The Scathing Atheist - ScathingAtheist 151: Illumi-Naughty Edition

Episode Date: January 7, 2016

In this week's episode we learn why the bible is lying from an expert on lying; a biblical scholar teaches us how the rib bone is connected to the dick bone; and we'll learn that you don't have to be religious to be full of shit.  But it helps.

Warning, our New Year's resolutions had nothing to do with saying fuck less. This week's episode of The Scathing Atheist is brought to you by the new police procedural show about priest scandals in Vatican City. Law and Order SV Eucharist. In the sex criminal justice system, pedophiles are represented by two separate yet equally important groups. The Vatican City police who pretend to investigate crime and the district attorneys who acquit the offenders. These are their stories. And now, the Scathing Atheist. Hello, this is the Emperor of California from the Atheist Apocalypse podcast. I know you were expecting me to say, hasta la vista, or get to the chopperper but you weren't expecting me to say

Rubber Baby Buggy Bumpers Ha! And we did in fact evolve from 50 Monkey Men You idiots Now You've got what you wanted, Cohagen Give these people air and put that cookie down! It's Thursday.

It's January 7th. And alternate side-of-the-street parking is in effect unless M&Bundy occupies the Pentagon. I'm no illusions. I'm Heath Enright, and from home on the gun range, Valdosta, Georgia, this is The Scathing Atheist. On this week's episode, we'll learn why the Bible is lying from an expert on lying. We learn from a biblical scholar how the rib bone's connected to the dick bone. And we'll learn that you don't have to be religious to be full of shit, but it helps.

But first, the diatribe. Sometimes the defense is worse than the accusation. And as a movement, we do well to remember that. It doesn't make much sense to use the person that you kidnapped as an alibi against the shoplifting, does it? But from time to time, it seems to me that that's exactly what we're doing. Now, obviously I have to paint with a damn broad brush here. The loose amalgamation of like-minded activists that I'm putting under the umbrella of atheism is too diverse to have any one approach to anything. But there are still certain arguments, certain analogies,

certain defenses that float to the top of the meme pool. And as if to remind us that we're not immune to irrationality and outright stupidity, not all of them are rational or even correct. In fact, sometimes we're in such a hurry to offer a sound defense that we don't even bother to see if the accusation has any meaning. Take, for example, the idea that atheism is the same as religion. Now, in all ways, that's an absurd statement. Atheism includes exactly zero of the things that you find listed after religion in the dictionary. There's no sacred. There's no doctrine.

There's no supreme being. There's no worship. There are no rituals. Those are all the things that religion means. And maybe that's why we're so tempted to defend ourselves. It's like they said bats were made of cheese. How could you not immediately come up with a hundred ways to refute that? But at the same time, why would you refute it?

Of fucking course bats aren't made of cheese. At a certain level of stupid, your refutation is its own type of validation. If you're wrong enough, the simple fact that a debate is happening is a victory for the other side. Look at the global warming denialists. You know, even if the side with all the science keeps winning every debate, the very fact that there's a continuing debate creates the illusion of uncertainty. Likewise, even a mildly stupid accusation can be made worse if you run from it too far too fast.

So to be clear, I'm not saying that we shouldn't rebuff the idea that atheism is just like a religion. We should. It's easy. Just read the definition of religion. But it seems like a lot of us have really internalized that jive and go way out of our way to prove that it's not true. You know, whenever I hear people talking about being open minded to religion, but not convinced when I hear people talking about being a six on the Dawkins scale or dubbing themselves agnostic atheists, that's what I think of. I see a bunch of people going way out of their way to prove that they're not dogmatic about a thing that has no dogma. You know, anytime I hear atheists talking about how open-minded they are towards religion, I just substitute the word God with Santa Claus, and suddenly it becomes damn

obvious what a stupid and unjustified concession they're making. If somebody says, don't get me wrong, I'm open-minded about Santa Claus, I just don't find the arguments entirely convincing. You sound like a fucking idiot. I mean, I guess I could envision a couple of very limited scenarios where it might make sense to point out that, you know, given enough evidence, you'd even believe in Santa Claus. If you're trying to explain the nature of degrees of uncertainty and changing your opinion based on evidence, that might be a great analogy. But in virtually any other scenario, an adult telling you that they haven't entirely ruled out the existence of Santa Claus would be an admission of stupidity. And before anybody scoffs at my analogy, I want to point out Santa Claus is an infinitely more reasonable claim than even the most philosophically forgivable postulation of God. Santa violates what, three

laws of physics maybe? God violates all of them and several of the laws of logic as well. There's nothing in the Santa mythology as grossly contradictory as the concept of being all-knowing and all-powerful at the same time. There's no argument against Santa's existence as damning as the problem of evil. You'd have to take fewer steps to get from reality to a reality with Santa Claus than reality to a reality with God. And sure, yes, granted, if as many grown adults in this country believed in Santa Claus as believe in God, we'd need to counter him. We'd need the Matt Dillahuntys and David Smalley's of a Santa-ism out there. So I'm not against debating. I'm against conceding. See, sometimes we're tempted to cede a little ground because we know we can still win the argument.

So we offer up a bone about how there really are some good arguments for God. No, there fucking aren't. In fact, I have people ask me this all the time. They're like, what's the most convincing argument you've ever heard for God? I've been asked that maybe a hundred times. Nobody has ever asked me the most convincing argument I've ever heard for Santa. But this infinitely less plausible concept? Yeah, even atheists ask me about this one.

And think about what's contained in that question. Why would there be any good argument in favor of God? How could there be? We've been to the North Pole and Santa wasn't there. And yet many people, even within atheism, still act like does God exist is a good question. I don't think I could come up with a stupider hypothesis than God. I challenge you to do that. I challenge you to come up with a single hypothesis that at once contradicts all the known laws of physics, contradicts itself, contradicts logic,

contradicts all of our observation of nature and something, plus something. You've got to add something to make it even stupider. At best, you can come up with an equally stupid hypothesis that's easier to definitively disprove, but you haven't come up with a stupider hypothesis, and yet we constantly act like this is a reasonable thing to think. And look, I get it. There are a lot of really smart people that believe this dumb shit. And it's hard to say this thing that you think is stupid without implying you're stupid. But it's still better to try that than it is to just be stupid along with them for a few minutes.

