background preloader

Invisible Pink Unicorn

Invisible Pink Unicorn
The Invisible Pink Unicorn (IPU) is the goddess of a parody religion used to satirize theistic beliefs, taking the form of a unicorn that is paradoxically both invisible and pink.[1] She is a rhetorical illustration used by atheists and other religious skeptics as a contemporary version of Russell's teapot, sometimes mentioned in conjunction with the Flying Spaghetti Monster.[2] The IPU is used to argue that supernatural beliefs are arbitrary by, for example, replacing the word God in any theistic statement with Invisible Pink Unicorn.[3] The mutually exclusive attributes of pinkness and invisibility, coupled with the inability to disprove the IPU's existence, satirize properties that some theists attribute to a theistic deity.[4] History[edit] The Invisible Pink Unicorn logo used to depict atheism The concept was further developed by a group of college students from 1994 to 1995 on the ISCA Telnet-based BBS. Invisible Pink Unicorns are beings of great spiritual power. Concepts[edit]

Russell's teapot Russell's teapot, sometimes called the celestial teapot or cosmic teapot, is an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970) to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others, specifically in the case of religion. Russell wrote that if he claims that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it is nonsensical for him to expect others to believe him on the grounds that they cannot prove him wrong. Russell's teapot is still referred to in discussions concerning the existence of God. Origins of the analogy[edit] In an article titled "Is There a God?" In 1958, Russell elaborated on the analogy as a reason for his own atheism: I ought to call myself an agnostic; but, for all practical purposes, I am an atheist. The burden of proof argument[edit] Other thinkers have posited similar analogies. Analysis[edit] Objections[edit]

An Atheist Manifesto Update: (2/08/2006 1:35 p.m. EST) Read Sam Harris’ additional arguments about The Reality of Islam Editor’s Note: At a time when fundamentalist religion has an unparalleled influence in the highest government levels in the United States, and religion-based terror dominates the world stage, Sam Harris argues that progressive tolerance of faith-based unreason is as great a menace as religion itself. Harris, a philosophy graduate of Stanford who has studied eastern and western religions, won the 2005 PEN Award for nonfiction for The End of Faith, which powerfully examines and explodes the absurdities of organized religion. Truthdig asked Harris to write a charter document for his thesis that belief in God, and appeasement of religious extremists of all faiths by moderates, has been and continues to be the greatest threat to world peace and a sustained assault on reason. An Atheist Manifesto Somewhere in the world a man has abducted a little girl. No. Continued: The Nature of Belief

Flying Spaghetti Monster The Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) is the deity of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Pastafarianism, a movement that promotes a light-hearted view of religion and opposes the teaching of intelligent design and creationism in public schools.[3] Although adherents describe Pastafarianism as a genuine religion,[3] it is generally seen by the media as a parody religion.[4][5] The "Flying Spaghetti Monster" was first described in a satirical open letter written by Bobby Henderson in 2005 to protest the Kansas State Board of Education decision to permit teaching intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in public school science classes.[6] In that letter, Henderson satirized creationist ideas by professing his belief that whenever a scientist carbon-dates an object, a supernatural creator that closely resembles spaghetti and meatballs is there "changing the results with His Noodly Appendage". History Internet phenomenon Positions Creation Afterlife Pirates and global warming

I Am An Atheist The Myth of Militant Atheism Nine bullets fired from close range ended the life of Salman Taseer last month, making the Pakistani governor the latest high-profile victim of religious violence. Taseer had the audacity to publicly question Pakistan's blasphemy laws, and for this transgression he paid with his life. Taseer joins a list of numerous other high-profile victims of militant religion, such as Dr. George Tiller, the Kansas abortion doctor killed by a devout Christian assassin in 2009, and Theo Van Gogh, the Dutch filmmaker whose provocative movie about Islam resulted in his being brutally murdered in 2004. With this background, it is especially puzzling that the American media and public still perpetuate the cliché of so-called "militant atheism." In fact, however, while millions of atheists are indeed walking our streets, it would be difficult to find even one who could accurately be described as militant. But this reflects a double standard, because it seems to apply only to atheists.

Recovering from Religion Atheism "Divine Fury" by Sabina Nore.Traditionally speaking, most religions were especially hostile towards women. While some atheists consider themselves as spiritual people, most do so because they haven't yet found the appropriate "label" for themselves. Atheism is, simply put and by definition, the belief that there is no God nor divine presence. Some atheists define it as a lack of belief in a God or deity, while others discover that the proper "label" for them would actually be agnostic, rather than atheist. In the words of Penn Jillette, a US-American comedian, illusionist and writer: "Believing there is no God gives me more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, beauty, sex, Jell-o, and all the other things I can prove and that make this life the best life I will ever have Here is an article by Ricky Gervais, an English writer, comedian and actor on how he went from "God-bless" to God-less in one afternoon. Further reading

Cerebral Outpourings at 5am « saintdavetheathiest Why is this world so fucked up? Why do people have to be such constant pricks about everything? From the Muslims who think it is acceptable to kill people for something so petty as drawing a fucking cartoon of their prophet, despite the fact that its apparently OK for them to regularly mock Jews in their publications, to companies like Apple who treat their workers in China so badly they have the highest rate of suicides in ANY of the major corporations factories. Today I read about big companies like Barclays who put wagers on what the price of food will be in certain third world countries at the end of, for example, the financial year. The act of betting on this particular outcome affects the price of the foods in question. We are talking here about countries where approx 90% of a households wages are spent on food alone and rising prices can mean the difference between life and death for most families. Then we get to the current trend in America for creationism to be taken seriously.

Evil Bible Home Page Atheists Love Christians Azeusism has caused every major atrocity in modern history! It happens far too frequently -- the lame atheism has caused more atrocities/death than Christianity/Islam/whatever argument. This means that a compelling response has not been found. If you are talking to a Christian who makes that argument, consider making the following argument. If he can discover exactly what's wrong about this argument, he has discovered exactly what's wrong with his own argument. Find the flaw in the following argument: Azeusism, or not believing in Zeus, has been the cause of almost every single major atrocity of the past several thousand years. Mass murder. Witch trials -- Azeusists. Crusades -- Azeusists. Holocaust -- Azeusists. Hitler -- Azeusist. Stalin -- Azeusist. Mao -- Azeusist. Pol Pot -- Azeusist. Mastro Titta (executed 516 people ... for the Catholic Pope. Jim Jones -- Azeusist. Also, in modern times, almost every serial killer has been an Azeusist. Jeffrey Dahmer -- Azeusist. Why aren't more editorials written into the newspapers with this kind of reasoning?

The Best Questions For A First Date First dates are awkward. There is so much you want to know about the person across the table from you, and yet so little you can directly ask. This post is our attempt to end the mystery. We took OkCupid's database of 275,294 match questions—probably the biggest collection of relationship concerns on earth—and the 776 million answers people have given us, and we asked: Love, sex, a soulmate, an argument, whatever you're looking for, we'll show you the polite questions to find it. First—define "easy to bring up" Before we could go looking for correlations to deeper stuff, our first task was to decide which questions were even first-date appropriate. If you were to be eaten by cannibal, how would you like to be prepaired? do u own 3 or more dildos in your room? Do you hsve a desent job? I would go fucking insane. So, instead of judging each question's first-date appropriateness subjectively, I turned to statistics. Now let's get right to the results. Okay, if you want to know... Ask...

Related: