Tuesday, April 19, 2011

The Religious Mole

Ya know what I can't stand? What really irks me?

Fake atheists. Religious 'moles.' Christians who, transparently to any real atheist, promote themselves to Christians as atheists who see Christianity as persecuted, persecuted of course by 'other' atheists!

Like S.E. Cupp for instance.

Her book

Her website

What a Godhole!

She gets a lot of face time on various media outlets, too. She's a total lie. A construct. A religious, Christian 'mole.' A self-promoting self-centered plastic woman.

And her angle is that 'she's an atheist' so we can't doubt her on this stuff. It's the very source of her supposed 'credibility' and so far, the only one I haven't seen fall for it, more or less, was Bill Maher. However, if you read the press, most people seem to think he lost the argument! Soo...

How incredibly annoying.

I just needed to vent. Thanks.

57 comments:

  1. So, I'm gonna go look up Maher and Cupp on youtube now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. After having seen footage of her, I think you're presupposing she understands the difference between lies and truths.

    I don't think she does. It's anecdotal but I'm pretty sure she's got a PD.

    So in a sense I agree. She is fake. I only disagree about the why.

    To her, xtianity and atheism are on a spectrum she can genuinely participate in without being duplicitous.

    My only other theory is that she's an atheist by happenstance. Her atheism is incidental to herself and self-interests. As more and more people become atheists we're going to have bourgeois bimbos who don't believe in god.

    ReplyDelete
  3. To her, xtianity and atheism are on a spectrum she can genuinely participate in without being duplicitous.
    ------------
    How is that even possible? Any person that truly does not believe in god is not out there saying that other atheists are attacking god, because they don't believe in god in the first place and so can clearly see that if anything, it's the reverse all the way, christianity attacking atheism at all possible opportunities. The whole idea is a meme created by the christians to allow them to attack the atheists with impuinty, calling it self-defense.




    As more and more people become atheists we're going to have bourgeois bimbos who don't believe in god.
    --------------
    So you're saying that because she's a bourgeois bimbo she's defending the opposite side of her true beliefs for some reason? For the money? Because it can't be that she's taking the christian side as an atheist because she perceives some huge injustice we're perpetrating on them. That's possible, so then she's a turncoat rather than a mole. Another shallow mammon worshipper, only this time from our side.
    Equally distasteful. Either way, she makes my skin crawl.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have to tell you though, on the Maher show she really came off as a christian to me. Too belief-based-seeming, I guess, if I had to quantify it. And self-righteous.
    Very Sarah Paliney...

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't think she does. It's anecdotal but I'm pretty sure she's got a PD.
    ----------
    I missed this. Yes, agreed.

    Isn't she cuddly? Like a spider...

    ReplyDelete
  6. I just happen to think that christianity is the particular personality disorder that she's suffering from.

    Atheists tend to be less fucked up. Or else at least, more aware that they have a problem. Not a rule of course, but an overarching trend, no doubt in my mind.

    A belief-based personality type, even if she happens to not believe in god. Facts do not sway her in the least. Her narrative just sounds too pretty, and people love it.... idiots, sure, but they have money too.

    ReplyDelete
  7. She certainly leaving a door the size of the entire universe open for herself to have a bit of a revelation later on.

    Also, I think she makes you ill, Brian, because she is basically a walking contradiction.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "I just happen to think that christianity is the particular personality disorder that she's suffering from."

    That's interesting. I definitely could see it as the cause of a PD.

    "Also, I think she makes you ill, Brian, because she is basically a walking contradiction."

    Agreed.

    The position she's taken on liberal media bias has validity, and I can't in good conscience tu quoque her. But she does not do that with Fox, or some of the conservative pundits on radio.

    If you're going to criticize the media, and you imply at least, that you care about Truth, take the microscope to the whole shebang.

    As a side note I think she's revolting. The attractive part was brought up over and over on the youtube videos. They must not be listening.

    For you Bri.