Let me be very clear here. There are plenty of smart reasons to believe really stupid stuff. You know, if you grew up in a religious family and you were indoctrinated before you were old enough to question the shit that you were being told, it's a really tough fight to get out. If your value as a person is being assessed by your community based on how religious you are, if you had enough irrational fears drilled deep enough into your brain, if you were simply never presented with good arguments for God, if your relationship with your family or your colleagues or if your employment depends on you believing in God, there are plenty of reasons for smart people to compartmentalize

and believe even the dumbest of shit, but that doesn't make the shit less dumb. So yes, technically speaking, I'm still a 6.99999 whatever on the Dawkins scale. Yes, I'm still agnostic about God if you redefine the word in contradiction to all the dictionaries, the coinage, and the common usage as so many folks are wont to do. But I'm less open-minded about God than I am about Santa Claus. I'm less open-minded about God than I am about David Icke's shape-shifting interterrestrial lizard overlords.

I'm less open-minded about God than I am about my penis actually being Napoleon. And I'm less open-minded about it because I'm thinking correctly. I'm basing my willingness to entertain a truth claim on its prior probability, its internal consistency, and the evidence backing it up. That's what you're supposed to do. That's how thinking is supposed to work. Being open-minded about dumb shit is how imagination works. Yes, that's important, but it's a completely different fucking thing. So once more, and sorry if I'm beating a dead horse here, but I am as certain about God not existing as I am about any other thing one could be said to be certain about. And what's more, that is the most intellectually defensible position to take on the matter.

Come get me in, Box. I ain't scared. They're talking about you, Jesus. I interrupt this broadcast to bring you a special news bulletin. a special news bulletin. Joining me for headlines tonight is Heath the White of Galbadron, son of Pag, slayer of dragons, wielder of the sacred scepter of Sibia. Heath, are you ready to

vanquish undead hordes? No. Okay. You want to do the headlines instead? Yeah, that sounds better. Fine. Alright, and our lead story tonight, from the pulling Trump file. According to a recent report from ABC News, Al-Qaeda's terrorist branch office in Somalia, known as Al-Shabaab, is featuring Donald Trump in their propaganda videos. Yes, they are.

So in case you were wondering how Islamic terrorist groups would react to a top American presidential candidate making hateful remarks about all Muslims, the answer is they're extremely grateful for all the recruiting help. Officially, on the record, they're offended, just like the millions of not-terrorist Muslims in the world. But at the same time, there's no denying that their jobs just got a whole lot easier. I'm guessing the new ad slogan is pretty simple now. It's just, Al-Shabaab, just watch the fucking news. We'll show you some of our videos if you want, but really just watch any American news. It doesn't really matter.

Donald Trump campaign rallies. More shock value than chopping people's heads off. If he uses that now, I want a royalty. He'll probably like that. He'll probably run with that. Some good headlines for that. So just in case there's anyone out there who managed to successfully ignore the shit show that is Donald Trump's campaign. Don't ruin it for him. Don't ruin it for him. They've tried damn hard.

You gotta know. This is important stuff. Donald Trump is currently running on the hate speech platform. Yes. That's pretty much what he's doing. Among other notable remarks, Mr. Trump suggested that the Mexican immigrant population is full of rapists and also that banning all Muslims from crossing our borders would be a good plan. I guess he wants us to install the Islam detectors at all our border checkpoints. Of course. Some kind of test. All right. Sing the last three lines of the national anthem.

Okay. Now eat this bacon. Now blow this Jewish man. Okay. He's safe. He's safe. Next. He's good.

So that's why they made me blow Moishe. You know, I would have asked, but it was only like the third most pointlessly intrusive step at airport security. So I never bothered, but I was curious. I didn't ask. I was wondering. All right. So it feels weird trying to describe something this way, but there's a Holocaust analogy

in here. I'm sure of it. There's always. But don't worry. But don't worry. I'm not saying Donald Trump is Hitler. Way too easy. No?

He's not even a Nazi in my example. I mean, obviously, al-Shabaab and the other violent hate groups are the Nazis. Okay. And this is like if the leader of the German Jewish political party was just about to negotiate like a no genocide option. But then German Jewish Donald Trump jumped up, started yelling, we should genocide them. No more Christians. Everybody in Germany is like, OK, see, this is exactly what the Fuhrer is talking about. This is exactly what he's been saying.

I get that. I get that now. That was a good Holocaust analogy. I liked it. And in Pakistan, your ground news tonight, the government of Earth's single shittiest place, Pakistan, took time off from instigating a nuclear war, murdering citizens for not believing in God,

and failing to provide potable water for nearly half their populace last Saturday to censor a recent New York Times article about murdered Bengali atheists. Let's be exhausted in Pakistan. I guess. The article detailed the ongoing string of brutal executions carried out by an Islamist group in Bangladesh. And as pissed as I am at the Pakistan government for censoring the article, I will give credit where our credit is due, because that means that now the Pakistani government has taken more action regarding this string of homicides than the one in Bangladesh.

So technically speaking, they're winning. Yeah, did Bangladesh keep the article on their version? I guess so, yes. They just figured it works as a good public service announcement. Atheist blogging continues to wane. Keep up the good work, everyone. Well, yeah, yeah. The Bangladeshi government is ignoring the problem

to score political favor with Islamists, so why censor a story about how they're not doing anything about it you know and as much as you'd think the pakistanis would love the stories about bangladesh's government being inept and corrupt apparently it isn't worth if it means admitting that people don't believe in god i guess yeah yeah and they even type about those bastards right in your face be a panic in the fucking street that kind of thing now it's worth emphasizing that killing atheists publicly isn't so much a crime in Pakistan as it is a federal mandate. So, to Pakistani

readers, this is just a story about privatization, but the point of the censorship wasn't to obscure the fact that there are atheists in danger, it was to obscure the fact that there are atheists. Of course, we godless heathens can't take all the credit as it is entirely possible Pakistan is still too embarrassed to admit the fact that there's a Bangladesh.

