Thursday, August 07, 2008

The NPZ

I've received so many e-mails about this that I've decided to go ahead and acknowledge No Possum Zone. I have known about this website since Thomas (the husband) made his first comment on this blog in June. Along with Thomas, Nancy (his wife) also posts to their "counter website". Well, here...have a look at their "mission statement".

This matriarch is popular with the atheist liberals
who claim god has no place in our world.She has been mentioned on PZ Meyers (the anti-ID professor exposed in Expelled). She has thousands of google hits.I do
not suggest you comment in her blog. Comment here.This blog will discuss her
entries with Christ's view. By Christ's people. By people who want only to
please their Lord.I think she is a good mother. Good mothering is unrelated to
having truth. Faith is the most important part of childraising but God has given
us this space to discuss what happens when God is thrown out

Sounds pretty harmless. I mean, they said I was a good mother and all. But, somehow I knew that wouldn't last long. Sure enough, the next post says this:

Is Opossummomma honorable? She is an unbelieving neighbor which is why this blog will hope to be a beacon. When you live without God your path is muddied with unimportant things. Honorable behavior is not including making posts about the standards modesty has in the FLDS. They are not hurting opposummom but she has dismissing opinions on any subject that smells of faithfulness to God's
commands. You may be asking why we have to stand for blogs that do not tolerate
God and I would say to you that we must because we know the truth. There's a
list of blogs on her site that I feel God is telling me to address to you so
that we may spread the Gospel Word. We must live honorably.

How honorable is it to create a blog for the soul purpose of disassembling one person's life? How is it honorable to defend child predators (the FLDS men) or the religion that glorifies the abuse? My problems with the FLDS had nothing to do with modesty. My posts reflect that I object to the any system that makes children chattel. I'm opposed to religions that enslave young girls with no means or choice to find freedom.

Next came a diatribe against co-sleeping and breastfeeding, with the following gems of wisdom:


It's no wonder this generation is spoilt rotten. Pmom says don't let them
cry. Don't raise a voice or speak. Eat whenever you want because the baby
controls you. Sleep together like hippies.


Oh yes. This country is going to hell in a handbasket because parents around the world practice a custom older than the Bible itself.

O ho ho. Who is she to talk about morals when she opened her knees to Tom, Dick, and Harry? Abstinence works every time. What did she expect the church to say to her with that problem.

Actually, it only took one Dick to get me pregnant. Tom and Harry weren't necessary. I love how they claim to be all pro-life, clown car uterus freaks, but they'll shake their fingers at the way those babies came to be.

In the most confusing twist...the next blog entry links to a post I made long ago in my livejournal. It wasn't just any post, it was a post I made about a loss we suffered...in 2001!
He found a post from November of 2001 and assumed that the Tom I was talking about was him.

My comment on poss's blog has the following hiped up. I am the topic of a blog post even. How special am I?

Very special, apparently. I don't want to insult people who ride the short bus by comparing them to Tom, but what the hell? He's "special" alright. When I e-mailed him to ask what the fuck was his problem and how he could possibly imagine I was referring to him in a post from seven years ago, he said "I thought it was a recent post." No dumb shit! It wasn't. Even if it was recent, how egotistical can one man be? Jerk.

In this same post, we get another rehashing of co-sleeping.

The harm in cosleeping is it lets the child control the parents when the
parents should be parents. A kid can't be independent if mommy is insecure so
much to not let them sleep alone. Won't her kids be the oddballs when they
invite mom in the marital bed with the spouse.


You see a lady who is passion is kids I see a lady who has passion for herself.
Those of us who respect the word of God and parenting advice from Adam and Eve know differently about who we should respect.

Oh really?

The recent post is a load of stinkin feces calling catholics bad for expecting
respect in the church. PZ Meyers or whatever is a scandal monger who wants
attention. Oposs is learning from him.

Well, I do subscribe to the whole "master/apprentice" philosophy from Star Wars. What problem does Tom have with PZ? Did PZ steal his pet octopus or something? *rolls eyes* The next line, though, sums his entire position up very succinctly.

Cosleeping is not right. It means a child comes between man and wife where God
says no man should go.

How he has the balls to call me a "self-worshipping", "selfish" person beats me. For people who claim to strive for purity of thought and action, these people sure are focused on sex. It's all about sex: abortion, single mothers, co-sleeping, breastfeeding, and "a mother's role".

I think I'll stop here. But, I'll leave you with a comment from his latest temper tantrum.

Op-momma is relentless in cramming atheism in all of her childrens experiences. She took them to the zoo but saw no beauty from God. She saw her secular mumbo jumbo facts about a theory of evolution which theory would be a thing that has not be
proven. Did she care about her childrens hearts in the zoo or was her day about
attacking God by desperite attempt to deny His creation? She had a partner this
day at the zoo
with another atheist.
She met for the first time at the zoo. I thought she wanted to protect her
children but meeting strangers is not protective. Do atheists always need to be
a group of secular skeptics in public places? I left a post in Oppossum's blog
and was attacked by the friend.

This guy's delusional. But, let's indulge him enough to see what Calladus said that constitutes an attack, shall we?

Calladus said...Saved Servant, if you're really and truly interested in saving
my soul, if you honestly want to save me from Hell, then you need to email me so
we can have an honest discussion.You can find my email address from my blog -
it's only a couple of clicks away.If I don't get an email, I'll assume you're
just posturing in public, displaying your righteousness in order to curry favor
with God in defiance of Matt. 6:1.

That's an attack?



EDITED TO ADD - Some people have asked why I'm giving these people any attention or recognition. That's a fair question...one I toyed with for the last two weeks. I decided to acknowledge it because I was receiving multiple e-mails saying, "Have you seen this?"
I want to make one thing clear, though. I do not think these people are in any way harmful. For one, they live on the opposite coast. Second, like many of you, I doubted that they were for real. I asked them, in light of previous issues, to give me proof of their existence and they've done so to my satisfaction. I have their full names and a phone number which checks out.

85 comments:

yanub said...

Wow. How bizarre that they can be so obsessed with you. Or with anyone, for that matter. Don't they have lives to live? Or do they envy yours to such a degree that they can't tear their eyes away? And what irony, that they should call their website devoted to the Possums "No Possum Zone."

Paul said...

[silentsanta, NZ]

I've pretty much given up on NPZ. S/he's just so offensively stupid that biting my tongue to compose a PG-rated Fisking is becoming too much to bear.

But I wanted to give them a chance... I don't ever want to become the kind of person that writes someone off without giving them a chance to engage in constructive dialog, justify their points, explain their worldview.
But NPZ has now demonstrated an unwillingness to provide anything more than baseless condemnation... I can no longer feel hope.

I'm hoping my responses might at least leave an impression on any other readers of NPZ though- they can't all be as ignorant as the authors; that defies all probability.

Enshoku said...

Oh boy. You really shouldn't have fed the troll. His writing just seethes out self-importance, and you're only fueling his fire. I hate to encourage censorship, but if he is really bugging you could simply IP ban him. I could set up the code if you want, it's up to you.

on a side note, I'd just like to point out again the ignorance in the name "no possum zone", as possum was/is used by pmomma as a metaphor for clever, just like one associates fast with a cheetah.

*the more you know star and rainbow pass over the night sky*

Anonymous said...

Man, is this what it's like to be religious?
Vindictive, angry, and petty at every opportunity?
Hey, I may burn in hell, but at least I'll be happy at least once in my life, unlike these people.

Nancy said...

Blessings to you all, I am Nancy from the nopossumzone. I thought me and opossummomma had an understanding that we could say what ever we wanted to do in our constitution rights. She never told us to shut the blog down and we guess now she might like the attention. I can respond to her accusations right?

The statement Thomas posted is right. We felt a calling to minister to op-mom along side her readers. Jesus will still take you back following your blasphemy since that is how forgiving our Savior is. But you must truly repent or don't bother. We are called to share the gospel of Christ. Is this bad? It is a loving jesture between religoius people and atheists.

How honorable is it to create a blog for the soul purpose of disassembling one person's life? How is it honorable to defend child predators (the FLDS men) or the religion that glorifies the abuse? My problems with the FLDS had nothing to do with modesty. My posts reflect that I object to the any system that makes children chattel. I'm opposed to religions that enslave young girls with no means or choice to find freedom. + OpMom
We did not start a blog to do that when you say disassembling your blog. We want to break your stubborn fatal attatude at God. What happens to us if we don't try to minister to you is not a snub that I want to give to God when he orders me to do something.

Oh yes. This country is going to hell in a handbasket because parents around the world practice a custom older than the Bible itself. + OpMom
I think you read to much in Thomas posts. He is saying a wife has a partner in bed where a child would be inappropriate in the marital bed. That is our retreat so we don't spoil it with making it a family space. He was wrong to call you a hippy but that is no reason to get angry with him. There is no scripture about cosleeping in our Bible. I think if that was common it would be in the Bible. I think you are making this evidence up.

