Speaking of fundamentalist religious insanity…
From PZ comes the news of the site MarryOurDaughter.com, where you can whore pimp enslave sell Biblically engage your young teen daughter to any worthy man who can pony up the money!
This site has to be a joke, right? [Update: It is, but the point I make below still stands...] Look at the testimonials:
“Our 15 year old daughter Mary wasn’t very popular and did nothing but mope around the house bringing everybody down, so we decided to marry her off through your site. Now our house is a lot cheerier and we love our new swimming pool and Jaccuzi [sic]! We’ve told our youngest that when she turns 15 we’re going to marry her off too!”
—Mrs. James P.
I mean, c’mon. It has to be a joke!
But there’s the funny thing: even with sites like Landover Baptist and Jesus’ General, it’s still really hard to distinguish complete over-the-top sarcasm and satire from real fundamentalist lunacy. When you have people — and I use that term loosely — like the truly evil and sick Fred Phelps, then how can you ever satirize fundamentalist religion again?
But then, the Bible does say you can sell your daughters. But who would ever take the Bible word-for-word literally?
Sigh.
And yes, I know other religions have incredibly foolish notions about arranged marriages, selling women, and the like. I will say this out loud and squarely: any institution — government, religion, or otherwise — that treats women as anything less than men should be derided and humiliated publicly, and not issued a deferment because of any notion of social relativism. Anyone who treats 50%+ of the population — or any percentage, no matter how small — as chattel should be taunted out of existence.
September 14th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
It’s a fake site. Heard about it on the radio. It was outed as a joke by some news agency.
September 14th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
My point still stands. How do you tell real lunacy from satire?
September 14th, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Here’s what Snopes had to say on the subject.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/marryourdaughter.asp
September 14th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
/shrug
By Snopes, apparently.
My solution for either situation is to laugh vigorously.
September 14th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
“…it’s still really hard to distinguish complete over-the-top sarcasm and satire from real fundamentalist lunacy.”
Only if someone is so blinded by bigotry that they’ve lost all ability to discern reality.
I know that some readers of this blog wish that you would stop posting about political and religious matters, but I hope that you continue. Each time I read something like this it reminds me to take all of your posts on such matters with the appropriate amount of salt.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/marryourdaughter.asp
For those that need confirmation.
I wonder if perhaps you spent some time with “regular” people who would be considered fundamentalist Christians, you would be less likely to paint all of us with such a broad, ugly brush. If you are ever in my part of Virginia, you are welcome to dinner anytime. You may even find a copy of your book on my shelf.
September 14th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Real lunacy usually has a lot more religious nonsense involved.
September 14th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
Y’know, I think instead of following our impulse to taunt/humiliate/silence/hunt down this kind of people/cultures/ideology, we should consider what would actually help the situation. I can list instances where such actions that seemed appropriate were in fact foolish and turned around to bite the “rational” side.
That, as a general comment.
Now specifically about the christian fundamentalists in the US who tend to take the Bible literally, maybe satire really is the way to go.
September 14th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
There’s that law…what is it again… ah, that’s right: Poe’s Law
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Poe’s+Law
September 14th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
[...] Original post by The Bad Astronomer [...]
September 14th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
I wonder why Christians keep referencing the jewish bible as their own. Don’t they remember that Christ said:”I am the way. He that believes in ME shall not perish, but have life everlasting,,,”
There’s nothing in that statement that references or relies on the old testament for its authority.
I’m pretty sure he also said,” ALL you need is love,,,’
Gary 7
September 14th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
As I keep reminding my liberal brethren who are too timid to aggressively attack fundamentalism, religion is a *choice*. It is a voluntarily adopted ideology. It is not an inherent trait such as race or gender. We protect the preceding qualities from public ridicule or discrimination because they are outside of the control of the individual and make no difference in how they impact society. But religion, as a choice, should be scrutinized, criticized, parodied, ridiculed — whatever — as necessary in a reality-based, secular democratic society.
September 14th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
TS, I’ve been mulling over what you said.
I stand by my conclusion. If an institution treats women like cattle, then they get derision from me. The Bible makes this clear, over and over again: women are property. Anyone who interprets the Bible literally and as inerrant must deal with this issue. Fundamentalism, by definition, interprets the Bible this way. If only for that reason, Fundamentalism is wrong.
There are many other reasons, as I have pointed out so many times here. Young Earth Creationism is another clear example.
I am not saying people who are Fundamentalists are inherently bad people. I am saying, quite unequivocally, that they are wrong. If you believe in the literal Bible, then you and I disagree about the most basic aspects of reality.