So I've never heard anything. He's the world just stands right there. Falls off. And in Bundy Sunday Funday news tonight, disgruntled Mormon rancher Ammon Bundy earned his father's love last week. He led an armed insurrection in Oregon against the Bureau of Land Management. And he's pretty sure he earned the love of God, too, by following directions. That's all it takes. That's right.

Acting on what he claims was a divine message from Mormon God, Mr. Bundy and his team of militant tax evaders overcame zero adversaries on their way to capturing an empty building in the middle of the woods. Could there be anything more fancy? Yeah. Well, they want everyone to know it's not as crazy as it sounds. They're protesting the fact that arsonists go to jail and pay taxes. So it's all for an important cause. Well, of course. Yeah. Yeah. So now how is, okay, I know this is a big question, but how is group of armed conspiracy, not white guys trying to overthrow the government through a birdwatching station supposed to convince anybody that we need less government? I mean, if they were brown, we'd be adding full

body scanners to federal trailheads. But the point is anarchists remind people why we needed so much archie in the first place every time they throw bombs, don't they? Pretty simply. Yeah. But in fairness to the Mormons, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day we needed so much archie in the first place every time they throw bombs don't they pretty simply yeah but but in fairness to the mormons the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints has already made a statement officially denouncing bundy's actions as contrary to their doctrine so that was nice but the larger point is that crazy people with guns are going to find a way to use religion badly inevitably and speaking of which the Oath Keepers said this was over the line. Wow.

The guys who want to send armed Christian guards to protect Kim Davis from the government. Those guys had to distance themselves from Ammon Bundy on this one. Not a great sign. Anyway, no word yet on what the badly organized militia is planning next. But as I understand it, all they need is a pile of gold, the greatest singer in the world and a cold fusion machine. And that's the Republic of John Galtistan. They're all set to go live. So see what happens. That's what they're going for. Gotcha. And in facts evasion news tonight, creationist parolee Kent Hovind took to the YouTubes this week to finally tackle the age-old question,

why does the infallible word of God have so much foul in it? And apparently it's because God doesn't want to share heaven with smart people. Appearing before the backdrop of stuff you envision when somebody says the shit behind a crazy person, Hovind explained that God put all the wrong shit in the Bible on purpose just to make sure that the atheists would burn in hell. Yes. So this is a new angle. It's interesting.

Yeah. Did not see coming. He's saying God made the Bible contradict itself so that the smart people, which he made, which God made. On purpose. Those smart people are going to suffer eternal damnation for inevitably smarting too much? Yes. For the mortal sin of reading comprehension? Really?

Yes, yes. What we have here is a grown-up using, I meant to say that I was just testing you defense here, on behalf of God. Yes, that's exactly what's happening. So the quote starts, if i was god and then doesn't proceed i wouldn't have spent the last eight years in jail so it's already pretty suspect but he carries on again presupposing that he ken hovine is god got it okay if i was god i would write the book in such a way that those who don't want to believe in me anyway would think they found something aha here's why i don't believe which is exactly what i said who don't want to believe in me anyway would think they found something. Aha!

Here's why I don't believe, which is exactly what I said. I don't know about you, but whatever I would find. So anyway, end quote. Okay, well, he's still creating atheists. That's weird. But I think he's overestimating the extent to which a perfect God would be happy to hear

that Kent Hovind is his writing style. I don't think that's big of a deal to god as he's hearing us and he's going come on guys come on guys no we don't know fucking god is kent hovine he then went on to defend the unforgivable sadism contained within his apologetic by adding quote i don't believe that's deceptive i think that's wise to weed out those who are really serious to weed out the quote. To weed out the wise people. Well, yeah, because what kind of idiot would be straightforward about how to not burn in hell for eternity?

So why don't we just write the warning signs in riddles and then hide them and find it? And from the Infernal Medicine File tonight, according to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU last week, a Catholic hospital in California called the Mercy Medical Center is guilty of illegal discrimination after administrators refused on religious grounds to perform a tubal ligation for a local woman despite the procedure being prescribed by her doctor. Getting your tubes tied is the same as killing babies. That's their policy. Yeah. getting your tubes tied is the same as killing babies. That's their policy.

Yeah. Except not exactly because the hospital has performed these in the past, but apparently only when they feel like it, I guess, which makes even less sense. Yeah. I have no idea. And I doubt they use these exact words in the complaint, but the hospital is also guilty of shitty,

incomplete hospitaling. And I'd like to think that's illegal, too. No. I might be wrong about that. No, you were thinking of any country with operational traffic lights other than the United States of America. We can't have laws like that on account of the death panels. Clearly, clearly. So here's what happened.

Here's what happened. A pregnant woman named Rebecca Chamorro had a C-section scheduled at that hospital for later this month, during which her OBGYN suggested the ligation procedure be performed at the same time in order to avoid a separate surgery, which is a common practice that's been shown to be safer than the alternative, obviously. Of course, this would prevent future pregnancy, which may have been deemed to be a medical risk for Ms. Chamorro, hence the procedure. Right, yeah. Not that the reason is anyone's fucking business but the patient and her physician. Well, that's what matters here. Yeah, exactly. Nonetheless, the hospital refused to do their job, citing a rulebook they follow called Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Healthcare Services, which is written by a bunch of bishops from the Catholic Conference of Not Doctors. That's what matters.

Again, exactly. Exactly. And by the way, expect to hear a lot more stories like this as the year unfolds. The Catholic strategy on abortion and contraception shit over the last couple of decades in the U.S. has been to buy all the fucking hospitals.

Right? Because they can't make the laws say what they want it to say, so they're just trying to make this shit unobtainable. In fact, if you walk into a random hospital in America today, the odds that a Catholic bishop is setting medical policy are about one in three. Yeah, up almost 20% since 2001. All right, well, here's the part I don't understand.