Actually, it only took one Dick to get me pregnant. Tom and Harry weren't necessary. I love how they claim to be all pro-life, clown car uterus freaks, but they'll shake their fingers at the way those babies came to be. + OpMom
Do you say words like these in public in front of children because you should be ashamed. I sent you a personal note with a apology about my husband saying that and I ask why you won't share it. I will to save you the trouble.
"OpMom,
You made the correct choice in not aborting your child when you were young. She is beautiful. Has you ever tried to imagine how she may've suffered by the hands of an abortionist or thrown to the garbage. You did the right thing. God was guiding you with strength to choose the right. You have to thank him for your blessing of such a beautiful child. Still you had her conception before you were married need to repent befor God. He will give you love for doing right after doing wrong but it was wrong to have premarital sex. Thomas has been thinking that you are proud of your sins which is what made him say what he said. I am sorry about the truth hurting now and again. We all have sinned and know God needs to grant us a child's heart after we repent with sinceer prayer."
She needs to put us in the spot of meanies so she can get sympathy. She needs to ask forgiveness from her Creator. Stop these foolish posts.

He made a mistake on your old 2001 journal. I pray to know how he can make an ammends with you about that. I am pregnant for baby seven but and we have been in God's favor with no miscariage in seven pregnancies. He could have healed you if you believed. To follow that God could heal you now if you pray to him with a open spirit. He maybe knew you needed P3 and P4 to be who they are so you should thank him for having clear vision for your future. Dwell on bad things gets you bad things.

What problem does Tom have with PZ? Did PZ steal his pet octopus or something? *rolls eyes* The next line, though, sums his entire position up very succinctly. +OpMom
I have not read Mr.Myers. I read faith promotive material. Tom reads Mr. Myers very much. I want you to really think about distanceing your blog from Myers because it makes you look un-open minded. His blog should be shut down after his scandal with the catholics says my husband. I trust his opinion.

Wow. How bizarre that they can be so obsessed with you. Or with anyone, for that matter. Don't they have lives to live? Or do they envy yours to such a degree that they can't tear their eyes away? And what irony, that they should call their website devoted to the Possums "No Possum Zone." + Yanub
We have no obsessiveness to this blogger. It is God who told us in prayer to pick her when we searched for an atheist woman to discuss for parenting Bible studies. I will pray for you to find an open mind.

But NPZ has now demonstrated an unwillingness to provide anything more than baseless condemnation... I can no longer feel hope. + Paul
You have left blasphemy comments. What do you want me to explain to you and I will give it my best? I can provide proof of God. I have read that you don't feel like you are the one who needs to prove God is not every thing we believe he is. I understand that maybe a little. I know Paxil's wager to. I agree that believe takes effort that people don't want to put in because they only think of now. I even consider that you are not in a place to know God. I don't know why you would not ever think about this again so what I see is you make up your mind that there is no god. A positive way to be atheist would be to going over the evidence every day.

Jacob said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jim said...

@Anonymous "Man, is this what it's like to be religious?
Vindictive, angry, and petty at every opportunity?"


And, I might add, apparently incapable of writing a coherent sentence in English.

rmuser said...

What happens to us if we don't try to minister to you is not a snub that I want to give to God when he orders me to do something.

If you actually believe God is ordering you to do something, you're suffering from hallucinations. If you do not, you're just plain lying and hiding behind a deity. In either case, there's absolutely no reason to take you seriously.

His blog should be shut down after his scandal with the catholics says my husband. I trust his opinion.

What was that you said about Constitutional rights?

I know Paxil's wager to.

Yeah, I bet you do.

nonmagical thinking said...

Paxil's wager ! Hahaha!

Cogito said...

Oh come on, surely this is a satire? "Paxil's Wager?" Please tell me it is.

In case they are serious, I'd be very interested in this "proof" of Yahweh. Unlike religious fanatics, I'm actually open to evidence contrary to my current beliefs.

Oh, and it sounds to me like they're parroting Ezzo re cosleeping. Gotta love Ezzo - the parenting guide for men so insecure and wimpy that they can't stand their wives paying more attention to a baby, even for a few months!

Paul said...

[silentsanta, NZ]

Nancy, I have responded to your comment, but I did so back on your own site. I apologise for my tone above; as I mentioned, I was frustrated that I felt my points were being purposely left unanswered.

I look forward to your proof of God.

Milo Johnson said...

Proving once again that the most uneducated and illiterate are the most easily duped into believing fairy tales. I pity these poor, stupid people. Worst of all, their pride in their own arrogant ignorance will ensure another, even more intellectually challenged generation of kids with the wrong number of chromosomes that they produce will perpetuate the nonsense.

nonmagical thinking said...

Nancy, How about Prozac's Wager or Wellbutrin's Wager ? Are you familiar with those too ??

Anonymous said...

Dude. These people are crazy and inciting some serious threats. I would send their site to the local branch of the FBI and tell them you're feeling threatened and in danger.

Let them handle these nut jobs!

Berlzebub said...

@ Nancy (with apologies to P-Momma for feeding the troll: Blessings to you all, I am Nancy from the nopossumzone. I thought me and opossummomma had an understanding that we could say what ever we wanted to do in our constitution rights. She never told us to shut the blog down and we guess now she might like the attention. I can respond to her accusations right?
Of course. However, I do hope you base your responses on facts, and not on your own feelings which could be erroneous.

The statement Thomas posted is right. We felt a calling to minister to op-mom along side her readers. Jesus will still take you back following your blasphemy since that is how forgiving our Savior is. But you must truly repent or don't bother. We are called to share the gospel of Christ. Is this bad? It is a loving jesture between religoius people and atheists.
No, it isn't. From the get go, and in every post you've put up you haven't shown any love, because part of love is respect. For one, as many have pointed out, you keep calling her opossummomma. "Possum" is latin for clever, where "opossum" is a marsupial. Even after commenters repeatedly pointing it out to you, you keep doing so.

Oh, and Jesus can't take anyone back. He's dead, that is if he ever existed at all.

We did not start a blog to do that when you say disassembling your blog. We want to break your stubborn fatal attatude at God. What happens to us if we don't try to minister to you is not a snub that I want to give to God when he orders me to do something.
So God told you to be an asshat? It's not a "stubborn fatal attitude". She simply doesn't find enough evidence to believe in the existance of your deity. You've had multiple chances to show otherwise, and always came up wanting.

Oh, and if God ordered you to do something did he do it by phone, email, or in person? If it's a voice in your head, don't bother replying.

I think you read to much in Thomas posts. He is saying a wife has a partner in bed where a child would be inappropriate in the marital bed. That is our retreat so we don't spoil it with making it a family space. He was wrong to call you a hippy but that is no reason to get angry with him. There is no scripture about cosleeping in our Bible. I think if that was common it would be in the Bible. I think you are making this evidence up.
I suggest you try Google. It's a wonderful tool, and this (and your) blog is owned by them. This is the third hit I got from a quick search. It's not difficult to do.

Oh, and Anarctica wasn't mentioned in the Bible either. Are we making that up, too?

Do you say words like these in public in front of children because you should be ashamed.
Ummm... She used the exact words your husband (or whoever) did. If you read more into it, that's your mind working not the childrens.
I sent you a personal note with a apology about my husband saying that and I ask why you won't share it. I will to save you the trouble.
"OpMom,
You made the correct choice in not aborting your child when you were young. She is beautiful. Has you ever tried to imagine how she may've suffered by the hands of an abortionist or thrown to the garbage. You did the right thing. God was guiding you with strength to choose the right. You have to thank him for your blessing of such a beautiful child. Still you had her conception before you were married need to repent befor God. He will give you love for doing right after doing wrong but it was wrong to have premarital sex. Thomas has been thinking that you are proud of your sins which is what made him say what he said. I am sorry about the truth hurting now and again. We all have sinned and know God needs to grant us a child's heart after we repent with sinceer prayer."

Again, stop with the "opmom" BS. If you start off with an insult, then how can you expect her to even have read it.

Also, that email isn't as "loving" as you think it is. I find it arrogant.
She needs to put us in the spot of meanies so she can get sympathy. She needs to ask forgiveness from her Creator. Stop these foolish posts.
No she doesn't. No one (and I seriously doubt you can) has given any evidence of your Creator's existance. I don't ask for forgiveness from someone else's imaginary friend.

Oh, and who are you to order her around? If she were to stop posting, your blog would become defunct. I doubt you'd know what to do with the empty spot in your life.

He made a mistake on your old 2001 journal. I pray to know how he can make an ammends with you about that. I am pregnant for baby seven but and we have been in God's favor with no miscariage in seven pregnancies. He could have healed you if you believed. To follow that God could heal you now if you pray to him with a open spirit. He maybe knew you needed P3 and P4 to be who they are so you should thank him for having clear vision for your future. Dwell on bad things gets you bad things.
LMAO... As always, those who say you should thank their deity discount the real people involved. P-Momma, Dr. P-Daddy, P1, and P2 can be proven to have an influence on P3's and P4's personality.

I have not read Mr.Myers. I read faith promotive material. Tom reads Mr. Myers very much. I want you to really think about distanceing your blog from Myers because it makes you look un-open minded. His blog should be shut down after his scandal with the catholics says my husband. I trust his opinion.
Why should his blog be shut down, and why should P-Momma distance herself from him? I'm just wondering on what basis your husband has formed his opinion, since you don't have one of your own.