    The Vandals

    (But Then) She Spoke

    There she stood
    she was a vision
    a picture of perfection
    so I made the big decision

    I'm going to talk to her
    I have to show to her it could be magic
    and I got the nerve up

    So went over there
    she was a goddess
    I had to show to her I could be her Adonis
    At first sight I knew she was my destiny
    The first time the feeling has come over me

    Intimidation, feared rejection
    I need to make a love connection
    then the unexpected had occurred
    and then it happened

    and she spoke
    and it all just went to hell
    her personality quickly broke the spell
    so disillusioned
    and I came to the conclusion
    she was garbage wrapped in loveliness
    leaving me so unimpressed

    If she don't shut up
    I'm gonna throw up
    all over her shoes

    How could it be?
    That such a goddess would ever talk to me
    and make me nauseous
    All the things she said
    just echoed in my head
    I thought she was an angel,
    but it was all just misread

    Every word was terrible,
    and made it more unbearable
    and made me have to leave the f-ing room

    and it's all because she spoke
    tortured by her words
    such a pretty shithead
    that I wished I never heard

    Perfect on the outside
    but fucked on the in
    how can god be so cruel?
    it's got to be a sin

    I had to plug my ears,
    until she disappears
    so I can cry - Waahh!

    and it's all because she spoke
    it all just went to hell
    her personality quickly broke the spell
    so disillusioned
    that I came to the conclusion
    she was garbage wrapped in loveliness
    leaving me so unimpressed

    I was destined to learn my lesson
    and I learned it well

    Never think she's perfect till you talk to her first
    Never fall in love till you go through her purse
    Never think she's perfect till you talk to her first
    And I should know

    ReplyDelete
  9. Liberal media - conservative media, it's all bullshit.

    Modern media is nothing if not opportunist.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It appears, to me, her atheism is a deliberate ploy so that she can the token atheist at Fox.

    I tend to agree with Maher. Most of the pundits she says are attacking christianity, are, in fact, christians.... Making her just like them, an atheist that attacks atheists ?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Never heard of her, and after having read the comments, I'm pretty sure I don't want to know any more about this person...

    ReplyDelete
  12. Naw, I think that there is an idea that people like to be like the people they like.

    Seems to me that kids might like to emulate her, girls 'cos she's pretty, she's supposedly smart and she's no doubt very well to do, and she is gaining celebrity.

    With her stance the way it is, blaming media for prostesting Christianity a bit too much in her view, and her being an 'atheist' with an open mind, basically a non-religious secularist with 'religious envy', if she could gain enough support from like-minded individuals then switch, dragging them with her, she might actually claim that she 'changed the face of America', that Atheism is dead and so on.

    ReplyDelete
  13. She's dangerous. That's the point. Atheists can see through her, sure, but people on the border trying to decide, or impressionable young people, or just dumb fans, can and will be influenced by her non-ideas into further forays into stupidity and ignorance.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'm so tired of hearing about how we atheists and liberals are waging a war on christianity. They throw blame on us so they can stir the shit. It's their pattern. So to me it seems more like something a believer would do, pretend to be an atheist to gain legitimacy and then as pboy says probably find jesus and drag a bunch of fans with her... plus she gets to be famous of course, pure heroin for an ego like hers... She believes she's a secret agent for god here, methinks. Behind enemy lines, or pretending to be at any rate.
    Why does she seem to be secular to all of you?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I mean, war on christianity my skinny white ass... they're on the rise, waxing, not waning, at least lately... and they're doing it, gaining strength and power, because of their duplicity in doing things just like this.
    I wish we would wake up and start fighting back, but we're too tolerant, so they'll use that against us at every turn. And gain ground. They are fighting on every possible front now politically. Every tiny advantage they think they can gain, they're going all-out for. They're playing chess, machiavelli-style. They're distracting us with the tax pyrotechnics in washington while they're making their real moves on the state level, destroying (or trying to destroy) the unions so there will never be another democrat in the white house. Taking huge powers, powers to dissolve towns and take over, eliminating the elected governments and installing 'emergency financial managers' who are of course, their cronies. They want to privatize government. And they're winning.

    ReplyDelete
  16. And disenfranchising voters, making it very difficult for new voters and immigrants to vote.... which groups of course vote overwhelmingly democrat... All the while crying 'voter fraud' when there just isn't any.
    They can't take losing. They'll win at any cost now. Or die trying.
    I'm kinda hoping for the latter.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I'm not coufusing the republicans with the christians, btw. I'm talking about the huge intersection of those two sets. Even if the leaders aren't true believers, they use the religion to accomplish their ends, and so it's all mixed up in it. Inseperable now.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Of course, I contend that most of the leaders are true believers and that is precisely why they have no discernable moral compasses and such preposterously huge, undeserved, unjustified egos.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Two very good developments lately.