The lawsuit seems like it's just about the selective discrimination thing apparently if the hospital had denied everyone this procedure it would be perfectly legal and that's insane yeah but it's protected yeah despite the obvious danger of medical facilities refusing proper treatment because the administrators are crazy people there's no law about that how is that possible i mean think about the precedent that sets. Like, yeah, sorry, we fucked up your surgery and you're bleeding out as we speak, but we don't do blood transfusions.

Yeah, this is a jade dump hospital. Yeah, we'll call you a cab for a real hospital, but you're almost dead, so it just seems like a dick move to the driver. Oh, sorry, you have devil's cancer. We just checked. You have devil's cancer. We thought checked. You have devil's cancer. We thought it was just the regular kind.

We weren't even supposed to be treating you in the first place. We're going to have to put the tumors back and sell you back. What the fuck is wrong with the law? Religion. Yep. That's the short answer. That's a good answer. And in Nebraska stupid question news tonight, anti-kids having genitals activists in Omaha

are livid over a revamped approach to sex ed in that state that would include talking about sex of particular contention or sections of the new curriculum that would acknowledge the existence of gays STDs and contraception now rather than responding with outrage that as of 2015 Nebraska kids weren't being taught about the existence of gays STDs or contraception local parents have instead invested their outrage in accusations that the new standards are information raping their children. Information raping. They use the verb, okay. Raping.

But, you know, in fairness to the school system, whenever a Christian reads a textbook, there's a decent chance they're getting raped in the eye with reality photons. I mean, that's just an occupational hazard. There's no way to avoid it, really. Yeah, and I mean, they don't get eye pregnant, so it's legitimate. Anyway, during a public meeting about the curriculum on Monday, one mother admitted that we can't just tell kids that they're imagining those devil-y bits between their legs, but she went on to explain that,

quote, the standards you have give too much information. It rapes children of their innocence there's and verb yeah i think that was a dig against catholicism but i'm not sure even better perhaps though was an analogy from another parent that only holds it yes it was not this anyway i love this analogy because it only would hold up if the curriculum came with unlimited prostitutes here is quote just because kids want to drink are you give them sick a bottle of alcohol to help with alcoholism? End quote. Sorry, no sympathy here.

You shouldn't have taught your kids to read if it's that important. That's where you fucked up. That's just bad Christian parenting. That's your fault. What were you thinking? It's your fault. According to a spokesman for the Save Nebraska Children Foundation, which describes comprehensive sex ed as assault on children on their website, the curriculum is ideologically driven. That's right.

The side that wants to say true stuff is driven by their ideological desire for murdered fetuses. But the assholes who shut down public meetings with chants about keeping their daughters pure are driven by dispassionate rationalism. And I guess since we just did two stories about theocratic sexism, you're all warmed up for the next segment, so we'll take a quick break and hand things over to my lovely wife, Lucinda. A man wrote the Bible? A whore is what she was.

If it's a legitimate race. It is your slut, right? Cooking can be fun. Hey! I'm proud of a man! This Week in Misogyny. In my opinion, if we want to be truly effective fighting bigotry, we have to learn to recognize and acknowledge all the shades of gray within it. We call this segment This Week in Misogyny because it has a nice ring to it. But in truth, there's a whole spectrum of sexism we talk about,

ranging from inconsiderate chauvinism to outright he-man-woman haters. And we have to be careful not to lump them all together in our minds. I have three stories this week that kind of illustrate that continuum, starting on the lightest end of the scale. We'll start off in Brussels, where a scientific conference sponsored by the European Commission last month did not include a lecture by British geneticist Samantha DeSomble, whose invitation was revoked when the organizers realized

she was planning on being seven months pregnant at the time of her scheduled lecture. Organizers explained their sudden change of heart by pointing out that they didn't want to risk taking her so far away from her midwife and stuff so late in her pregnancy, though they later privately apologized for forgetting that they also have doctors in Brussels. Now, if I had to guess, I'd say that's an example of sexism born of ignorance. I mean, it's possible that the organizers were sitting there going, oh shit, that's the lady version of Sam. I'll be damned

if I'm going to be told science by some Y-chromosomalist menstruator. But it's a lot more likely that this just grows out of the helpless little lady stereotype, compounded by the there aren't any women on the panel making these decisions problem so common in the scientific world. Sometimes it's not quite as easy to figure out. Take this recent comment from New Hampshire State Representative Josh Moore on the nuances of tit grabbing. A female colleague posted something on her Facebook page about a bill she was sponsoring that would make it illegal for women to show their nipples in public unless they're breastfeeding. In her post, she pointed out that all of the bill's sponsors were men, all Republicans, and all big fans of small government when they're not talking about parts of women's bodies.

So anyway, this result of a two-tailed, no-headed sperm rebutted like so. Quote, This result of a two-tailed, no-headed sperm rebutted like so. Quote, If it's a woman's natural inclination to pull her nipple out in public and you support that, then you should have no problem with a man's inclination to stare at it and grab it. End quote. He has, of course, deleted the post, but that's not how the internet works and he's a fucking idiot.

If I'm not mistaken, though, by his logic, you have every right to yank out his fingernails if you're so inclined. I mean, by displaying them in public, he's kind of asking for it, right? Now, in that instance, it's hard to believe anybody is that stupid. He's obviously made it to adulthood without accidentally lobotomizing himself with a spoon, so he probably knows the difference between displaying a boob and accosting one. It's not like I'm allowed to give topless men titty twisters at random. So you have to imagine there's at least some malice driving the ignorance here. But for our last story, I chose one where the misogyny is unmistakable. And this one comes from Jolly Old the UK.

According to a report in the Telegraph, a 46-year-old Saudi millionaire named Bassan Abdulaziz pled not guilty to rape allegations despite the presence of his sperm in his victim's girly bits by arguing that he slipped and fell into his victim. Now, I can add some details, but it's not going to sound less like bullshit. So according to him, he was walking naked through his apartment with a hand full of his own jizz, and this girl was sleeping on his couch. He slipped, grabbed her vagina to catch his balance, of course, and the jizz was on that hand. Yes, that is what he actually argued in court. I'm not just making shit up to make this sound crazier.

