More Australian hate mail

So tomorrow I leave for the holidays and I just had to post this page of hate mail before I left. It’s just too important and amusing and essential for me to share with you that which I’m having to put up with.

I think you’ll understand when you feel the emptiness you’re left with at the end of The S. Collier files.


7 thoughts on “More Australian hate mail”

  1. I don’t think you called him out enough on his circular logic. To paraphrase, you/we/Atheists said “I disrespect you for doing something that is clearly wrong but endorsed in your bible book” and his only reply was “the bible book says I can’t be held accountable for what it tells me to do, so I don’t care what you think” He’s substituted his own reasoning and thinking with what he saw in the bible. By church standards, he’s a ‘good’ Christian, actually.

  2. It’s pretty hilarious how this person uses flamboyant language as if he/she were actually intelligent…

    Anyone who falls for the idiocy of the bible is an ignorant idiot in my opinion. Well, it’s more fact than opinion, but the Christians would say, “THATS UR OPINION GO 2 HELL!!!!!!!!!”

    Because they’re idiots.

  3. Bob, check your memos. We now call them “seculardays”.

    Congrats on moving on from MySpace. What the heck were you thinking??!!

  4. Regarding “Respect is earned:

    The only respect that truly matters is self-respect… If you have it, you need no one else’s. If you lack it, no one else’s can do you any good.

  5. Ah, yes. Mr. Collier is using one of the most tired of tactics to non-argue against what you’re doing. It’s the “what about the children?!? Who will think of the children?!?” argument. The argument from “we should strive to always create operas by Salieri,” is answered by Mozart, who reminds us that those operas are about old dieties who fart marble.

    It’s a diversionary tactic.

    But you answered him perfectly well, Bob. Christianity is not edifying, and in the art and creativity department, Christianity is nothing but bad fan-art. The best they can do is offer Outsider art by alcoholics in Louisiana who paint charming fire-and-brimstone death-sentences like Grandma Moses. It’s like white intellectuals at the poor-folk zoo.

    You wanna see some edifying Christian creativity? I refer to stuff made after the Victorian era, well after the Industrial Age took most of the money and patronage power away from the Roman Catholic Church (thereby nullifying the legitimate “christianity” of most of the classical artists and musicians out there).

  6. Given that 2000 years ago, when common thought was of sacrificing a goat or lamb daily to atone for sins, naturally one would consider the sacrificing of a human being to be the ultimate end to all sacrificing and atonement of sins, especially the sacrifice of a (prophesized virgin-born messiah).

    When all along the virgin-birth story was nothing more than a cover-up for a raped young little girl, and raped by a rabbi no less.

    End of story – they murdered an innocent man, jesus mystery solved!

  7. I am glad that you keep reiterating, over and over, this notion that someone else can pay the penalty for our crimes, bad behavior, and shortcomings (collectively called “sins” by the religious). Christians are taught this notion every Sunday of their lives and they never stop to think about how impossible it really is. If I commit a murder, how is it going to help me become a better person if someone else offers to go to prison and serve my sentence for me? All that means is that an innocent person is being punished for my crime, while I am free to go on committing more murders. What judge in his right mind would agree to such an arrangement?

    If I steal your large-screen TV from you and sell it to buy drugs, how do I become a better person if someone else is forced to buy you a new TV and go to drug rehab in my place? It would make no sense, and again, no judge would agree to it. Everyone knows that the correct, proper, fair, and just way to do things is that the person who does something wrong is the one who should suffer the consequences. Your kid whacks a baseball through Mrs. Miller’s window, and you make him go over and apologize, and you take money out of his allowance to help pay for it. He swipes a candy bar from the store, and you make him go back and pay for what he stole. So even as kids, we learn that there are consequences for our actions, and that we sometimes have to suffer them. It doesn’t matter if it was an accident, we still have to pay for it. That is how life works.

    Then along comes Christianity and says that there’s this one guy, this extra-super-special guy, who can take away all your sins by suffering the punishment that you deserve. He lived a long, long time ago, and he suffered and died a long, long time ago, but you can still take advantage of his sacrifice simply by praying to him whenever you do something bad. Then you will not have to be punished, because that man, named Jesus, was punished FOR you. EVERY TIME YOU SIN, you can ask him forgiveness and he will apply his punishment to your credit record. It doesn’t matter how often you sin, or what kind of sin it is, you’re still off the hook forever.

    Why should Christianity get this special dispensation from the consequences of bad behavior? I think they like the idea of never having to feel guilty for anything, of never being made to make up for their failings or to improve themselves in any way. It is much easier to ask an imaginary friend for forgiveness than it is to go to the person you hurt and ask them. They might be so mad at you that they won’t ever forgive you, but the imaginary friend will always forgive you–probably because HE is not the one who was hurt.

Comments are closed.