    One: Paul Ryan's medicare-killing budget is apparently D.O.A. and is possibly a poison-pill to all who signed it in the house. Mr. Ryan himself was booed by his own republican constituents at a recent town-hall he was hosting. It appears that it alone might kill the republicans chances in the election.

    Two: Donald Trump. Scylla to Ryan's Charybdis. He's making the party look like a circus, and there's not a damned thing the few sensible ones can do to stop him. He's in the lead. I love that guy! He's making the delicate dance between appealing to mouthbreathing primary voters and sensible middle-america in the actual race, just about impossible.

    If the dems blow this low-hanging fruit, they need to become sanitation workers or something. Anything else.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "Why does she seem to be secular to all of you?"

    Being "mentally ill" myself and having dealt with pd people who are bonafide lunatics (some just get along better in society because they learned to keep their mouths shut at the right time) it's because *secular* would be a secondary characteristic.

    That's if she has a personality disorder.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "That's if she has a personality disorder."

    Yeah, I got to stick by my guns, I think she does. Narcissistic pd perhaps? Her and Ann Coulter.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I'm confused. How is 'secular' a secondary characteristic to a PD?

    ReplyDelete
  23. "Cupp fails to prove the thesis suggested by the book's title; in fact, on the contrary, she says the number of Christians has increased in the 8 year period of 2001 to 2008 by 14 million people. (p. 14)"

    This sums up the entire book. A quote from a reviewer who seems to be bending over backwards to be on her side while not being willing to follow her example of throwing logic into the rose bushes while inverting numerical facts Big Brother style, her numbers never being intended to be factual.

    Still, I think she might have been doing a double Big Brother here, turning a 'negative' so-many-millions of Christians into a positive for a happy ending to her book.

    We'll certainly never know for sure from the likes of S.E.Cupp.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  25. If you're sick enough the illness defines you.

    ReplyDelete
  26. If you're sick enough, the illness defines you. Hmm.

    If said illness has it's roots in christianity and christian coercive morality, christian reverse morality, then is it not so that while the illness defines you, christianity in turn defines the illness?

    ReplyDelete
  27. You guys really believe that she absolutely does not believe in any god or gods, and yet is pandering to those who do? For the cash? Why choose this? What gave her the idea, if she's an atheist?
    No, perhaps she thinks she's an atheist, but in reality she believes at some level, and is seeking it again. Seeking the religion, fighting for it 'as an outsider...' and accepting their accolades for being an 'atheist' that 'sees the light.'
    She's as false as rubber dog vomit, and about as attractive. But that level of falsity, that level of disassociation from reality, is most often associated with a belief-system.
    She's saying that she doesn't believe in christiantiy, but for some reason she's claiming that atheists are at war with it? This is why she's a fucking christian. There's no reason to 'go against your own' like that unless you're not really an atheist.
    It stinks of christianity to me.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "If said illness has it's roots in christianity and christian coercive morality, christian reverse morality, then is it not so that while the illness defines you, christianity in turn defines the illness?"

    I think that's plausible but I believe there's more data to support my speculation.

    "You guys really believe that she absolutely does not believe in any god or gods, and yet is pandering to those who do?"

    Oh c'mon, you can't slip in 'absolutely.' I'm not absolutely sure about anything, including my being unsure.

    Plus, I don't speak for peeb or mac, and Ed said he wasn't going to bother. Which is good.

    "No, perhaps she thinks she's an atheist, but in reality she believes at some level, and is seeking it again."

    Realm of real probability... check. I would just say her delusion comes from some disorder ;)

    ReplyDelete
  29. Isn't it interesting how easy it is to rise to fame if you have no scruples?

    ReplyDelete
  30. It seems to me this woman's main problem is her misunderstanding about where values come from.
    while Christianity may embrace the vales she likes it is hardly the source of any values. It is a belief system not a source of values. Either values have their source in god or the individual, not a belief system. I guess she thinks there were no values on the planet before Jesus.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Now, why on earth would an atheist assume that christianity is the source of moral values, I wonder?

    ReplyDelete
  32. This phenomenon looks like it's the "subject du jour" on a lot of atheist websites right now, this thing that's called 'tone trolling'.