If you have a copy of my book, then look at the chapter about creationism. While I am not as strident there as I am now on my blog (many years have passed, and I find myself with stronger feelings in this area now), I was still clear that YEC is wrong. This means perforce that I know that literally interpreting the Bible is wrong as well.
This is the most basic division between science and strictly interpreted religion. Some people say the two can be reconciled, but I don’t think they can. If you base your observations of the world on a book, and not on the evidence the Universe provides, then agreement can never be found — especially since that particular book contradicts so much that we know to be true. It is that simple.
I am, as always, open to alternative evidence. If you think I am wrong, then I am willing to listen.
I am not, incidentally, a bigot. That would mean I am pre-judging based on a lack of evidence. That is not the case; I have carefully examined the evidence and found that Fundamentalism is wrong. The word “lunacy”, as I used it, may be somewhat strident, but the Bible’s notions on many things scientific can be, IMO, safely categorized that way. Certainly the Biblical ideas about women fall under that category as well.
If I have to choose between what the Universe is telling me, and what the Bible says — and that choice has been thrust upon me by my society quite against my wishes — then I choose the Universe. It really is that simple.
September 14th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
I’m pretty sure he also said,†ALL you need is love,,,’
Actually, Gary, it was John Lennon who said that…
DA – da- dadadaaaaa
September 14th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Can I just make one comment about arranged marriages? Keep in mind that I’m a chick…
I have known quite a few people who are Indian and who have had arranged marriages. They are, for the most part, quite happy. That is what they wanted to do and their parents were happy to help. If that’s her choice, let’s not judge. If not, hammer away!
September 14th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
While your quote from Exodus might be applicable to most Jews, you should look to the New Testament for what most Christians believe. Jesus released us from having to attempt to follow the letter of the Jewish laws.
Paul wrote to the church in Galatia “Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the [Jewish] law. You are all children of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. *There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.* (Gal 3:25-29)
I, too, am bothered by those who attempt to use the history of the relationship between man and God to explain scientific ideas.
September 14th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
I’m no funadmentalist Christian, but I am Christian nonetheless. I’m not disagreeing that fundamentalists are just a bit off their rockers, instead, I just wanted to point out the fact that the site skepticsannotatedbible.com is absolutely ridiculous. They blow many things way out of proportion, they use different translations of the Bible for different passages, and they simply make up facts altogether.
Religion aside, I’m a big fan of your work Mr. Plait and I hope you continue your work in your field.
Good day.
September 14th, 2007 at 11:32 pm
“I will say this out loud and squarely: any institution — government, religion, or otherwise — that treats women as anything less than men should be derided and humiliated publicly, and not issued a deferment because of any notion of social relativism.”
I absolutely agree. It may make some people upset, but I believe there is such a thing as objective morality, and it is possible to judge different cultures and belief systems as better or worse by them. (Don’t ask me what they are, though. I don’t know. It’s like a physicist trying to figure out the objective laws of nature). However, I do believe one of them is that any human should be treated exactly the same as any other.
As for the site, I find it mildly amusing, given it’s a hoax. It kind of reminds me of the “Letter to Dr. Laura” regarding other questionable parts of the Bible.
September 15th, 2007 at 12:12 am
Every culture has its advantages and disadvantages. I have yet to see a society embrace a “perfect” culture, namely one that would advance true happiness for everyone equally (BTW I don’t think that would mean treating everyone the same, but rather giving each the treatment they really need). I dream of such a society.
I don’t see any point in comparing cultures to see which sucks the most. The real bet is to rectify what is wrong by showing people around us what is right.
September 15th, 2007 at 7:42 am
“Jesus released us from having to attempt to follow the letter of the Jewish laws.”
In other words, you can now choose some parts of the hebrew bible — say, certain passages of Leviticus — and declare them to be the inerrant word of God, while other passages can be safely ignored?
How does this apply to fundamentalists and biblical literalists? How do they know which parts of the bible fall into which category?
September 15th, 2007 at 7:51 am
TS: “I wonder if perhaps you spent some time with “regular†people who would be considered fundamentalist Christians, you would be less likely to paint all of us with such a broad, ugly brush.”
Having spent the entirety of my life around “regular” people who would be considered fundamentalist Christians, I can readily say I despise them.
Anyway, the thing that gets me most about this site is that I keep reading the title as “Marry Your Daughter.” Don’t worry, I promise it’s not a Freudian slip kind of thing.
