by 600 years. In many cases the life histories (e.g. virginity of mother, cannibalism of the martyr) and words used about them (e.g. “light”, “redeemer”) are strikingly similar.
This knowledge tends to surprise many christians, who often use the so-called unique character of christ as evidence to shore up their faith. They are wrong.
The former UK law against homosexuality never prohibited lesbianism, reputedly because when Victoria came to sign the law she found the idea of sinful thoughts of ungodly woman sex disgusting.
Those who have not yet looked up Romans 1:26 are in for a treat if they read the very next verse:
“1:27 And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the
women, have burned in their lusts, one towards another: men with men,
working that which is filthy and receiving in themselves the recompense
which was due to their error.” (Douay-Rheims Bible)
kiyaroru: When you consider the parallelism with the next verse (which starts with “in the same way” and then refers explicitly to male homosexuality), it seems most likely that Rom 1:26 does indeed refer to lesbianism. You’re right that it isn’t explicitly so, and so there’s room for other interpretations, but it’s (IMO) the most likely interpretation (as well as the traditional one FWIW).
I don’t have any problem with celebrating Jesus’ birthday on Dec. 25 – after all, if He existed at all, He had to have a birthday sometime, right? So since we have no way of knowing the actual date, Dec. 25 is as good a choice as any. Though it must be a bummer to have your birthday be the same day as Christmas. 😉 😉 😉
Jesus & Mo (the characters) are absurd, blinkered, and oddly very sweet. J&M (the cartoon) is brilliant: sharp, delicious, irresistible. Salman Rushdie
Jesus and Mo cartoons are wonderfully funny and true. Richard Dawkins
Jesus and Mo make the world a better place, bless their little hearts. Ophelia Benson
In a world defined by outrage and offence and liberal spinelessness, Jesus and Mo is a treasure, whose value we should never fail to recognize. Read them. Laugh. And think. Kenan Malik
The brilliant, celebrated, freaking hilarious atheist comic strip ... Greta Christina
...rays of sanity in a befuddled world. Keri Hulme
The liveliest depictions of Muhammad currently available... Malise Ruthven
J & Mo is the funniest and most consistently thought-provoking cartoon strip on the Net. In a saner world, it would run in a major newspaper. Nelson Jones, Heresy Corner
Consistently amusing, frequently thought-provoking and often heart-warming. New Humanist
Jesus & Mo is one of the most wonderful things on the internet.. JT Eberhard
Wittily captures much of the absurdity of religious apologetics. Mano Singham
I love jesusandmo.net cartoons - witty and sharp! Katha Pollitt
Often hilarious, frequently wry, these cartoons do what all the best cartoons do: they tell the truth through humour. Terry Sanderson, NSS President
...a wonderfully acid British cartoonist... Nick Cohen
I love the scrappy mockery of Jesus and Mo. Freedom of speech
includes the freedom to mock any person, any thing, any activity, and
any belief -- and J&M stands up for this unflinchingly Richard Stallman
...empowering, important and deeply progressive, not to mention hilarious... Council of Ex-Muslims
April 26, 2007
If the Queen can have a pretend birthday, so can Jesus.
Abolish the monarchy!
There’s a tipping point between pointing out the absurdity of beleif when it’s funny and just representing the beleif and it’s scary.
THis one really straddles the line, but it’s closer to the scary for me because of the opening line of being persecuted – that beleiver mentality of being attacked is really bizarre when they act like they are still a minority cult and the Coliseum is open for business.
If xtian beleivers in the US want to know what persecution really looks like, they should look at what their group does to gays and lesbians
tee hee
This year I’m sending “Merry Pretend Birthday” cards!
There is not one word, not a whisper of a hint of an indication about lesbians anywhere in the bible. Where do the christers get it from?
Very nice point, Nina. For that matter, gays and lesbians aren’t always treated well by secular society, at least in the US. Still, tolerance and awareness of homosexuals as people does seem to be increasing here, even at the current “two steps forward, one step back” pace.
Happy Turkey Day to my fellow USAmericans and wishing a day of fine eating and family to all others!
Are there any Jesus and Mo Christmas cards… or Saturnalia cards come to that?