    Honestly, I hadn't heard about it until just the other day, when another post-er clued me in to an incident involving Chris Mooney.

    The basic idea is that (so the tone-trolling argument goes, at least as much of it as I've been able to absorb) atheists are doing ourselves and the scientific community a disservice by coming off strident, dismissive, vituperative, etc. in our discussions with Christians and religionists, and that to mitigate the bad effects of our tactics, we should adopt a more conciliatory "tone" when arguing with them. It's been pointed out, of course that giving such implied respect to their positions in the discussions just allows them to feel like they're already occupying the high ground. Thus, many of the atheists are saying that, similar to your objections to this S.E. Cupp, this tactic is a grave blunder on the part of science-minded and atheistic people.

    Here is a link to the post that got me started, and there's many interconnected links in a couple of the later comments that provide some insight.

    ReplyDelete
  33. There's a lot of dishonesty and sock-puppeteering going on, too. It's a sordid tale...

    ReplyDelete
  34. In general:

    'PD' = personality disorder?

    ReplyDelete
  35. This looks like a different angle (the S.E. Cupp thingy) on 'tone-trolling', though: a secret Christian posing as an atheist to try and cajole the real atheists to "stop with the solid arguments already", so to speak...

    ReplyDelete
  36. "Stop with the solid arguments already"

    Pretty funny, ed. And yet, so it seems to me. That seems to be her motivation. Her stated motivation at any rate. The real one in all likelihood, being fame and money.

    Sad note on our society that she's getting that.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "The real one in all likelihood, being fame and money.

    Sad note on our society that she's getting that."

    rAmen brother, rAmen.

    Ed,

    Yeah, PD = personality disorder.

    I think we should go for a utility based system, but I'm generally against the PZ Meyers, Dawkins approach as an all encompassing way of "communicating."

    When I was a christian, I think the only DD blogger I really used to get into it with (unless you have the transcripts and can correct me ;-D) was William Hayes. That motherfucker was soooooo infuriating.

    I compare him to someone like Harvey or Brian and there is a world of difference. Brian can be heavy handed but it's usually provoked.

    I don't know... for me at least, my desire to reason about faith was brought out by questions, discourse, logic, and common ground.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Of course there's common ground Harry, we're all here on this planet. All us sane ones don't want killing sprees.

    The idea that justice is fairness, which we should all be able to agree with, and not simply a question of following our 'betters*' edicts.

    'Betters' would include successful businessmen(would be Donald Trumps), successful church leaders(from the Pope to Jimmy Swaggert to ...whoever is getting rich off telling you what you ought to believe), politicians bought by the business men with cash and the religious leaders by votes, right wing judges who feel that laws ought to reflect their 'will' more than 'what is fair', and so on.

    If atheists discuss the problems with the the religious on the religious folks' terms, then we are conceding that justice ISN'T fairness, that their view that their sense of right coming from a 'higher power' is to be respected by all, even those who don't believe in 'higher powers'.

    And THAT is just not just.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Sometimes you make me think of Hamish Imlach.

    It has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, just thought I'd share.

    ReplyDelete
  40. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Harry said,
    When I was a christian.
    --------
    Harry, Being raised in a Christian home does not make you a Christian, nor does your claim to once being a Christian make you a Christian.
    You’re not even a good atheist…. You do however along with the rest of the faithful here at ST. Brian’s blog have a deep wound that haunts you day and night. You will not find the remedy for your pain here, but you can find some brain tranquilizers here, enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
  42. "You’re not even a good atheist."

    What does that even mean? Am I bad at not believing in zombies too?

    ReplyDelete
  43. I have transcripts of several of D'Stoopid's aol blogs, copied without editing except to respace the lines (they came into Word double-spaced, and I converted to single spacing to save paper, beause I printed hard copies out at the office I was working in).

    Here's the list, in chornological order, with the dates:

    "An Absentee God", 09 July 2008

    "How Homo Sapiens Got So Smart", 11 July 2008

    "The Evolutionary Benefits of Religion", 23 July 2008

    "Countering Richard Dawkins on Al-Jazeera", 24 July 2008

    "Infanticide and Family Values", 02 August 2008

    "No One Sees God", 17 September 2008

    "Does Science Really Have Laws?", 24 September 2008

    "Obama and the Reagan Doctrine" (but only up to comment #4185 (out of roughly 12,000 comments before aol axed it) by our very own St. Brian!) 27 September 2008.