We have no obsessiveness to this blogger. It is God who told us in prayer to pick her when we searched for an atheist woman to discuss for parenting Bible studies. I will pray for you to find an open mind.
Dont' have an obsessiveness? Every single post you've put up is in reference to P-Momma!! In modern vernacular, you could be considered a cyber stalker.

Also, why does your deity have to tell you to do things. For an all powerful being, he's certainly lacking. Or just maybe, he's just a voice in your head.

The rest I will leave to Paul, who left a comment on your blog. However, "Paxil's wager" gave me a laugh I haven't had since another commenter (also a female Christian) talked about Jesus being in Europe.

phewd said...

What kills me is the need to actually let you know that they're praying for you. Fine - pray for me. Pray your fucking balls off (or ovaries out - depending on gender). But why do you feel the need to let me know at every turn that you're doing it?! WHY?!?!

Thranil said...

"But why do you feel the need to let me know at every turn that you're doing it?! WHY?!?!"

Because what they're doing is praying AT you.

Calis said...

Greetings from a fellow atheist "Bloger" (as they say at the NPZ).

Rueyn said...

I'm really trying to be understanding to people's opinions. I really am. But this makes me so angry I want to throw something: "I am pregnant for baby seven but and we have been in God's favor with no miscariage in seven pregnancies. He could have healed you if you believed..."

That is a hideous thing to write to someone, no matter whether or not you agree with his/her view on the world. To say that (any) God would smite someone with the loss of a child because that person didn't believe in him is nothing less than hateful. PMomma -- don't waste your time reading/responding to these idiots. You deserve better.

Calladus said...

The offer still stands Nancy & Thomas. Email me and we'll talk.

As an Ex-Christian I can sort of see where you're coming from. But your methods are quite different from what my church taught was honorable or acceptable. I'd like to understand those differences, are they doctrinal or personally held?

If you're scared of what I'll do with those emails, I can promise you that, other than deleting them, I'll treat them in the way you wish.

Crusade33 said...

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

Alicia said...

I have come across your blog before, possummmomma, but was reacquainted via reddit because of this post.

This is insane. Completely batshit crazy. As a fellow co-sleeping, breastfeeding, atheist momma of three (no minivan yet :)), I am completely baffled by these people. Offensively stupid is right. Speechless.

Keep doing what you're doing, and try to ignore the stupids.

Enkidu said...

P-momma,

For the life of me, I can't imagine what you were thinking when you dignified these mental midgets with a post. Let their bastion of ignorance wither away like an old motel bypassed by the new freeway.

Going Churching said...

Don't let these folks get you down! They are just another bullshit Christian blog in the vast sea of bullshit Christian blogs. If anything, their small percentage of blog hits will lead directly to your site and help in promoting you! lol.

I wish someone would make a blog devoted to hating me! Geez!

Geekwad said...

I'm so sorry to have stopped following your blog, Possummomma. I see you are doing very well! I am very envious. I have always wanted a gang of fruitcakes obsessing over my every action. It would make me feel so important!

Best of luck.

CrypticLife said...

Cosleeping: Japan, China, India, and Korea alone make up the bulk of the world, and those are only the countries where I know cosleeping is extensively practiced. Their argument about cosleeping allowing the child to control the parents seems based on a fundamental misconception -- they view cosleeping as a response to the child being scared and wanting to sleep with the parents. Actually, if cosleeping is initiated as a normal part of life that's not the case at all. It's not the child choosing to cosleep, it's the parents.

The crack about you "opened your knees" is just nastiness. As are the bulk of their other statements.

Moreover, they are idiots. I don't say that with any ire, as I do like a number of idiots; some of them are among the nicest people I know. Nancy and her husband aren't nice, but I wouldn't call them idiots just for that. Vox Day is repugnant, but he at least has a brain. These people who've targeted you are not smart. Maybe they'll agree and accuse me of being elitist for caring about intelligence, but the fact is that without intelligence you can't make logical arguments. Or even persuasively make illogical ones.

They would also be well-advised to look into laws on harassment and slander/libel. There is freedom of speech, but they come close to the edge when they decide the focus of their blog is going to be about you. I don't know the law in these areas all that well (my JD focused on other areas of law).

Ami said...

If one truly follows the Christian belief system, how could they possibly say that their god is against a woman becoming pregnant out of wedlock?

According to their legends,isn't that exactly what their god did to Mary?

But how truly magnanimous for Nancy to give her approval for you to be raising your own child.

@@

Natasha Yar-Routh said...

Nancy your obsession with P-momma is so strong it practically glows. Your every post reeks of passive aggressive hate not the love you so feebly protest.

As for this Jesus in whose name you claim to act, He's dead, It's been 2000 years, He's not coming back, Get over it.

But really Why So Serious?

Let's put a smile on that face!

Floridamom said...

They do it because they're afraid. Afraid if they examine their beliefs with a critical mind, they'll know how foolish they are. If it wasn't you P-Momma, they'd find someone else.

Stephen said...

Well, between the Paxil's Wager and the bad grammar, I have to admit that I am truly impressed that Nancy could manage to work a computer and open her own Blogger account. It pains me to read that she is homeschooling. Christianity aside, I couldn't imagine purposely passing this kind of ignorance down another generation.

Pmomma, you have done so much more for your kids than these dweebs have done for theirs. Don't worry about their unidimensional rants.

Spidergrackle said...

I'm with Stephen: how can someone so lacking in writing skills and basic logic manage to open a blogger account and figure out how to post?

Spidergrackle said...

Oh, dear Bog. I just checked the blog out and stumbled accross this gem of a comment:

pdaddy does not set a good example by letting this wife on a blog to make his manhood seem foolish. Her husband isn't even atheist but her mouth sqwaks away. Children are taught to turn to the Lord for comfort. What you do with babys is not right with teenagers.
Breasts may be babys for some times until real food is started. Wives submit bodies to the husband thru a glorious wedding cov that is old as time. Breast milk feeding puts off a woman in return to her duty to have children.


I'm to shocked to even be amused. Poe's law.

Erin said...

I think you need to invest in an "I <3 Haters" shirt.

Erin said...

Oh, man. This kills me.
Breast milk feeding puts off a woman in return to her duty to have children.

Horrific grammar aside....
Really? Breastfeeding is never, ever mentioned in the Bible? So, Joseph hopped over to Walmart to buy a case of Similac for Jesus?

But what do I know? I'm just a dirty hippie, sleeping with my kid while my breasts swing free.

Berlzebub said...

I'm just a dirty hippie, sleeping with my kid while my breasts swing free.

Maybe Erin is onto something here. If we post these comments enough, it might keep the trolls at bay. They might visit, but then they'll have to ask forgiveness through prayer, which means they shouldn't have time to comment.

In the meantime, us heathens can use those same comments to fuel our fantasies. :-D

Seems like a win/win to me.

KevinGreene said...

You have your very own cyber stalkers; a strange mix of creepy and impotent.

I have not read Mr.Myers. I read faith promotive material. Tom reads Mr. Myers very much. I want you to really think about distanceing your blog from Myers because it makes you look un-open minded. His blog should be shut down after his scandal with the catholics says my husband. I trust his opinion.

So instead of forming any rational opinion on your own based on any facts you’ve decided instead to gladly accept authoritarian dictates on how to behave while removing all responsibility for how you came to hold your opinions.

What’s more religious than that?

Jim said...

Is it just me or does that comment sound like it's got song potential...

I'm just a dirty hippie, sleeping with my kid while my breasts swing free.

Sing it!

I'm just a dirty hippie.
Sleeping with my kid,
While my breast swing free.

Learned all about it from the heathen possummomma.

Trolls say it'll damn my soul
For all eter-nit-y.


I know not...not quite as catchy as

www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaGgpGLxLQw

LCR said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
LCR said...

Nancy,

You have got to be the most judgemental holier-than-thou busybody I have ever had the displeasure to come across. You have absolutely no right to cast judgement upon Pmomma and her life and her family, nor do you have the right to tell her what to do. Do you recognize what a horrible example you are setting as a Christian? Can you possibly understand that your behavior and your hatefulness toward this woman serves only to remind atheists and agnostics of all the bad that can come from someone who practices religion? Pmomma established this blog to express her views on faith and atheism. You and your husband set up your blog solely (the name gives it away) to discredit and attack one sole person for their views. Pathetic. Attend to yourselves, live as you like, and leave the rest of the world alone before you do any serious irreparable damage.

Cindy said...

Wow, PMomma, I had never read the comment section of your blog before, but I have enjoyed the blog itself for a long time.

Boy, now that I dig into the comments I'm shocked. I never knew you had a following of crazy hate filled stalkers. After reading a bit I almost have a hard time believing that they are for real and not a distasteful parody of the worst of self righteous christians. How can they not see how poorly they themselves are behaving?

Anyway they don't deserve the time of dwelling on them. I just wanted to post and let you know that there is at least one more family of happy normal non crazy people who enjoy your works. I will definitely keep reading, but I will stay away from the comments and the stalkers. Let us know of any more gems of "wisdom" from them that we shouldn't miss.