That was his actual defense. And I'll admit that up until now, this is more of a story about stupidity than misogyny. But the story ends with the court accepting that excuse and acquitting him of all charges. And while you chew on the fact that he probably wouldn't have gotten any more misogynistic of an outcome if the court was back home in Saudi Arabia. I'll hand things back over to Noah and Heath. Thank you, Lucinda. And in I Schmidt my pants news tonight, Colorado lawmaker disgraced former Navy chaplain and third Russian nesting doll down if you start taking apart Rush Limbaugh, Gordon Klingenschmidt

exactly what he looks like, revealed the true sinister anti-Christian motivation behind gayness this week. I've seen that one. The second one down is Krang, right? Yes. The smallest one is just a bacon-wrapped scallop. Because he looks like a bacon-wrapped... He does. He's all white and he's circly and fat.

Midway in between a bacon-wrapped scallop and Rush Limbaugh. Exactly. Anyway, while ranting apoplectically about a recent court decision in Massachusetts that ruled the Catholic school couldn't refuse to hire somebody for being gay married, Goklings was able to look past the plaintiff's transparent bullshit about wanting equality and a job and see the true motivation. The quote, demonic spirit of lust, end quote. This guy holds elected office in this country. That cannot be overemphasized. And he thinks gay person means pedophile priest.

That's his experience of the world. Probably. Elected office. From both ends. According to Schmitty, though, this lawsuit is proof that gay rights aren't really about rights for gay people so much as hating baby Jesus. After all all if they just wanted to be left alone they probably wouldn't want jobs to begin with instead

their motivation is obviously a desire to come after the church quote they don't care about the first amendment they don't care about the constitution they just want power and this is not about sexuality anymore it's about power and that's a demonic spirit of lust, not just for another man, but lust for power over the Christian people who yearn to breathe free. End quote, probably with fireworks and a sad eagle, you know, one tear like the Indian dude. All right, but that last thing actually sounds accurate, I got to say. When gay people see Gordon Klingenschmitt talking, they do probably want to put a dick in his mouth so he can't breathe. So fucking breathe. Probably not their dick, but somebody's dick.

Right. Yes, exactly. But then again, straight people like me feel the same way. Oh, true. So I think you still have to hire the gay people regardless. To put their dicks in Gordon Klingenschmitt's mouth. If we're going to reason it out, the gay hiring question. I'm glad we brought that back to rationality.

So yes, for the record, according to the string of mouth turds coming out of Phyllis Schmidt over here, when you see a Christian school refusing to hire a person because they're gay, that is an example of gay people persecuting Christians. Just like how the Jews kept fucking with the Nazis by tying up so many other trains during the war. Holocaust analogy number two. Good work.

Yeah, check. All right. So moving on in flightless spaghetti monster news tonight, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia took some time away from homophobic essay practice or whatever the fuck he does.

No, that's it. To deliver a pro-theocracy speech at a louisiana catholic high school last week apparently he did some homework and he's pretty sure the 14th amendment doesn't apply to atheists so we don't get any of that equal protection-y stuff damn it yeah he admits the government isn't supposed to favor one religion over another but he's claiming that the Constitution certainly still allows like a broad general discrimination against atheism. That's the line. I see.

As long as everyone is treated better than atheists. I swear the dude that lived like, where's that motherfucker like a tauntaun until they can elect another Republican president has finally snapped. So walking around marionette and that fat corpse for the last couple of years caught up with him. He's completely lost it. Or maybe he's lost control of the mouth mechanism now and it's just yammering random shit. The fucking dude is crazy and we have him on the goddamn Supreme Court. That's frightening as hell. Yeah.

So apparently Scalia's remarks were a follow up on his speech from about a year and a half ago in which he tried to make a similar point but had a bit of trouble understanding words. Here's what he had to say while speaking at Colorado Christian University in 2014. Quote, I think the main fight is to dissuade Americans from what the secularists are trying to persuade them to be true that the separation of church and state means that the government cannot favor religion over non-religion and keep in mind that this guy's job is to comprehend words and then think in that order that's the entire thing and this is a speech he knew he was going to give like i mean we didn't just like go to his house and wake him up in the middle of his ava longoria dream and then demand a comment about the 14th amendment at gunpoint here he said those words in that order

on purpose malice aforethought yeah so uh lots of confusion about the words separation church and state clearly um also favor government really almost all the words were problematic and in that same speech by the way he also pointed out that if we want a secular government like they have in europe we should write the laws that way seemingly unaware of the european founding fathers who already did that yeah and i can't stress this enough we're talking about a guy who's supposed to be one of the top legal minds in the country. He has that much power. It's one thing to be a constitutional literalist, but he is one step away from saying, no, no, according to this thing here, you only have the right to justice, not justice. So no trial for you, sir. Off with your head.

Yeah. So this was extremely depressing to hear from Supreme Court Justice. But I'd like to thank Mr. Scalia for helping illustrate the purpose of Pastafarianism better than any atheist possibly could. Justice just announced to the secular world that if we don't wear colanders on our heads and genuinely worship a pasta-based deity, we don't deserve the same rights and legal protections as everyone else. So, bravo, sir. Well done. And in the Scathing Atheist weather report tonight, we have a story of metaphysical meteorological malfeasance, which, of course, involves Christian God murdering people at the command of his minions. Now, if you follow their doctrine, all weather-related fatalities are examples of divine homicide, usually resulting from some type of human butt fuckery. So I guess the only thing making this one unusual is a conspicuous lack of sodomy. Well, that we know of.

I mean, it's always possible that, like, a butterfly had some butt sex over the Pacific. Right, yeah, exactly. Now, this story starts in Micronesia, of all places, where Jehovah's Witnesses finally explained why God murdered 7,400 people and caused $2.86 billion in damage when he slammed Typhoon Haiyan into South Asia back in 2013. And it turns out it's because some J-dubs on Micronesia needed sand.