Well, NO ONE is always treated well by ANY society, assuming they are not identical. But yeah, the persecuted line is the really freaky part; everytime someone opposes state-mandated prayer in schools or suggest that maybe churches shouldn’t get to drive up property values in nice neighborhoods by not paying property taxes, it’s horrible persecution. I bet those with a dark sense of humor in Israel find that hilarious.
I somehow have the disconcerting feeling that I saw this one before. But then – we see xmas every year, so why bother…
Blasphemers! It is Mithras’ real birthday and you should all be celebrating it.
After all, he died for your sins (after having been born to a virgin and, as the sun god was worshipped in mid-winter and shown with a sunny glow -ie halo- about his head.
That newfangled jewish imposter must be exposed for what he is. And cruxified or something….
kiyaroru: Romans 1:26 has a whisper of a hint of an indication about lesbians, FWIW. But I think that’s the only place in the Bible.
Whoah, I had always assumed London as a background (assumption based on the bias of most UK media). But looking at the new digitally enhanced scenery: Pennines? Lake District? Are J+M talking with northern accents? This is where Muslim and (nominal) Christian culture rub up against each other most roughly of course. Nice one Author.
Happy Hannukuh, J&M! ……..what?! Too soon?
I am surprised to see Mo. Is he not going on the hadj? Is he perhaps scared of catching the “Mexican” flu (mustn’t mention the trotter’s name, it is haram).
Reading Romans 1:26 has made me feel all funny in my special place…
Curiously on an Irish political debate site people from a Christian background are adopting this tone against those who are saying that in the light of current child abuse revelations (and the role of the hierarchy in covering up this abuse) the church should not have any role in state sponsored education.
Sad really
True. The literal b-day of Yeshua is/oughta be Jan 1, 0001 AD.
There IS mention of gays/lesbians in the bible. They’re mentioned in the same chapter as fir trees/logs, giant rabbits, chocolate eggs containing actual chickens and dinosaurs.
Quick question(s); are atheists willing to accept the traditions of polytheism as long as it is apparent that the traditions of certain monotheisms have been used to cover them up? Is it OK to discredit one religion by citing another? Is paganism acceptable? Is the enemy of my enemy my friend?
I only ask because the same was done at Easter.
Given that some other religions (namely Hindu) have been vilified on this site before, I was wondering if it’s only religions currently mass practiced that have to take it up the jacksy 😀
r00db00y, of course I can’t speak for anyone else but I think the Christmas thing is mostly about the fact that Christians pick one of the meanings that have been tacked onto the holiday over the years and insisting that everyone respects it as the true meaning of Christmas. In years to come when the cult of yellow sock wearers is supplanting the commercialism of Retailmas I will point out to all the outraged retailers that it wasn’t always Retailmas anyway. Then I will go out on my second-hand hoverboard wearing nothing but yellow socks in defiance of Toys R Us.
Oops. I mean “insist” not “insisting.”
I find it really funny here in the States when Christians get all worked up about the lack of religiosity in the Christmas season! They don’t know their early American history well because celebrating Christmas was outlawed in many places (primarily the New England states) until the 19th century. Those Christians opposed to it largely considered the holiday “Papist” and refused to commemorate it.
Merry Horus-mas!
– ‘Accept’ in what sense? Why do you expect any one atheist to be able to answer for all the others?
– How is it possible not to?
– ‘Acceptable’ in what sense, and to whom?
– Depends on the circumstances. How can anyone else tell you the answer?
– Well we’re talking about christmas now, but what difference does it make whether it’s easter or christmas?
The site’s called ‘Jesus and Mo’ in case you missed it. Sometimes other religions are addressed. In what way does not systematically and specifically criticizing every religion the human race has ever invented reduce the validity of the criticisms of these particular two (or three if you prefer)?
‘Vilified’ is an exaggeration. ‘Mocked’ would be more accurate.
How would you distinguish between intelligent, ironic criticism and mockery on one hand, and ‘taking it up the jacksy’ on the other? Why do you feel religions practiced by large numbers should be exempt from either?