Amy said...

NPZ said: Abstinence works every time.

Mary of Nazareth begs to differ.

Milo Johnson said...

Heh.

Terra said...

Erin,

Love the t-shirt idea. How about also,
"Atheist liberal and goddamn proud of it." (Thomas called us all atheist liberals and I quite like the sound of it. I threw in the blasphemy just to concrete my point.)

P.S. unrelated to anything: my word verification that I will have to type in in a second here is "eftoss" I wonder what an F-toss is? Sounds fun!

Milo Johnson said...

F-toss is what it would have been if you put another word before the word "goddamn." A-toss is the little old man who ran the library in the Star Trek episode called "All Our Yesterdays." And now, back to our regularly scheduled program, already in progress.

Marcy said...

That is creepy, scary, and subintelligent.

Atheist in a mini van. said...

This post has been edited to add information. Please click the link to read the addition. Thank you.

Blessings to you all, I am Nancy from the nopossumzone. I thought me and opossummomma had an understanding that we could say what ever we wanted to do in our constitution rights. She never told us to shut the blog down and we guess now she might like the attention. I can respond to her accusations right?

I never have, and never will, demand that you take your blog down. You have a right to voice your opinion. But, I do take offense to your suggestion that I want the attention to be silly. I made it this far without you.

The statement Thomas posted is right. We felt a calling to minister to op-mom along side her readers. Jesus will still take you back following your blasphemy since that is how forgiving our Savior is. But you must truly repent or don't bother. We are called to share the gospel of Christ. Is this bad? It is a loving jesture between religoius people and atheists.

Here's where it usually fails, Nancy. Your actions are only loving if you God is real. If not, then you're doing nothing more than wasting your time. You have six children! Focus on them! As for Jesus: his forgiveness is neither desired or required. If there ever was a Jesus (and, that's likely given the popularity of the name in that era), he's dead now. I don't accept his ressurection or divinity because I think it's a myth. An old and widely believed myth, but a myth just the same. As I've tried to tell you in multiple e-mails; in order to make people take you seriously, you have to show them proof for what you're asking them to believe.

We did not start a blog to do that when you say disassembling your blog. We want to break your stubborn fatal attatude at God. What happens to us if we don't try to minister to you is not a snub that I want to give to God when he orders me to do something.

You think starting a blog will "break me"? How very passive-aggressive of you. Personally, I don't believe you God exists. Why would I be swayed, in any fashion, by your claim that you don't want to "snub" this non-entity?

I think you read to much in Thomas posts. He is saying a wife has a partner in bed where a child would be inappropriate in the marital bed. That is our retreat so we don't spoil it with making it a family space. He was wrong to call you a hippy but that is no reason to get angry with him. There is no scripture about cosleeping in our Bible. I think if that was common it would be in the Bible. I think you are making this evidence up.


ROFLOL! Google is your friend. Ask any anthropologist about co-sleeping and they'll tell you it was likely the manner in which family groups have always slept. Hell, even animals co-sleep. You don't see a pride of lions going to different bushes at bed time. What do you think your own ancestors did when they got to the Americas? They built a ONE ROOM cabin (in most cases) and crammed it full of kids. Sleeping alone is a relatively recent, American custom. Ugh! This topic has been done to death.

Do you say words like these in public in front of children because you should be ashamed. I sent you a personal note with a apology about my husband saying that and I ask why you won't share it. I will to save you the trouble.
You're angry because I used the name "Dick"? Would it be better for you if I'd said it only took one penis to get me pregnant, instead of the three your husband suggests were needed?

Your husband used a very painful event in our family's history as a weapon. If he does that to a stranger, then what does he do to you?

I am pregnant for baby seven but and we have been in God's favor with no miscariage in seven pregnancies. He could have healed you if you believed. To follow that God could heal you now if you pray to him with a open spirit. He maybe knew you needed P3 and P4 to be who they are so you should thank him for having clear vision for your future. Dwell on bad things gets you bad things.

No. Actually, God didn't heal me. Syringes full of heparin did the trick, though. As for God being able to cure Lupus, I have to ask you (again) to prove he exists. Until you do that, there's no reason for me to believe God is any more effective than placebo.

I have not read Mr.Myers. I read faith promotive material. Tom reads Mr. Myers very much. I want you to really think about distanceing your blog from Myers because it makes you look un-open minded. His blog should be shut down after his scandal with the catholics says my husband. I trust his opinion.
If you've never read his posts, then how can you speak with any authority on what PZ stands for? Your blind allegiance to your husband is disturbing. When do you get to be a big girl and form your own opinions?

We have no obsessiveness to this blogger. It is God who told us in prayer to pick her when we searched for an atheist woman to discuss for parenting Bible studies. I will pray for you to find an open mind.
Bullshit.

I can provide proof of God.
Then provide it, already! We're all listening.

Erin said...

Good point, berlzebub! I'm sure Nancy would've much prefered the phrase "dirty pillows" to breasts, and I probably have caused a great deal of prayers for forgiveness at the very thought of free-swinging breasts.;)

CJ said...

Possummomma

I'm also an atheist Mom of three with a minivan. I enjoy your blog and hearing about your kids and how you are raising them as atheists.

I am so sorry to hear about these religious stalkers. I wanted to put 'crazy' 'psycho' etc but I read what they write and, wow, they are honest and earnest and so completely insane. There just isn't a good word for how far from reality they are.

I mean, I know intellectually people like this exist. I live in the San Francisco bay area, so I manage to believe -- and every day life backs me up -- that people are rational, reasonable and nice, even if some are religious. Though clearly the religious ones have to do some rationalizing moreso than being rational.

Anyway, sorry, what I want to say is that it's not worth it. Answering their irrational attacks and rants. I read the attack about 'do you use those words around your kids' and was livid. It was a frigging BLOG POST. You were responding to a vicious attack with humor!

That woman is mean, spiteful and a shame to Christians everywhere. And I say that as a fellow atheist.

I'm trying to say I support you. {hug}

CJ

Mojoey said...

Possummomma - I don't understand why they would single you out. But getting attention like this crosses a line, like the crazy fundie line or something. Be careful.

Enkidu said...

When I notice somebody hasn't cleaned up after his dog, I take special care not to step in it and spread it around. That's the best policy here as well.

These nutters will never change because they never think, they emote. They are incapable of seeing the world outside their religion, they can't understand that Jesus looks to us like Apollo and Mohammad look to them.

Joe said...

I don't know if you should be honored or concerned for having a fundy blog just for you.

Thomas - saved servant said...

God bless all of you. I'm Thomas but you can call me Tom if you want. Nancy is worn out from this blog during her last few months of confinement.

I never have, and never will, demand that you take your blog down. You have a right to voice your opinion. But, I do take offense to your suggestion that I want the attention to be silly. I made it this far without you.

I have said you are selfish all the long with this proving it. You have an ego about you. If you say you don't need people who want to talk to you why do you have a blog?

Here's where it usually fails, Nancy. Your actions are only loving if you God is real. If not, then you're doing nothing more than wasting your time. You have six children! Focus on them!
God is real. Secular people don't look for him. How can you find God with no efort to turn an open heart to Him? My wife is 10 times the mother you are so stop insulting her. You tell her to focus on them so why do you not focus on yours?
As for Jesus: his forgiveness is neither desired or required. If there ever was a Jesus (and, that's likely given the popularity of the name in that era), he's dead now. I don't accept his ressurection or divinity because I think it's a myth. An old and widely believed myth, but a myth just the same.
All right, prove it is a myth. You can't do that can you because no atheist can. Faith with devotion gives us proof to believe. You won't find God in a libary book but once you ask him to come to your heart he will fill it with his presense that you won't deny. How many other corpses do you know that walked out of a sealed tomb like Jesus? You believe strange things to but you don't admit them. You believe we came from jungle monkeys or fish. I know what Evolutionists say to that. You will tell me that you don't say you come from fish and monkeys because it is a slow change. How does a fish become a human in 7000 years can you tell me that? Can you make all this divursity in nature in only such a short time?
As I've tried to tell you in multiple e-mails; in order to make people take you seriously, you have to show them proof for what you're asking them to believe.
I think you may be right but atheists don't want evidence they want a scientist to say what they want to hear when they ignore the great scientists of ID. The man who found DNA believes in God and you think you have more smarts than he does. My test for you is to read a book. I will pay for it but you have to read it and I will buy a book your recommend. I am not afraid of what is said by deceived men named Dawkins or Harris. Do we have a deal?

You think starting a blog will "break me"? How very passive-aggressive of you. Personally, I don't believe you God exists. Why would I be swayed, in any fashion, by your claim that you don't want to "snub" this non-entity?

You say this but believe in DNA with evolution which you can't see. Where is the link with half a cat and haf a dog? Not thinking God is real because you can't see him is lazy because I could say I have not seen the Civil War so it did not happen.