That's right. Needed sand. In a recent interview on JW Broadcasting, the construction overseer in charge of renovating some J-dub church in Micronesia at the time explained that God created the storm because, wouldn't you know it, they kept running out of sand, and damn if that deadly storm didn't wash a bunch of extra sand up on the beaches. Yeah, no, it's just like that earthquake in Fukushima. Some J-dubs in

california probably needed some cesium very similar put them in some fish and then send them over yeah now here's the takeaway i think this guy knows that this storm killed thousands of people he was like basically there he knows it destroyed thousands of homes cost billions of dollars and he also thinks god sent it because they were praying for sand. And his takeaway from this is not never pray for anything. You know, he's not just saying that God murdered all these people to bring them sand. He is approving. Well done, God. That's thumbs up.

And finally tonight, from the Bone Boner File, in a recent issue of a magazine called Biblical Archaeology Review. Hold on. Let me start over. There's a magazine called Biblical Archaeology Review. Trees died for this to happen. It contains articles about stuff we didn't dig up yet. But it's coming. One such article discussed a 2013 book by Professor Ziany Zevit of the American Jewish University in Maryland entitled What Really Happened in the Garden of Eden?

And this renewed media attention reignited a fierce debate in the biblical archaeology community over the claim made in the book that Eve wasn't made from Adam's rib, but instead from his penis bone, his penis bone. Oh, all right. Well, you just made it even more insane. This is like arguing over Han or Greedo shooting first, but like with archaeology and academic journals and shit, like what really happened in the Garden of Eden? What really happened with that girlfriend I had that moved away that you guys didn't know but was crazy hot these fucking people you're taking up brain cells they could be calculating feynman diagrams or something you could be

virtually folding proteins or transcribing shit or anything else any other thing that you could be doing anyway so uh so this guy this uh ziony, he did this rigorous scientific study, discover about what really happened in the fucking rainbow land of Haralot, where the fuck this was supposed to be. What fictional universe he lived in. God, Jesus, this is stupid. They have departments in academia for this shit and everything. It's like real knowledge, only it's stupid. He's a professor. I'm going to give myself a fucking heart attack over this shit, and it's like real knowledge only it's stupid he's a professor

i'm gonna give myself a fucking heart attack over this shit and you're gonna hear it you're gonna hear it right on this fucking microphone me dying of a goddamn heart attack over one of these stories i'm sorry and this list this one doesn't even deserve my ire it's about a rib penis i'm sorry that's right let's get back to the dick jokes where we belong. Let's segue back to rib penis. So according to Professor Zevit, in the book of Genesis, the part about Adam's rib is actually a mistranslation of the Hebrew word tzela, which is supposed to mean, quote, limbs sticking out sideways from an upright human body, end quote. sideways from an upright human body, end quote. And he thinks this was a way for ancient Israelites to explain how the penis became the only such sideways limb that doesn't have a bone. Finally, we know. It's because God took the bone from Adam's penis.

And apparently the archaeological evidence backs him up on that. So far, nobody's dug up a dude in the garden of eden with a missing rib so there you go right well qed or with a penis bone so yeah and my guess by the way is that the translators just knew that shit at the time you know they were looking through the book they're like okay guys this is wall-to-wall dick jokes this whole fucking book i mean you could do like a tri-weekly segment about this for years and never run out of dick jokes. So do we really, I mean, do we want to add one right at the beginning?

Yes, we do. Maybe we just write rib. We go with rib. And then another guy's like, well, you know, ribs are things that are real. And dick bones, not so much. So yeah, they ran with it. I don't know if I can came together for him.

Yeah, that's right. That's perfect. They ran with it. It all fucking came together for them. Yeah, that's right. There's an academic debate over the extent to which historical evidence supports the idea that the world's first human female was made of dicks, especially considering the prevailing wisdom says it was ribs and therefore the penis thing is ridiculous. Whoa. Big debate. So I guess we'll just let them argue that out and then maybe they can dig up Narnia and clone some centaurs after that.

Might as well, yeah. Either way, we've once again stumbled upon a fun new game, I would say. Let's go ahead and put 30 seconds on the clock. We're looking for ad slogans from the alternate universe in which the words penis and rib are switched. Okay. Go. Oh. Go. Oh, shit.

Uncle Larry's House of Penises. Leave with a full stomach and sticky fingers guaranteed. What about Braised Short Penis? The other white meat. Really sticks to your penises, I'll say. How about Caitlyn Jenner's House of Spare Penises? Because some trans fats are better than others. What about McDonald's?

Releasing McPenis when seasonally appropriate. You can get breakfast anytime. How about this alternate universe? The only place where you look for black men when you want good short penises. What about Trojan condoms they now come with penises for her pleasure oh here's a good one god awful movies i laughed so hard i broke my penis true story all right what about um uh whatever the fuck steakhouse the dry aged bone-in penis eye is full of flavor ideal with a warm pink center ideal yes absolutely okay as it says this is a localist chain but it

doesn't matter if you haven't heard it i think you can still puzzle it out how about zaxby's indis penisably good get it in this penis penis yeah yeah there you go i'm fucking awful i was running out this is a hard one this is fucking hard Get it? Indus penis. Scribd penis. Rib. Yeah, yeah. There you go. Fucking awful. I was running out. This is a hard one. This is fucking hard. All right. Last one.

What about Chili's? You like your baby back penises the way you like your ribs. Dark on the outside, covered in barbecue sauce, and served by the dozen. Oh, that is how I like it. Chili's. Your baby back penises. I guess on that bit of penis-tickling humor, I suppose we can close the headlines for the night.

Heath, thanks as always. Jumanji! Going back to Jumanji. Nice, nice. And it's retro now. And when we come back, we'll take a peek behind the curtain and ask if there really is a secret cabal

subversively controlling every level of world government. And the answer will be no, there isn't. we know there isn't. It's time for the Atheist Calendar portion of the show, and I'm putting it here because I heard a nasty rumor that you weren't planning to make it to any atheist, secular, or skeptical conventions this year. Now, of course, I told the person that said it that they were full of shit, and I wouldn't want you to make a liar out of me.