    I can mail them out, but not all at once; they're huge.

    ReplyDelete
  44. There were a couple more posts that D'Stoopid put up but I never commented on, so I didn't save them. I was keeping all this stuff for book research (the novel I'm allegedly writing...remember?).

    Most of the files are 100-250 pages (Word, single spaced!), except Obama..., which is 790 pages long (even though I only got a third of it!)

    ReplyDelete
  45. "Impressive."
    -Darth Vader

    I forget when I hopped on. Did they erase all the archives, or just take them off the web?

    ReplyDelete
  46. "(the novel I'm allegedly writing...remember?)."

    Forgive me, I don't. I have a memory lacking in strength.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Harry,

    I tried to find a way to get back in and recover the rest of "Obama and the Reagan Doctrine", but there was no way I could find to do it.

    sad face.

    The old links didn't work any more, and just trying to go to aol newsbloggers only linked to Cenk, and only for a month or two more after "Obama..." disappeared. I would love to have those other 8,000 comments...

    ReplyDelete
  48. Uh, about the novel: I've only mentioned it a couple of times, and without going into any substantial detail.

    I don't want to be my own spoiler.

    ReplyDelete
  49. For you Observant I'll make an exception to my approach.

    Ed,

    We should put together a compendium of short stories about Mike's excessive masturbation habits.

    The premise:

    He can only feel sexually aroused when he looks at women who aren't christians or men who are. This has gotten him into trouble with the law because he compulsively masturbates in public.

    The kicker? He has to add Jesus' wounds into the mix in order to orgasm and shouts 'Stigmata!' as he lets it fly.

    Every story will have that basic structure, a third person narrator (except for the last one which is from Mike's perspective), and have his pastor accidentally be in the vicinity each time, resulting in "baptism."

    Suggestions:

    1. Mike could be enacting the sermons, leading to despair on the pastor's part and his eventual deconversion.

    2. Mike's wife realizes she's a lesbian after she and he are attracted to S.E. Cupp, who is visiting a local college to promote her new book, 'What's So Great About Me & Dinesh D'Souza.'

    3. He whips it out at an all men's prayer breakfast, only during the prayers of course. The yells of 'Stigmata!' are slightly too Catholic, but taken to be signs of fervor.

    4. He visits Brian's blog at Internet cafes as a kind of foreplay to his excursions. We find out about him after his arrest at a kosher deli. Peeb changes his icon.

    ReplyDelete
  50. "Peeb changes his icon."

    Forgot my consistency. Pb wouldn't need to change his icon.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Harry,
    What a childish imagination you have. Lets see now, you have failed at Christianity, Atheism ,and now you have proven with out doubt you have NO Character as well. No wonder your wife left you… she obviously couldn’t stand the sight of you . I mean think about it Harry….. She must of loved you at one time…. After all she did marry you ….It must have been a real tragedy for her to suddenly find herself with a person as you. My guess is she couldn’t get out quick enough hey Harry… Put this in your book boy wonder.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Observant, why are you the asshole if you're the christian?

    Same difference, in your case.

    That was just nasty. And like something a kid would do. A kid with problems. Probably sexual ones. Just saying. You're the type that could wring a puppy's neck while eating an egg mcmuffin. A real credit to your sicko religion.

    I bet you want to have hot hairy man sex with Terry Jones. Because of the moustache of course.

    ReplyDelete
  53. You used to piss me off so much, Mike, with your backwards childish beliefs and your shallow empty pride. And I used to mourn the person that might have been if only his brain hadn't been stunted.

    But, nothing I can do about that. You are what you are.

    So have a nice easter or whatever.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Mike, I dedicate my next post to you.

    So, go check it out!

    ;-)

    Do read the article if you can manage to. Not that it will reach you. Quite the contrary...

    New post is up!

    ReplyDelete
  55. "..with the rest of the faithful here at ST. Brian’s blog have a deep wound that haunts you day and night."

    What the HELL are you talkin' about Mike?

    " You will not find the remedy for your pain here, but you can find some brain tranquilizers here, enjoy."

    You forgot to make a link to the site where we can get these brain tranquilizers.

    ReplyDelete