Ask any anthropologist about co-sleeping and they'll tell you it was likely the manner in which family groups have always slept. Hell, even animals co-sleep. You don't see a pride of lions going to different bushes at bed time. What do you think your own ancestors did when they got to the Americas? They built a ONE ROOM cabin (in most cases) and crammed it full of kids. Sleeping alone is a relatively recent, American custom. Ugh! This topic has been done to death.

We should not do what we did a thousand years ago. God gives us modern choices.

Your husband used a very painful event in our family's history as a weapon. If he does that to a stranger, then what does he do to you?
I do feel sorry for that.

No. Actually, God didn't heal me. Syringes full of heparin did the trick, though. As for God being able to cure Lupus, I have to ask you (again) to prove he exists. Until you do that, there's no reason for me to believe God is any more effective than placebo.

Who taught the scientist to try heparin?

If you've never read his posts, then how can you speak with any authority on what PZ stands for? Your blind allegiance to your husband is disturbing. When do you get to be a big girl and form your own opinions?
It's not "blind allegeance" it is trust. Disgaree if you want but women need to stay focused on children family and God.

Then provide it, already! We're all listening.
Jesus was because our dating times revolute around his death and birth. It is 2008 years side His birth. Every nation in the world uses his life as a start. Are they all wrong and just you are right?
Design needs deseigner.
Ecoli bacteria have motors that move them around but we can't duplicate it because it is too complex which means a high power created it for us to learn from.
Our world is perfect for our need so it can't be of chance. We had to begin. You can't begin from nothing unless God is the something. The second law of thermodynamics is the best proof.

Milo Johnson said...

This last post proved once and for all that these people are simply too stupid to engage in conversation. How they even manage to feed themselves without poking their eyes out with the fork is a mystery.

DB said...

This is sad. I thought trolls were bad, but getting your own extremist website is pretty nuts! Good luck!

Cris said...

I think that one of the reasons why so many people cling to their religious beliefs is that it can be so much easier to be dictated to, rather than having to made their own decisions and be considered responsible for them.

I am also baffled by the concept that a supreme and eternal being, of infinite knowledge and intelligence, with the power of creating the universe and all living creatures, could care anything about being believed in, worshiped, honored, prayed to, how we dress, and how and who we have sex with.
These concerns belong to many human cultures that want to impose some form of control.
But what can be in it for a god?

Jim said...

@Thomas-SS
You can't begin from nothing unless God is the something. The second law of thermodynamics is the best proof.

That's not what the Second Law of Thermodynamics says...and that statement also goes against modern cosmology and Guth's inflation theory.

I take it that what you wanted to say was that since entropy increases over time that's why there has to be a god, otherwise we wouldn't be here.

This, unfortunately, is a simplistic "understanding" of the Second Law of Thermodynamics which is oft repeated by those of a Creationist bent.

Since it is early on a Saturday morning, and I’m too lazy to type this from scratch, let me point you to this website which summarizes things quite nicely - though I'm sure you'll disagree.

Dawn said...

@Thomas (AKA Saved Servant) You may chose to believe me or not, but I was a devout Christian for many years, although I am now agnostic, if not atheistic. (yay bible studies that teach you to READ the bible, and research biblical times and learn the truth. Thanks to the priest who taught the classes! A wonderful priest, who felt Bishop John Shelby Spong was right...)

Your post, and your wife's, are appalling. I am only going to respond to a few points. No one "taught" doctors to use heparin. The use was discovered, like most medicine through research. Trial and error to start.

Pmomma DOES focus on her family. What evidence do you have that she does not?

No, EVERY nation in the world does not use the dating from Jesus' birth. Israel, China, Saudi Arabia, as a beginning to a list. In fact, if you use the "facts" in the bible, then it's not really 2008 anyway. No one knows for sure when the biblical Jesus was born. There is no documentation of the events of his death outside the bible, and since the Romans were big on records, there would have been documents about the sudden darkness, the earthquake, the walking of the zombies...

You won't convert anyone, least of all Pmomma. We have read and studied. If you have evidence, we will accept it. The bible is not evidence (read some of the books of the bible that weren't included in the council's choice...you'll understand why).

We are always willing to hear from those Christians who are willing to have a dialogue. No lectures. But a friendly, perhaps agree-to-disagree conversation is always welcome.

Psychodiva said...

unreal- they never cease to amaze me these hate-filled psychotic idiots- I don't mind being seen as a bigot by them as I don't go to their websites and harass them or start blogs against just one person- their mindset is unbelievable and I look forward to the day when they are no longer able to grasp at power in any country

Dark Heart said...

@Dawn you have to remember that those countries don't count because they are not "christian nations" and if the Romans didn't keep any records of jesus thats just because they too were pagan loving heathens :)

Calladus said...

We should not do what we did a thousand years ago.

You were so close to the truth there. Keep thinking that way.

GodIsIrrelevant said...

If I ever find a Christian who can actually explain a *reason* why God would kill an innocent otherwise healthy baby at birth, instead of waving their hands around and claiming it's God's Will for some Plan which We Are UnFit To Understand, maybe I'll return to belief.

As it stands, either God is a complete Bastard (in which case I don't care to "feed the troll"), or He doesn't exist. From the standpoint of my life, how I conduct myself is not controlled by some mythic wish outside myself, it is controlled by me, for good and for bad. If there's someone who can hold me and everyone else accountable afterwards, so much the better, but conduct, not belief, is what matters.

Katkinkate said...

Don't take their criticism personally Pmomma. They are just 'jealous of your freedoms'. Hope you have recovered from the zoo trip.

Brigit said...

It is God who told us in prayer to pick her when we searched for an atheist woman to discuss for parenting Bible studies.

So you listen to the voice(s) in your head and say its a deity? magnificent.

I know Paxil's wager to.

No. the problem seems to be you are not acquaintanced with it well enough.

Atheist in a mini van. said...

Hey Paul, aka Silentsanta!
Did you see that NPZ is addressing you in a new post? Oy vey!

Erin said...
Good point, berlzebub! I'm sure Nancy would've much prefered the phrase "dirty pillows" to breasts, and I probably have caused a great deal of prayers for forgiveness at the very thought of free-swinging breasts.;)

LOL @ the Carrie reference. I seriously don't understand why these fundamental Christians hate breastfeeding. As you've said before (I think), "God didn't create Similac."

CJ said...
I read the attack about 'do you use those words around your kids' and was livid. It was a frigging BLOG POST. You were responding to a vicious attack with humor!

*nods* Thank you for your support.

Mojoey said...
Possummomma - I don't understand why they would single you out. But getting attention like this crosses a line, like the crazy fundie line or something. Be careful.

I'm not sure I completely understand it either. But, I did speak to a friend of the P-Blog who is a forensic psychiatrist (or...well, he will be in June of this year). He's writing a paper on internet stalkers. He pointed out a few things that I hadn't thought of. For starters, with the exception of Nancy, all of my trolls/naysayers have been men. They've also shared a belief in the dominance of man, as suggested in the Bible. They've all been Biblical literalists with, if we look at their writing style, little education. Except for the first, all of them have been Quiverfull advocates. Which means they see women as a uterus with legs. They advocate arranged marriage. And, when any male friend or poster asks for personal e-mails, they do not respond to the request. What they hate is a woman having a voice, and opposing opinion, on the very thing that allows them to exercise power in their own homes. They're scared. Plain and simple.

Joe said...
I don't know if you should be honored or concerned for having a fundy blog just for you.

I'm not sure, either.

And...heeeeere we go.
Thomas said...
Nancy is worn out from this blog during her last few months of confinement.

I'm sorry to hear that. With six children to deal with, I'm sure she has her hands full. Pregnancy can be exhausting. Pass along my well-wishes.

I have said you are selfish all the long with this proving it. You have an ego about you. If you say you don't need people who want to talk to you why do you have a blog?

The fact that I made it this far without you is egotistical? In what world? I never said I didn't want people to engage in a discussion. And, I have built strong friendships with many of the people who post here. The problem isn't that you're a Christian. The problem is that YOU dont' want to talk! You want to dictate and expect to have your ego stroked.
God is real.
The tooth fairy is real. See how stupid that looks/sounds?
Secular people don't look for him. How can you find God with no efort to turn an open heart to Him? My wife is 10 times the mother you are so stop insulting her. You tell her to focus on them so why do you not focus on yours?

Your ignorance is stunning. I can't speak for every "secularist" (and, I'm guessing you mean "atheist"), but many of us did look for a deity. The difference between you and I is that I was willing to look for my deity in an objective manner. I didn't toss the evidence against the alleged deity. Unless you have a bone saw, you can't open your heart to anything. It's a muscle that pumps blood through our body. It's not an emotional receptacle.
Your claim about your wife shows your inability to debate effectively.

The rest of your post is one fallacy after another.

Country Wife said...

What a bunch of smucktards! I can't imagine ever having a life so pathetic that the focus would become someone else's life!

@ Nancy : I am pregnant for baby seven but and we have been in God's favor with no miscariage in seven pregnancies. He could have healed you if you believed. To follow that God could heal you now if you pray to him with a open spirit.