September 15th, 2007 at 8:27 am
In a similar vein, there’s the Letter to Doctor Laura Schlessinger:
http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/susan/joke/laura.htm
September 15th, 2007 at 8:57 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_intelligence#Specific_abilities
September 15th, 2007 at 8:57 am
Nobody—and I mean nobody—takes the Bible as the literal Word of God. At best they cherry pick the bits they like and ignore or rationalize the rest. No exceptions.
Examples? In Leviticus it says anyone who wears clothes of 2 different fabrics (say a cotton/polyester blend) should be killed. Interesting, given that this is the same book that is most often used to justify persecuting gays.
In Psalms it says people who kill babies are blessed.
I could go on. No one tale the Bible as the literal Word of God. Not you, you, and especially not you (you all know who you are).
September 15th, 2007 at 8:58 am
I have read your RSS feed for quite a while and I have to say that I find your gleeful polemicism to be every bit as objectionable as the ramblings of fundamentalists. I agree that many fundamentalists are irritating and wrong headed but I find that the kind of self righteous ranting that you engage on here is every bit as irritating and not the least bit useful.
If I take as a basic assumption that you believe fundamentalism is ignorant and wrong and damaging, I can’t imagine how you think mocking will help. You won’t improve the state of fundamentalists because no one will listen to someone calling them an idiot and you don’t need to convince the people who agree with you since they already agree with you.
I get the sense that what you really want is to be congratulated for being so clever to see through the ignorance of fundamentalism. Well, congratulations. Can we please get back to astronomy now?
September 15th, 2007 at 9:30 am
I read somewhere that during the First Nicean Council of AD 325, several hotly debated issues were eventually put to the vote after many weeks of argument. Amongst these were:
1) Was Jesus divine?
2) Do women have souls?
In both of these issues the majority vote was “yes” – but only by ONE vote in each case! The Emperor Constantine was present, and voted in the affirmative each time, but wasn’t really bothered about the outcome as he just wanted the whole debate settled. Now – imagine how history might have progressed had he not voted? (It also makes me wonder how women were treated before AD 325)
September 15th, 2007 at 9:45 am
Carl, do you mind reading all the posts where the BA says that it is his website and he’ll write whatever he pleases?
Plus, it’s not by ignoring these annoying fundamentalists that wreck the world that things will get better. Heck, I think they deserve to be “mocked” myself, or at least have their faces rubbed in their nonsense. We need to make them know that they will NOT enslave the minds of our children in schools, that we will NOT let them continue further the destruction of science.
And frankly I think everyone should know what someone thinks of them for real. Yea, fundamentalists are idiots to me. I can’t tolerate ‘em.
September 15th, 2007 at 9:52 am
I did not question his right to post whatever he pleases. I’m just saying that invective has no effect on fundamentalists and he’s preaching to the choir on a site like this. I can’t imagine what he hopes to accomplish. Do you honestly believe that the people he’s mocking are likely to read this site? Even if they do, do you think the tone he uses is likely to convince anyone? Since it’s clear that the ranting cannot possibly have any substantive effect, I can only assume that it is self-righteousness and arrogance. The irony is that those qualities are the same ones that you guys seem to find so offensive in fundamentalism.
Feel free to write whatever you like but I, for one, would rather read something a little more substantive and will not be reading this blog any further.
September 15th, 2007 at 9:54 am
I have read the postings from your commenters for quite a while and I have to say that I find their presumptuous definition of appropriate blog content to be every bit as objectionable as the repetition of stupid sitcom catch phrases. I agree that many posts are not as interesting as others but I find that the kind of self righteous ranting that is engaged in here is every bit as irritating and not the least bit useful.
Please institute some method of limiting responses to those who have something interesting to say, and censoring those who take offense. After all, it is a Constitutional right to be free from offensiveness, so kindly delete those who annoy me.
And while we’re at it, no more talk about man-crushes, it’s kinda creepy, and I really think you should have more pictures of baby kittens and duckies.
Thank you
September 15th, 2007 at 10:51 am
Ordinary Radical, I disagree. If the New Testament supplants the Old, then why do people like Congressman Lynn Westmoreland try to legislate putting the 10 Commandments in courthouses and in the Senate and House? Why do people take Genesis literally?
I’m not buying it. No matter how you slice it, Fundamentalists want to both interpret the Bible literally and cherry pick the parts they want to believe in. That is a basic — I might say fundamental — contradiction in logic. It’s yet another reason Fundamentalism is wrong.