I have no problem with Christians wishing to celebrate the birth of their Lord and Savior over the midwinter period. I do have a bit of a problem when they seek to monopolise the festivities by claiming that only they know the true meaning of Christmas and that we should all celebrate it their way or not at all. The festive season also generally brings a rash of non-stories from the tabloid press about evil PC types wanting to rebrand Christmas as Winterval and to spoil all the Christian’s fun, these have become utterly tiresome over the years.
On the subject of cards, I quite like the slightly unusual cards from http://www.hedinghamfair.co.uk that have a somewhat pagan feel and have info about various bygone Christmas traditions on the back.
r00db00y
The traditions of any religion are no more acceptable than other religions owing to the type of religion. All religions have the same evidence – none – and thus are all equally not valid.
That said, some traditions are more acceptable than others based on assessing their benefit/harm ratio.
wright
I guess the question is – would secular society be discriminatory to gays and lesbians, if not for the religious bias and influence?
Which religion also previously justified the “secular” second class status of women and black people….
Brother Daniel
Romans 1:26 says “unnatural” or “against nature”. The only other mentions of women doing unusual sex are regarding bestiality. No indication of girl-on-girl. Anywhere.
@RB I think we may have got our purposes crossed?
I would not use one religion to discredit another. However, by pointing out the similarities between lots of disparate religious beliefs across time and space, many of which have had no opportunity for cross polination, I claim that there is a prima facie case for saying that these beliefs answer to a deep human need (to make sense of an otherwise unust universe?), rather than are a response to an external truth (Christ is risen?).
For example, if I describe a redeemer god as someone with a magical birth, who died for our sins and was resurrected and will bring justice to the downtrodden I could be describing Christ. I could also be describing Krishna son of Devi (Hinduism); Quetzlcoatl of the Mexica; Mithras of the Pagans/ Persians; Attis of the Galatian Phygians; Osiris of the Egyptians; Dionysus of the Greeks; Zoroasta, or (some versions of) the Buddha. In some cases these are clearly the same person (e.g. Dionysus comes from Osiris) but in other cases they arise separately. For example, Mithras predates Christ by 600 years. In many cases the life histories (e.g. virginity of mother, cannibalism of the martyr) and words used about them (e.g. “light”, “redeemer”) are strikingly similar.
This knowledge tends to surprise many christians, who often use the so-called unique character of christ as evidence to shore up their faith. They are wrong.
The former UK law against homosexuality never prohibited lesbianism, reputedly because when Victoria came to sign the law she found the idea of sinful thoughts of ungodly woman sex disgusting.
Those who have not yet looked up Romans 1:26 are in for a treat if they read the very next verse:
“1:27 And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the
women, have burned in their lusts, one towards another: men with men,
working that which is filthy and receiving in themselves the recompense
which was due to their error.” (Douay-Rheims Bible)
kiyaroru: When you consider the parallelism with the next verse (which starts with “in the same way” and then refers explicitly to male homosexuality), it seems most likely that Rom 1:26 does indeed refer to lesbianism. You’re right that it isn’t explicitly so, and so there’s room for other interpretations, but it’s (IMO) the most likely interpretation (as well as the traditional one FWIW).
Mo had it right. The real meaning of the celebration is the Winter Solstice (the returning of the sun). 🙂
On Persecution –
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/the-dark-side-of-dubai-1664368.html
It’s funny, all of this talk about putting christ back in christmas music.
As Johnny Cash’s daughter Rosanne once said, there’s never a word about what has to be put back into country music.
Hmm, seemed a bit funnier when it was said aloud.
[…] Get ready it’s war on Christmas time! Posted at November 30, 2009 via […]
Its Jesus or never.Change your life,change others too.
As a man preparing a Revisionist Advent Calendar, I like to ask myself the question: “What would Larry David do?”
(I don’t often get an answer, even from my myself, but I like posing the question.)
I don’t have any problem with celebrating Jesus’ birthday on Dec. 25 – after all, if He existed at all, He had to have a birthday sometime, right? So since we have no way of knowing the actual date, Dec. 25 is as good a choice as any. Though it must be a bummer to have your birthday be the same day as Christmas. 😉 😉 😉
I approve of Mo’s new nose.