So you are saying that all PM has to do is believe in gawd and she will be healed simply because you've managed to carry babies without miscarriage? What an offensive thing to say!! What about those devout women that have suffered miscarriage? What about all those babies hurt by parents? What about child abuse and pedophiles? Those babies just didn't believe in gawd or pray hard enough? I'm sure those children old enough to have been to church prayed their little hearts out while being 'used' by grown men..what do you have to say to them?

You make me sick. Grow up. Think for yourself. Get an education. Stop letting your idiot husband think for you; he can't even think for himself. Take care of your own children and stop obsessing. If there was a god, he would've called Tom to his office long ago for giving him such a bad name.

Perpetual Beginner said...

I don't even know where to start.

Thomas - speaking as a Christian here, when it comes to science you do not know what you are talking about. You are so far off that you're not even wrong. Your opinions on what scientists say, and how science works, and why people believe it are so far off I can barely believe you live in the 21st century. It's as if we were having a conversation about life in Kentucky and you suddenly opined that the random contaigious cyanide outbreaks must make education difficult. WHAT? What are you talking about? What you're saying makes no sense whatsoever.

If you want to have a conversation with atheists that accomplishes anything other than making them think Christians are completely off their rockers, please, please, PLEASE, educate yourself about basic scientific principles first.

P.S. - Francis Crick was and is (to the best of my knowledge) a pretty outspoken atheist, so you might not want to make that particular argument.

Atheist in a mini van. said...

Country Wife said...
So you are saying that all PM has to do is believe in gawd and she will be healed simply because you've managed to carry babies without miscarriage? What an offensive thing to say!!


Through her posts here and her e-mails, I can vouch that that is exactly what she wanted to say. In one e-mail, she said the following: God gives us what we need if we come to him with belief that He can cure you
I asked, "Are you saying that mothers who sits by her child who has incurable cancer is "doing it wrong"?" Nancy said that that was correct. Just to make sure she can't say I've twisted her words, her complete answer was...God knows us before we are born so he can know what is best for people when they can't see what is good. A mom in your exampled question has to put faith in God to heal. It would be good if she asked to pray for the doctors to do his jobs right. There are Christians who do not pray right. It is sad for a child to die but I feel good knowing they end up with God no dout."

What about those devout women that have suffered miscarriage? What about all those babies hurt by parents?
Nancy and Thomas brought this up because Thomas found a post in my journal from 2001. In November of that year, I miscarried a baby girl. This was my third loss. Our first loss was a girl. The second loss were twin boys. Then, this final loss. Grace was the pregnancy shortly thereafter. Nancy sent me several links saying she had some spotting with a pregnancy and decided to fast and pray for a day. She didn't lose the baby. So, of course, that's proof that God won't make you miscarry if you're a sheeple. At the time, I had a friend who was hardcore in his Cathoicism (named Tom). I made a comment about that in the post and Thomas thought I was talking about him. He thought it was a recent post. This tells me tat he's fucking full of himself.
What about child abuse and pedophiles? Those babies just didn't believe in gawd or pray hard enough? I'm sure those children old enough to have been to church prayed their little hearts out while being 'used' by grown men..what do you have to say to them?

No shit. I loathe this rationale. Victims are victims. Don't fucking victimize them again because your twisted religion can find fault in everyone.

KevinGreene said...

I wish to apologize up front for the numerous spelling and grammar errors that are sure to be contained within.

My vocabulary regularly outstrips my ability to express it without typographical errors and I'm typing this in notepad, because I have not gotten around to reinstalling OpenOffice.

As such I am bereft of a spell checker for the moment and as a result all of you most suffer along with me.

My wife is 10 times the mother you are so stop insulting her.
I'm sure she is a paragon of virtue and can do the work of 10 normal mothers because her heart is pure.

Funny though how you manage to insult someone at the same time as demanding special consideration for you wife.

To not be overly hypocritical I've not made any such demand for myself.

All right, prove it is a myth. You can't do that can you because no atheist can.

Ah the infamous shifting of burden of proof; a logic mistake made only more tiresome by its predicable use.

The claim is to if a god exists (leaving aside for a moment which one or ones would have to be settled next).

Anything which hasn't yet been proven false is not evidence that it is true and we do not act that way in any other portion of our day to day lives.

Else I would ask you for your disproof of Yeti's, UFO's, unicorns, magical mole men living in the earths crust as all things you must absolutely believe in. Allthough if you where to tell me you did believe in all of those I wouldn't myself by much surprised.
And if the inability to absolutely disprove a negative, rather than prove a positive, is your yard stick for belief I would ask if you also believe in every god that has every been preposed in the history of the world.

Do you worship Loki the trickster god of the norsman on Mondays while talking some homeopathic medice? What evidence can you provide the Loki is not real?

Do you worship Bacchus the Roman god of wine on Tuesdays, perhaps with a little nightcap? What evidence can you provide the Bacchus is not real?

Do you fear the lightning bolts of the Greek god Zeus when a storm rolls by on Wednesday? What evidence can you provide the Zues is not real?

When putting doing a bookshelf on Thursday do you say a prayer to Lu-Pan the Chinese god of Carpenters while making sure the shelving is properly Fung Shui. What evidence can you provide the Lu-Pan is not real?

On Friday do you observe the Islamic sabbath and bowing to mecca praise Allah? What evidence can you provide the Allah is not real?

On Saturday do you consider appeasing the Hawaiian volcano god Pele? What evidence can you provide the Pele is not real?

On Sunday do you dig into a big bowl of Pasta and give thanks to the Flying Spaghetti Monster (bless his noodly form)? What evidence can you provide that his noodly emeninance is not real and more to the point, can you provide any evidence that wouldn't also apply to your favored imaginary friend?

Or is it perhaps that the complete absence of a reason to believe something isn't a reason to believe something.

Faith with devotion gives us proof to believe.

As for faith, If you indeed had proof you would not need faith so let us not pretend that faith and proof aren't exclusive positions.

Faith rather is the excuse people use to justify believing something not only the absence of evidence but in the face of contradictory evidence.

Far from being a virtue it is the most horrible shackle that a mind can be fitted with.

How many other corpses do you know that walked out of a sealed tomb like Jesus?

This is a logical fallacy called beging the question or the or the unstated major premise. The premise being in this case that the event actually occured being stated as a given assumption.

Rather we get something like, "How many people do you know got super powers after being bitten by a radioactive spider like Spiderman."

Hardly a convincing arguement of anything other than an inability to differientiate fact from fiction.

I know what Evolutionists say to that. You will tell me that you don't say you come from fish and monkeys because it is a slow change. How does a fish become a human in 7000 years can you tell me that? Can you make all this divursity in nature in only such a short time?

This logical arguement rests on an error of fact or the logical falicy of Argument by Uninformed Opinion. It rests on a premise that all evolution occured in the last 7000 years. Which would be somewhat problametic if the only source of our knowlegde was literal interpretations of bible scripture and we had to cram the whole world into something between 6,000 and 10,00 years.

Fortionately we don't have to limit or understanding to such a narrow world view we can instead look at what the evidence actually gives. The earth itself is about 4.55 billion years old.
The simpilest life forms, Prokaryote. about 4 billion years ago.

If you want to bring fish into it we are looking at about 500 million years ago for Fish and proto-amphibians and about 200,000 years for a human that looked something like us. Which if you have been able to follow along is approximately 499,800,000 years difference.

At this point it is obvious the statement that you 'know what Evolutionist say' is an embarasement you should seek to correct by reading what scientists actually say, not what your pastor tell you they say.

I think you may be right but atheists don't want evidence they want a scientist to say what they want to hear when they ignore the great scientists of ID. The man who found DNA believes in God and you think you have more smarts than he does.

This logical fallicy would be the Appeal to Authority. Religous people love appeals to authority because it has they acquire so much of their 'knowledge'.

An arguement is not valid or invalid based on the person making the claim. Rather all arguements must survive or be disproven based on there own merits and not the merits of the person making the arguement.

It boils down to you should believe X because person Y also believed in X and person Y should be listened to.

I understand you believe everything your pastor tells you, and your wife in turn believes everything you tell her, but some of us have higher standards.
Before going on lets see what other mistakes are being made here.

The first is another Error of Fact in the line, 'The man who found DNA believes in god".

James D. Watson, Francis Crick, and Maurice Witkins where awarded a nobel price in 1962 for there work discovering the structure of DNA. I would argue that Rosalind Franklin should have been included in that group. Watson himself was by his own public comments an atheist. Crick authored on artical in his own named entitled, "How I got inclined to atheism."

I only bring it up because it is seems in this particular case to be an unsupported claim advanced in the hope that no one would challenge it's validity. It must be OK to lie for Jesus.

That said, speaking more generally, I would point out that there are many geneticist who are also theists. Not the particular ones you where talking about but certainly others. This is a given.

Belief or lack of a belief in a supernatural agency have no barring on your ability or inability to understand genetics or evolution.

What is not a given is the implied causal chain between belief and being a proponent of Intellegent Design.

There are many scientists who have no problem both being theists and accepting evolution without a designer.

That is because not everyone who is theistic believes in an interventionary god who has to poke and prod as he goes along.