September 15th, 2007 at 10:54 am
Carl, please read this blog entry. I will continue to write about politics and religion because both have a profound effect on the way the world works. If you don’t like it — and there really is no polite way to say this — that’s too bad. I will write about these topics, and I will try to get others to speak out as well. Preaching to the choir is not a bad thing, as long as the choir goes out and preaches too.
September 15th, 2007 at 11:21 am
Well, if they were any guys so obssively fundementalist as to go on that site, we’d have too little in common for our marrage to work, anyway. A YEC and a Skepchic-in-training is a recipie for devorce.
September 15th, 2007 at 11:28 am
@”none”: Tell that to my math teacher.
Last year in highschool (I was like 17), I heard of a special “advanced” course for highschool mathematics in town and I took it (it was aside from school). They didn’t offer a degree or anything; they didn’t keep a list of the students; you’d just show up there on time and sit down for class. It was really fun, I had such a great time! ^_^ Everyone in there was keenly interested, and gifted at math, as one would expect from students who would happily travel across the city every week to catch a completely unnecessary and informal math class at 8:30 in the morning.
Let me note that the majority of my classmates there were boys.
Thing is, while I was more or less on the same level as the others, I displayed an extraordinary ability on the field of stereometry. I was the only one who could solve most stereometrical problems under a minute, [i]without drawing anything on paper[/i]. I do that in geometry too; I can solve many geometrical problems in my mind without pen and paper, as long as there aren’t any long mathematical formulas or operations involved. But it was the stereometry thing that made an impression.
“Spatial abilities”? Hah! I still haven’t found the man to best me.
September 15th, 2007 at 11:30 am
*in under a minute (linguistic skills, anyone?
)
September 15th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
In my experience, it becomes nearly impossible to determine who is parodying religious fundamentalists and who is serious. I have been told by serious believers that:
The Great Pyramid (and presumably the rest of the 107) was not made in the time frame historians claim, but was magically put together after the flood, and were built by God and not the Egyptians.
That the sons of Noah seperated and each founded entirely new versions of the cultures that had been wiped out by the floods and picked up where the prior ones had left off (presumably, the Summerians and the Chinese among them).
That humans lived extremely long lives at one time, despite the archaeological and genetic evidence.
That despite the fact that multiple, independent dating methods generate the same results, all of the dating methods must be wrong.
That the quality of a person’s physical health is an indicator of their degree of religious faith.
That feminism is “Satanic”.
That the reason there is no evidence for Creationism is that :Jesus took the evidence back to Heaven with him.”
That (fill in the disease/disaster/accident/war) is a punishment from God for (fill in the arbitrary pet peeve).
I thought the Rapture Ready forum was a parody when I first came across it. It took a little bit before it sank in that those people were absolutely serious.
September 15th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
It’s possible that this thread is now dead (other than with sad people like me who didn’t pick up on it earlier), but there have been a number of correct statements and a number I would suggest are “unsound”.
The New Testament (NT) does not supersede (correct spelling) the Old, but completes it.
Both testaments are books of their time. The OT is written for a patriarchal race of nomads and not for 21st century people of fixed abode.
There is much cherry picking of quotes on both sides – Daffy’s observation of the 2 cloths is one, and I can’t begin to tell you the problems Deut 22:5 cause.
The point is, it is Dr. (please, can we at least agree on politeness here – he did earn it after all) Phil’s blog. He is entitled to his opinion and is entitled to write about it.
And, he is, in the main, correct. The Bible is NOT an instruction manual as to how to build a universe. It does contains rules(laws) that have been “overwritten”. It has a moral “backbone” that underpins it all – love.
Oh, and as an Anglican priest, I can categorically state, the universe is about 14 billion years old.
September 15th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
BA – I don’t know why fundamentalists insist the Bible is inerrant and why some people take Genesis literally. All I know, is the Bible should be read as a story of humankind’s relationship with God, not as a rule book or science text.
Elwood – I don’t know what you read, but it’s inaccurate. The minutes of the First Council of Nicea [the correct name] were recorded in so much detail, I can’t figure out why there’s so much misunderstanding about what went on. The First Council debated the *type* of divinity of Jesus. e.g. Was he a human who was used by God? Was he a vision of God that looked human? There was no question that Jesus was divine, just what form this divinity took. There was no vote regarding the souls or status of women. Constantine I was present – but only as an observer and did not vote on any issues.
September 15th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
@ Marlayna – Anecdotal evidence FTW?
September 16th, 2007 at 1:46 am
The web site may be a joke, but the real thing isn’t funny. Listen to testimony against Warren Jeffs.
continued testimony.