So to help you out in that regard, I wanted to highlight a few of the events that I'm most looking forward to in 2016, and if shit goes right, Heath Lucinda and I plan to hit up all five of me. So to help you out in that regard, I wanted to highlight a few of the events that I'm most looking forward to in 2016. And if shit goes right, Heath Lucinda and I plan to hit up all five of them. We're going to start off in the Big Apple with the Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism. I've only missed one of those in the last four years, and I don't want to fuck up my average any more than that. As with all the events we'll be talking about, it's too early to know exactly who's going to be there. But I can say from experience that they always put together a great lineup if you're the kind of person that enjoys thinking. That's going to be May 12th to

the 15th. But of course, if it turns out that I can only make it to one, there's no question that I'll be in Washington, D.C. on June the 4th for the Reason Rally. And while I'm sure there are a shitload of speakers yet to come, they've already got Richard Dawkins, Eugenie Scott, and James Randi on the bill. So, like, you could fill the rest of that schedule with my racist cousins and I'd still make the trip.

Dates haven't officially been announced yet, but the amazing meeting makes my itinerary one way or the other. It's usually the second weekend in July, but I'm flexible. I but the amazing meeting makes my itinerary one way or the other. It's usually the second weekend in July, but I'm flexible. I think it's damn important for atheists to get active in the skeptical movement, and there's really no better place to do it. We're also going to try to meet some of our listeners across the pond this year, October 14th to the 16th at QED in Manchester, England. We'll finally have a chance to harass Andy Wilson in person, and that would make the travel cost worthwhile, even if we didn't get an awesome weekend of science and skepticism to go with it but we will and of course we'll finish up the year in springfield missouri at skepticon 9 on the weekend of november the 11th obviously way

too soon for them to have started locking down any speakers or anything but based on their past performance i'm already willing to give them my endorsement if you want more information of course you can find links for all of these events on the show notes for this episode and as more details come available i'll be filling you in during monthly calendar segments going forward and And as always, if you're aware of an event, big or small, that you think our audience would like to know about, let me know. You'll find all the contact info on the contact page at skatingatheist.com. I got a message from friend of the show, hilarious comedian, and all-around swell felon Nick Morganmore, just as we were putting this episode together on Wednesday night, and he asked if we could spare a minute to tell you about a rally he's involved with in

Montgomery, Alabama this coming Tuesday to get state Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore the fuck off the bench. Now, you'll remember Roy Moore from doing a bunch of illegal anti-gay shit and abusing his power and also saying Pat Robertson-level dumb shit on national media so we can make fun of him on this show. The guy is a frothing homophobic theocrat and he's underqualified to adjudicate a Pokemon tournament. So with all the details, I'll hand things over to the lovely Nick Morgan Moore and the also lovely Zandy Anderson. Hi, I'm Nick Morgan Moore. And I'm Zandy Anderson. Say, Nick, did you hear about the rally on Tuesday at the Supreme Court building in Montgomery, Alabama, the one for marriage equality?

What? Yeah, we're rallying for marriage equality. We think that same-sex couples should be allowed to get married. But, wait, what year? Oh, this is 2016. I understand your confusion. understand your confusion. However, Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore just issued an order demanding that same-sex couples not be issued marriage licenses in Alabama. Oh, well, that guy sucks donkey dicks. Well, yes, but that's his pastime. It's nobody's business. Okay, but he should be

doing his job. Well, yeah, I mean, you can suck donkey dicks when you have time, but, you know, job. Well, yeah. I mean, you can suck donkey dicks when you have time, but, you know, you have to do your job, which is abiding by the Supreme Court of the United States. Their ruling, which said that, you know, everybody can get married. Oh, if they want to.

If they want to, yes. Consent is important. Okay, good. So, what? We're going down there to say... Oh, yeah. So, the rally on Tuesday, January 12th, 2016, we're all going to meet at the Supreme Court building to demand that Chief Justice Roy Moore be removed from the bench because, well, you said he sucks donkey balls,

but the real reason is that he's just unethical and incompetent. Yes. Yeah, it sounds like it. So what time? 12 o'clock. Noon. Lunch. Lunch breaks.

Yeah. Lunch breaks. So if you're in Montgomery, Alabama and you have a lunch break or nothing to do on Tuesday and you believe in marriage equality. And, you know, rights. And, and the Chief Justice Roy Moore sucks donkey dicks. If you believe that the year, if you believe the year is 2016, please meet us at the Supreme Court building in Montgomery, Alabama on Tuesday the 12th at noon. Bring a protest sign or one will be provided for you.

What if I told you you were being lied to? What if I told you that a hidden aristocracy was secretly controlling the globe through subversive manipulation of every level of world government, maintaining an unexposed and unprecedented grip on power for centuries and counting? You'd at least agree that you were, in fact, being lied to. And despite the patent absurdity of the claim, millions of people profess some belief in just such a hidden group known as the Illuminati. Well, this week we're going to put them under the microscope and ask,

How bullshit is it? So Heath, tell us, what is the Illuminati? Okay, but are you afraid that if you don't say, tell us, I'll start writing it instead? Wait, what? I mean, you always say, Heath, tell us, blah, blah, blah. Of course I'm going to tell you. What else am I going to do? Explain it through interpretive dance?

I guess it's just kind of a stupid thing to say. But it sounds like it gives it that little pause. It makes it dramatic. It makes it, like, dramatic. It makes it sound professorial. Well, I don't think that has anything to do with it. I mean, if you just said, Heath, what is the Illuminati? You'd sound like you needed my help knowing something. But if you say, Heath, tell us, what is the Illuminati? It sounds like you're telling me what to do.

You know, it's not a big deal. It's a little thing. I feel like I should try to pretend that's not true, and yet I can't muster the enthusiasm I need to lie. So tell us already. Here's the thing that you already did it in the intro. That's why I'm vamping with all this bananas psychoanalysis shit. Oh, did I?

Yeah. You said the whole hidden aristocracy secretly controlling the globe thing. Oh, yeah. No. So I did. So I did. Yeah. Right.

So it's like that. Only bullshit. Okay, next question then. Where does the name Illuminati come from? Well, like most conspiracy theories, it's loosely based on a real thing, actually. The Illuminati was a Bavarian secret society in the late 18th century that used subterfuge and conspiracy

to further their political goals for about a decade and a half before they were crushed by the monarchy and the church. Okay, so did they, you know, control the world? No. It was like a dozen guys that worked around a bunch of religious people and they got together under fake names so they could say, fuck religion together. Right on. So like us, but only old-timey and Bavarian.