You say this but believe in DNA with evolution which you can't see. Where is the link with half a cat and haf a dog?

The logical falacy used here is that of the Straw Man. Argueing the against the merits of the position held by no one but the person doing the arguring.

It is also somewhat akin to asking a mathmetician to tell him what the whole number between 3 and 4 is.

It is thus an arguement that does nothing except to reveal your lack of knowledge and certainly does nothing to advance your arguement.
One does have to wonder however if you imagine that cats and dogs are presently interbreeding in the manner of Ligers, the hybrid of a lion and a tiger, or a Mules, the hyrbid of Donkeys and Horses.

I can assure you that even if your Chow is getting it on with the neighbors Tabby its not going to result in any offspring.

A more intelligent and thus answerable question might be what taxa the closest known common ancestor shared between the Family Canidea and the Family Felidae belong to. The study of genetics can tell us about when the diverged which is was approximately 50 million years ago. The taxa they are thought to be associated with would be miacoids which had some traits similar to those of dogs, some similar to those of cats, and others that are dissimilar from both.

Do we say with certainity that absolutely this particular fossiled member of an order is undoubtedly the one. No we do not. This is not a point in your favor it only is addressing what is actually claimed versus what you feverishly imagine is claimed.
That you could have researched this yourself before asking the question is a given.

Not thinking God is real because you can't see him is lazy because I could say I have not seen the Civil War so it did not happen.

I can't decide of the logical fallacy here is that of the bad anology or if its just a non sequitor.

Because you did not eyewitness event X and because I can't prove Z even exists that these are equivelent positions.

That I have not watched any of the coverage of the olympics doesn't validate the existance of flying monkeys.

Nor should it imply that the exist of evidence for both or that any evidence for one implies an equal amount for the other.

Are you sure you want to be the one talking about lazy thinking?

Who taught the scientist to try heparin?

The doctor who performed the injections was taught to do so by his years in medical school learning Anotomy, Physiology, Histology, Biochemistry, Embryology, Nearoanotomy, Pathology, Phermacology, Microbiology, and Immunology. He choose the particular drug based on his understanding of the compounds in it and the interactions it would have in the human body as shown to him by research trials on the efficicecy of the drug for a specific problem.

The drug itself is discovered by scientists specifically looking for pro-coagulant preperations. There's research choices and direction where informed by what they already knew of biochemisty based on the combined work of all the research that had been done before them.

Their discover in 1913 was later refined by yet another team of scientists in 1929 to discover ways in which the molecle could be derived in larger quantities and in purer form.

It is evident though from your screed who you believe taught the scientists to try heparin but I'm afraid that's just introducing another logical falicy which is known as beging the question or the unstated major premise
The argument of a god, oh lets say Odin this time, informing the scientists - rather than their own cummulative studies and testing would first rest on the existing of Odin having already been proven previously.

The only thing I'm afraid your comment above hilights is the contempt you have of both science and the abilities of your fellow man.

Let us just say that I don't share such a dim view of human endevours.

Disgaree if you want but women need to stay focused on children family and God.

OK, I disagree with you. I think more of women than regulating them to baby making, worship machines.

To each, there own.

Jesus was because our dating times revolute around his death and birth. It is 2008 years side His birth. Every nation in the world uses his life as a start. Are they all wrong and just you are right?

Where to start with the falacies listed in this one.

I suppose we can start with the factual errors such as 'every nation in the world uses [it]'.

This is just an incorrect statement.

There have been many calendars through time, the Gregorian being only one of many.
There is the Chinese Calendar can be traced back to 2637 B.C.E.where legend has it that it was invented by then Emporer Huangdi The Chinese calendar is based on exact astronomical observations of the longitude of the sun and the phases of the moon. This means that principles of modern science have had an impact on the Chinese calendar. The Chinese calendar - like the Hebrew - is a combined solar/lunar calendar in that it strives to have its years coincide with the tropical year and its months coincide with the synodic months. I believe we are currently in the Chinese Calendar year 4707, the year of the Ox, although I admit I may have read the table wrong.
The Indian Calendar is a formalized lunisolar calendar whose initial starting period of the Saka Era, a traditional epoch of Indian chronology. Years are counted from the Saka Era; 1 Saka is considered to begin with the vernal equinox of C.E. 79. And the months of the calendar are; Caitra, Vaisakha, Jyaistha, Asadha, Sravana, Bhadra, Asvina, Kartika, Agrahayana, Pausa, Magha, and Phalguna. As far as I can figure then it's perhaps Bhadra 1930.
The Islamic calendar (or Hijri calendar) is a purely lunar calendar. It contains 12 months that are based on the motion of the moon, and because 12 synodic months is only 12 x 29.53=354.36 days, the Islamic calendar is consistently shorter than a tropical year, and therefore it shifts with respect to the Christian calendar.
Each month starts when the lunar crescent is first seen (by a human observer's eye) after a new moon.
Although new moons may be calculated quite precisely, the actual visibility of the crescent is much more difficult to predict. It depends on factors such as weather, the optical properties of the atmosphere, and the location of the observer. It is therefore very difficult to give accurate information in advance about when a new month will start. Furthermore, some Muslims depend on a local sighting of the moon, whereas others depend on a sighting by authorities somewhere in the Muslim world. Both are valid Islamic practices, but they may lead to different starting days for the months.
Years are counted since the Hijra, that is, Mohammed's emigration to Medina in C.E. 622. Because this lunar year is about 11 days shorter than the solar year, Islamic holy days, although celebrated on fixed dates in their own calendar, usually shift 11 days earlier each successive solar year
It should be Islamic year AH 1429, I believe.
The Jewish Calendar. The Jewish calendar is used for religious purposes by Jews all over the world, and it is the official calendar of Israel.
The Jewish calendar is a combined solar/lunar calendar, in that it strives to have its years coincide with the tropical year and its months coincide with the synodic months. This is a complicated goal, and the rules for the Jewish calendar are correspondingly fascinating.
Lunisolar calendars use months to approximate the tropical year. Examples are the Jewish and Chinese calendars. Since 12 months are about 11 days shorter than the tropical year, a leap month (also called intercalary month) is inserted about every third year to keep the calendar in tune with the seasons. The big question is how to do this. A simple method is to just base it on nature. In ancient Israel, the religious leaders would determine the date for Passover each spring by seeing if the roads were dry enough for the pilgrims and if the lambs were ready for slaughter. If not, they would add one more month. An aboriginal tribe in Taiwan would go out to sea with lanterns near the new moon at the beginning of spring. If the migrating flying fish appeared, there would be fish for New Year's reunion dinner. If not, they would try their luck next month.
The Ethiopian calendar is based on the Coptic calendar, although it differs with regard to the saint's days and the time of observing them.
The Coptic, or Egyptian, calendar is 7/8 years behind the Gregorian calendar. This discrepancy results from differences between the Ethiopian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church as to the date of the creation of the world.
The Ethiopian calendar is based on the Egyptian. An Egyptian year has 13 months. The first 12 months have 30 days. The last month, Paguemain, is an intercalary month, which has 6 days on leap year and 5 on others.
The Persian calendar is a solar calendar with a starting point that matches that of the Islamic calendar. Apart from that, the two calendars are not related. The origin of the Persian calendar can be traced back to the 11th century when a group of astronomers (including the well-known poet Omar Khayyam) created what is known as the Jalaali calendar. However, a number of changes have been made to the calendar since then.
The current calendar has been used in Iran since 1925
As in the Islamic calendar years are counted since Mohammed's emigration to Medina in C.E. 622. Note that contrary to the Islamic calendar, the Persian calendar counts solar years. In the year C.E. 2008 we have therefore witnessed the start of Persian year 1386.
This is not even considering calendars no longer in use such as the Mayan calendar system.

Nor is it the only mistake you've made witht the calendar arguement.

The next is the blatent application of the logical falacy Appeal to Widespread Belief (The Bandwagon Arguement).
You should believe X because lots of people believe X.

While it is true lots of people may believe X, the fact that lots of people believe X provides no support for X itself.

Nor would you think that someone who identifies themselves as of a christian faith would be at all comfortable with an appeal to numbers unless they had a gross misunderstanding of there relative place in the world.

While it may be true that all the people in your social circle have many of the same beliefs as you does not mean you can extrapolate that to be inclusive of people outside your group.

I found a listing of a projected total of all christians worldwide in 2001 as being 2.1 billion, edging out the next bunch of heretics by a good margin.

Huzzah.

Let's take a look at the population of the planet for the same time frame.

As of 2000, the world's population is estimated to be just over 6.07 billion.

The obvious point being that the vast majority of 3.97 billion alive think your bat shit crazy.

So if I can't convince you that Appeals to Widespread Belief don't logicially support your arguement and is just lazy thinking then at least look at the numbers and understand that this a straight numbers game doesn't help you at all.

Nor was the Gregorian calendar handed down from on high to Charlton Heston. It's a work in progress. The form you love and enjoy today was decreed by Pope Gregory XIII in using that calendar February 24, 1582.