September 16th, 2007 at 4:11 am
@Dom: Yes, but when one side claims women have certain inherrent mental drawbacks (or advantages) compared to men, the other side only needs one counterexample of natural talent (OK, maybe not just one, as I might be the product of some extraordinary mutation). If there are women like me, then there is no biological setback and we must look to social causes for any perceived differences.
I do realise that the claim is usually made in a weaker form, namely that there is a statistical difference (eg. more women do well at verbal tasks than men), and that is more difficult to refute. But to draw conclusions about a whole group of people based on a majority is dangerous and stupid and racist
September 16th, 2007 at 4:49 am
@Tim G: I just heard them. The description of what that poor girl went through was downright horrifying. I was on the verge of crying.
The question is, how do we battle this kind of thing? How do we help girls like that escape such a fate?
It is cases like this where blowing off steam like Dr.Plait did might not be the proper thing to do. These sects will just keep burying themselves more and more in secrecy, and the more derision they get from us the more power they will gain over their followers. Shutting them out will actually make things worse.
These are very difficult, painful problems and to solve them we need strategy and patience. I’d like to be able to reach into these people’s brains and take away all the crap, but sadly I know it doesn’t work like that…
September 16th, 2007 at 8:57 am
We can only help the poor girls (and some poor guys too, it does hurt both ways sometimes! I bet some guys in that sect are miserable.) by catching and bringing to justice the bastards that do it to ‘em. Unfortunately there will always be bastards like that. It’s an endless fight that we must take.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:13 am
I’d like very much to see people like that get what they deserve, Michelle, but these sects have ways of protecting themselves from what they perceive as an attack on their culture… all the worse if they are cut off from the rest of the world. Hostility and ridicule toward their religion would probably give their leaders the chance to draw their followers into even deeper isolation.
But I must confess I don’t have enough information about mormons to say for sure what should be done.
September 16th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
Thank you for your string of balanced and logical posts Marlayna, you are the voice of reason in this thread. I agree that everything Phil said is true, and his heart is in the right place (to support women when they are subjected to appallingly harmful attitudes), and he has every right to voice his opinion on his own blog– but it’s not really the say to help women.
The target of the ridicule has to be better focused than on simply “religious fundamentalism”. That’s a relatively small contributor to the overall problem. For example– how much worse is it to treat women like property than to treat them like sex symbols whose sole value to society comes between the ages of 16 and 25? But which culture could I possibly be talking about there?
September 16th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
It’s fake? DAMMIT!!!!!
September 16th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
>>> foolish notions about arranged marriages,
>>> selling women, and the like.
The problem is that there is a huge difference between a culture with a long tradition of arranged marriages and the concept of “selling women”. You are lumping together very dissimilar things and being quite bigoted in this case, my gringo. I almost expeced a Homer Simpson comment like, “They’re funny because they dress differently!”
And to be blunt: The USA has about a 50% divorce rate. Who the f*** are we to deride anyone on that front?
Here is one woman’s view:
http://www.courses.psu.edu/hd_fs/hd_fs315_rxj9/proposal.htm
>>> I will say this out loud and squarely: any institution —
>>> government, religion, or otherwise — that treats women
>>> as anything less than men should be derided and
>>> humiliated publicly,
Well, Islam is a huge offender on that front, so have at it:
http://www.islam-watch.org/IW/WomenInIslam.htm
I expect a blog entry on this within a week.
September 16th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
>>> I can’t imagine how you think mocking will help.
It’s the Penn & Teller Syndrome. I’ve railed against it myself in favor of a kindler, gentler approach. For example, I’d wager a month’s salary that I have turned more people away from Sylvia Browne then P&T have with all their media exposure and TV shows.
Currently, I’m trying to convince my parents that the NAFTA Superhighway does not exist, will not exist, and not to send money to the “anti-highway” group that keeps sending them requests in the mail.
September 17th, 2007 at 9:20 am
Daffy – Would you please supply “addresses” for your examples from Lev. and Ps.? Thanks.
September 19th, 2007 at 11:45 am
Why is it people dismiss creation/origin stories from Greece, Egyptian, Chinese, Australian Aboriginal (Dreamtime), etc, as myths – even though they are widely documented and passed down through history?
But somehow when it comes to the Bible, the creationist story in there are taken as fact? What stops the other cultures from claiming that their myths are historical fact?
It just seems to me that Christians had a better publicity and marketing campaign to ’spread the word’ back in the day. Kinda like Coca Cola.
And just FYI – I was brought up in a very strict (and still very strict) Roman Catholic environment. Eventually, I just couldn’t ignore the huge inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible. But don’t tell my mother…