Left-wing blog post won’t say the I word

I was fascinated to come across an article critical of religion on a NZ left-wing blog site. NZ left-wing blogs have been consistently critical of Christianity and God and supportive of secularism and atheism yet, at the same time, apologists for Islam and Allah. The article proposed banning all religions but both it and the comments only acknowledged Christianity. Not one person was prepared to utter the I word.

I?m a little worried about God.

Not only does God not exist, the reasons for needing him to exist are fast fading. The human race is approaching the end of its adolescent years and is heading for maturity.

…Clearly, the world?s population is still mostly religious. But the countries where?citizens are happiest are, for the most part, agnostic and social democratic. The Nordic example is where the world should be heading as a next step.

Given that there is no God and no ?is reason for there to be a God, what do we do about religion? Should we remain tolerant of the unfounded beliefs of the billions of adherents? Should we continue to parse individual religions, identifying some strains of faith as being acceptable, while decrying other, more militant, sects?

I think it?s time to end religion.

…The next idea might be a step too far for some readers. I think we should look to ban religion altogether. Give it a grace period of a decade or so, then close it down. No more brutalising and poisoning our citizens with notions of heaven and hell. Let the next generation be free to think for themselves.

If NZ can set an example for the world, as we have done in the past for? democracy and peace, maybe, just maybe, we can end some of the madness that is currently brutalizing our small, beautiful world.

-The Standard

Even though Islam was not mentioned I suspect that the writer, affected by all the religious terrorism happening all over the Western world at the moment, has finally reached a tipping point. ?The cognitive dissonance ?of holding two opposing points of view may have have finally come to a head. ?If the writer truly believes that the secular outlook on life is the better outlook and that all religion is bad, then they have to acknowledge that Islam is bad. They can no longer just cherry-pick and attack Christianity exclusively.

The comments in response to the article were very telling. Just as anti-Semites try to cover up their bigotry by claiming that they are anti-Israel and anti Zionism, not anti Jew, the readers are trying hard to disguise their disgust of Islam and Islamic terrorism by choosing their words very carefully. They only refer to religion in general or Christianity when describing it as…

One of the worst things about unctuous lickspittles is the way they demand the right never to be offended by anything. Hence blasphemy laws. Always ready to cast the first stone, blinded by the deciduous forest sticking out of their eye.

like any human activity, ?religion can be subverted by dickheads…

“Hatefully”? ?would you like to quote the sentence that shows the hatefulness? Because all I can see is a rational takedown of the idea of God. And if that offends religious people so be it. Religion should be up for rational debate just as much as any other subject…The capacity for religion is hardwired. There will always be some who believe in Sky pixies…

… Although New Zealand is not quite as bad as the USA, there is plenty of “hatefulness” on the religious side, and plenty of rather patronising assumptions as well.

… Feelings of grandness is far more likely in people who think they are God’s favoured species.

… However, if you’re thinking of God in terms of all the different flavours of shit that religions have come up with over the millennia, the odds of any of that being true are microscopic.

-The Standard

Interestingly, those who control The Standard were not too happy with the post. ?The writer was obviously speaking off the reservation with their views ?even though they were careful to not mention the I word.

Screen Shot 2016-07-18 at 12.25.23 PM

Screen Shot 2016-07-18 at 12.26.15 PM


Some however disagreed.

Screen Shot 2016-07-18 at 12.25.07 PM



I think Colonial Viper’s response is particularly funny as he is,?unintentionally, being offensive to people who hold the beliefs and values that he claims to defend. ?If it is easy to come up with rational analyses proposing the destruction of faith then, according to him, religion is not rational. If it is not rational then surely it is not factual/real. Essentially, he is saying that it is made up but that we should respect people who believe in something that is not true even if we know that it is not true.

Personally, I do not care what you believe in unless it hurts others. The I word that the writer and the?commenters on The Standard were so careful not to mention, does hurt others when it is introduced into Western countries that have incompatible values and beliefs. It even hurts others in countries where it is the main religion because it is not tolerant of other versions of it, and because of its backward and brutal religious laws.

I am not afraid to name the I word.

I challenge the left-wing blogs to say its name.