It itself was a reform of an earlier calendar the Jullian Calendar introduced in B.C.E 45 or 45 BC to you. (another calendar still in use some places). And the Julian calendar itself was a reform of the earlier Roman calendar. And it continues to change, let us even say evolve, taking the Common Era calendar into consideration.

It's one of many calendars each one given an arbitrary starting points and each one competing by the technical merits of how well they relate to a solar or lunar year. Each is in turn spread by the expansion of the cultures that use them, the presures they impose for it's adoption, and its securlar merits.

In the end all the exists of a Gregorian Calendar proves is that a Gregorian Calendar exists.

I'll even go further and say that it speaks to the existance of christians who adopted it and promoted it's spread.

Certainly no one was argueing that they didn't believe christians actually exist.

If you harbored that belief let me say that I'll grant that christians themselves exist. You know, just for the sake of arguement.

If you consider it proof of anything beyond that I would say that your evidence is wanting.

Design needs deseigner.
Are you going to tell me the proof of this is a bannana or perhaps your just happy with tautologies?

Our world is perfect for our need so it can't be of chance.

It's an interesting premise. See if this one stretches your mind for a moment.

". . . imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, ‘This is an interesting world I find myself in’an interesting hole I find myself in’fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!’ This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it’s still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything’s going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for." -- Douglas Adams

From a purely biological point of view what would be the results of evolution by natural selection be? We can look around and see the results are varied but what we have are creatures adapted to there environment. The reason being those who found the conditions they where in less than idealic face stronger survival preasures than those that do not.
The fact that they make the observation doesn't itself say anything about how they became adapted to their environment only that they have been. You see a creator, I see no need for a creator. But the perception itself is certainly not any type of evidence.

If you are speaking more cosmologically about conditions that would have to exist for any kind of life at all to exist I'll refer you simply to the Anthropic principle.

Which goes like this, if conditions where not such that life could exist and indeed did not exist we could not be having this conversation. If there are several conditions that all could have led to life, no matter how different than our own, then we end up having this same conversation.

Imagine if you will some physical constants are tweaked such that carbon based life as we know it never comes to exist.
As long as all life is not ruled out in some form then we imagine that different life evolving. Perhaps it is silicon based and lives out its life swiming in molten pools of heavy metals and sees and comunicates by radio wave emissions.

I quite imagine if such a thing did exist then one day it would have a conversation with it's fellow where it explained about the perfectly temperate world they lived in that was fit just for it and demanding to know how such a thing could be.

We had to begin. You can't begin from nothing unless God is the something.

God doesn't help you in any search of a first cause it's merely a way of trying say you have an answer when the answer is you don't know.
If you postulate that everything has a first cause then we have to postulate what created god, perhaps a greater god than that one, and then what created that, and then what created that into infinite regression.

Here the believer comes back and explains that god doesn't need a first cause. Which is just an arguement from a personal assertion proposed without any justification.

He first argues that he needs a first cause, and that he then has a special out where he does not. Taken another way its an admission that we don't need a first cause after all.

Once that admision is made there is no need for god to be the uncaused first cause and the universe itself can step in nicely into the roll as its own uncaused source.

It's about as valid and it explains as much or as little.

This is leaving aside for the moment the whole problem that even if a god is presumed here for the purpose of arguement that the assumption provides no evidence for nature or number of gods being argued for.

The second law of thermodynamics is the best proof.

As this ground has been covered ad nausum by actual physcists I'll link you instead to some educational reading. Well educational for someone else who might click on the link and go there perhaps.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo.html
http://members.aol.com/steamdoc/writings/thermo.html
http://www.charleswood.ca/reading/evolution.php
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Cooling.cfm


This has been an interesting attempt to cover your Galloping Gish (spew as many arguements as you can in the hope that something sticks) and while I can't say I didn't consider it an entertaining use of my time it was still a considerable amount of typing.

The sad fact is that it takes far less effort to vomit forth someone elses one line arguements that you happen to rememeber than it does to answer them so I don't expect I'll be replying any more in this thread.

To those that wish to continue banging your head against a wall - I salute you.

Calladus said...

My test for you is to read a book. I will pay for it but you have to read it and I will buy a book your recommend.

I know you're not challenging me on this, but I'll gladly take you up on it. You won't even have to buy the book, I'll do so myself. Just tell me what and who.

My only stipulation is that you read a book of my choosing.

Milo Johnson said...

Any of you folks ever talk to your dog? Or any dog? You always get the same result. The dog watches you intently with that happy doggie look on his face, tilting his head from one side to the other as he quivers with barely restrained excitement from all of this attention being lavished on him. Gary Larson of "The Far Side" had a cartoon once titled something like "what dogs hear" and it was the dog's owner talking to the dog, and the thought bubble over the dog, indicating what he got from the conversation, went like this: "Fido, blah blah blah blah blah, blah Fido blah blah blah, blah Fido blah blah Fido blah blah blah."

This is exactly the same response any attempt to converse with these faithodroids offers as a result. These creatures have no faculties for reason and logic. They have deliberately constrained their universe to the pages of a book of dubious origin heralding a primitive mythology with no evidence to support it. They have cast off that which makes humans so special on this planet, the ability to reason, to use logic, to deduce the realities of the universe from empirical evidence, and to have any freedom of choice in their actions. They may be somewhat funcional in their everyday lives, but judging from the incredible lack of literacy and evidence of any kind of education, their everyday lives are probably about as menial and base as is possible in this country.

No amount of evidence, no amount of scientific consensus, no amount of logic, nothing that anybody here can do or say is going to change that. They do not have the intellect to grasp it, and what little intellect they may have had they intentionally surrendered in exchange for the idiotic belief that some fairy tale creature would reward them for it. They are as far from human as it is possible to be for beings that share the DNA of humanity. There is only one benefit that they have to the human race, genetic diversity.

Any further discussion with them is pointless. Their wretched little soapbox on the internet is obviously the brightest part of their world, the only thing that makes them feel worthy, and there is no proof sufficient to them that they are as wrong and as ignorant as it is possible to be.

Ignore them and they will wither on the vine. There will be sporadic outbursts of colossal stupidity which will gradually fade away as they find some other unfortunate to spew their ignorant bile upon.

cockingasnook said...

I do not think these people are in any way harmful.

***

They don't seem literate enough to be truly harmful.

Nance

cockingasnook said...

It pains me to read that she is homeschooling. Christianity aside, I couldn't imagine purposely passing this kind of ignorance down another generation.

**

You think this level of stupid can be cured by public school?

Come on. . .

Nance

cockingasnook said...

It must be OK to lie for Jesus.

***

How does that work?

Nance

cockingasnook said...

LMAO!!!!!!!

"That I have not watched any of the coverage of the olympics doesn't validate the existance of flying monkeys."

Love it!

Nance

Cris said...

Milo, I agree very much with you.

cockingasnook said...

I just clicked over to the NPZ blog.

It is like stepping into a very dark room.

Nance

Robert said...

Wow! I don't understand how you manage to attract all of the weirdos to you? I'm guessing its gotta be the fact that you are a mother who is successfully raising four children without religion. Add that to the fact that you have a serious illness, yet are still filled with hope and joy without religion and I think you are perhaps the scariest thing they have ever encountered.

Least, thats all I can figure.

KevinGreene said...

How does that work?
Nance


"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church ... a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them."
– Martin Luther


You may also want to look up Pious Fraud and the writings of some of the early church fathers about telling a lie for god.

The basic idea boils down to that of the greater good. Getting converts is so important that the good of it outways the harm of how you go about doing it. After all God will forgive almost any sin so in the end whats the harm in sinning if you have a good reason or so the reasoning goes.

Frankly I call it being a dick.

cockingasnook said...

Oh, and here I thought that the big G would be upset if a believer lied.

Thanks. :)

Nance

P.S. With the advent of the Google, though, the lies are so easy to disprove that the liar ends up looking stupid and doesn't really help bring converts to the other G. Maybe this is the battle of the Gs?

Jim said...

cockingasnook said...
You think this level of stupid can be cured by public school?


"You can't fix stupid"
- Ron White

Ignorance, that you can fix. But it's probably "the stupid" that they've got.

"Just think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider."
- George Carlin

concerned said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
redd said...

"Battle of the Gs"?
It's already on..the gauntlet has been cast down.

www.thechurchofgoogle.org/

I won't comment on the ridiculous posts left by Mr and Mrs Brain-dead; everyone else has said what I would say, and much more nicely in most cases!
I want to call Poe's Law...but I don't think you can make this stuff up! ;o)

redd

aimee said...

Tommy boy said: "You won't find God in a libary book but once you ask him to come to your heart he will fill it with his presense that you won't deny."

Alright, I'll give it a try...

Okay, I just came back from the bathroom. I turned out the lights and said "Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ.", with all the passion I had. I felt it in my heart. Want to guess what happened?

NOT A GODDAMNFUCKINGTHING!!!

Still waiting.

@lankr1ta said...

Like I said in my other post- these people seriously need help.
I hope they don't distress you Pmom- just laugh at em.

CrypticLife said...

"My only stipulation is that you read a book of my choosing."

If they take you up on it, please make them read Strunk & White's The Elements of Style?