Right, exactly. At first, yeah. But eventually it devolved into pseudo-freemasonry and swelled to a few hundred members before that government edict dissolved it in 1785. Okay, so hardly worth mentioning group exists then ceases to exist. What's next? Basically nothing for a couple hundred years they pop up as a phantom rumor here and there in like little tabloids and stuff for a few decades and then they all but disappear from the historical record until the internet age okay and uh upon

their triumphant return they've taken over the world and may or may not be run by alien lizard shapeshifters. Uh-huh. And also may or may not be preparing the world for the coming of the Antichrist. Uh-huh. And also may or may not have orchestrated every single conflict and significant global event in the last several centuries. Uh-huh. Also might have done that. Okay, okay, yeah, but how seriously is anybody taking this shit? I mean, are we going to dig through every batshit crazy time cube website on the internet on this segment

well i mean you'd prefer sensible bullshit no i i just mean if the only people saying this are crazy people in echo chambers why poke a hole in that echo chamber well look everybody who promotes this stuff is crazy sure by definition but but that doesn't mean they're not influential. In fact, a lot of the details I just offered you came from a 1994 book titled New World Order, and it was authored by none other than Anal P. Robes himself. Oh, really? Soon after having plastic surgery at a Twix factory, I'm assuming. He's a casascady guy. Yes.

He's got a Cascady face. Rather. Created a Twix commercial. Well, okay. So he wrote about it and believes in it. I would need to know nothing else to know that it was bullshit. Yeah. Well, we don't talk about non-bullshit in the segment.

I'm just pointing out that it's influential bullshit. Right. Okay. Yeah, I gotcha. So what is the Illuminati after? What's their goal? Well, it depends on who the person you're asking hates the most If you ask a Christian fundamentalist

It'll be the coming of Satan, obviously Probably by way of the gays Of course Obviously If you ask an anti-Semite It's going to be Zionism If you ask a freedom-shitting gun nut It's going to be Zionism. If you ask a freedom-shitting gun nut, it's going to be Sharia law. If you ask a conservative libertarian, it's going to be the Obama monarchy that he's planning to declare in November.

Okay, so we have a made-up group that's made up of whoever you want to have in it, and its goal is whatever you want that goal to be. So what's the point? That is the point. That's tricky. Doesn't seem like a point. Well, it makes them the perfect enemy to all people that's the thing you just insert the group you hate and suddenly that group is responsible for everything bad that's ever happened in the world oh possibly all right

okay so so who gets cast as the enemy most often oh the jews oh i knew it would be that i knew it would be the jews um yeah typically you don't have to scratch too far below the surface of a conspiracy theory to find a whole bunch of anti-Semitism. Okay, but I hate that I'm actually formulating this sentence in an episode with multiple Holocaust references and stuff. But why not just blame the Jews? I mean, ultimately that's what they're doing. But that would be racist. Well, it's already racist. Not if the Jews really are secretly controlling the world.

Then it's just a statement of fact about what Jews are doing. So you're saying that the Illuminati are just an intellectual justification for bigotry? I'm not saying they're just that. What else are they, then? They're a logical byproduct of a conspiracy mindset. As soon as logical byproduct of a conspiracy mindset. As soon as your brain commits to a conspiracy and finds contradictory evidence, you have to either abandon it or assume that the people that produced the evidence were also in on it. Gotcha. It doesn't take long for every bullshit conspiracy theory to make it all the way to the top.

So that's how they do it. But why would a brain commit to a conspiracy theory in the first place? That's because the human brain is way better at pattern recognition than it is at critical thinking, sadly. A well-thought-out conspiracy theory satisfies a deep-seated desire to make order out of the chaos. The same reason a snowflake is beautiful and a shit stain is not. It always comes back to shit stains. Doesn't it?

Okay, so where do these well-thought-out conspiracy theories come from in the first place? Probably insane people. There's no sanity requirement for a webpage, and anybody who's dealt with a paranoid schizophrenic will tell you they can be damn convincing. It's entirely possible that many of the common threads in today's Illuminati mythology started with the crazy person on the internet and kicked into overdrive when people like David Icke

and Pat Robertson realized they could make money off of it. Okay, but I mean, why would rational people believe the ramblings of some crazy person on the internet? Because people believe dumb shit. In fact, they're great at that. Yeah, I know, but I mean, it has to be more than that, or they'd believe every dumb shit, and they don't believe, like, realities. Well, for some people, it's probably comforting to believe

all the random chaos is actually being controlled by someone, even if that person is the Antichrist. For other people, it might just be that informed member of an elite minority decoding the secret ambitions of the most powerful group in human history is a more satisfying persona than part-time fry cook at Applebee's or whatever. Right. Okay. I get it. I get it.

But, I mean, shouldn't a sane person be able to dig themselves out of this stuff pretty quickly? Yeah, if they wanted to, maybe. But keep in mind that we're dealing with a worldview where the lack of evidence of the worldview is evidence of the worldview. Oh, yeah. If something doesn't support the conspiracy, it's obviously a false flag operation or a distraction or we're just being lied to about it happening at all. So no possible piece of evidence can invalidate it. Sounds kind of terrifying terrifying to be honest well we should be fine as long as no armed domestic terrorists start taking over government property

in the pacific northwest over paranoid bullshit like this yeah no so tell us heath how bullshit is it you did the the tell us thing again it's not a big deal oh yeah no it's instinct yeah sorry okay how bullshit it's uh it's donald Trump explaining his latest STD to his wife levels of bullshit. You can get HPV from the inside of a limo. Oh, yeah, yeah. Those rapey Mexicans. True story. Of course.

I'm running for president. True story. That's scary. Right on. So tell us, Heath. Thanks again. Dick. It's time for the part of the show that comes next, listener feedback.

This is the part of the show that we've been neglecting for so long it probably won't let us fuck it this time around. Our first message comes from Rex, who wanted to thank us for helping him get a weekly dose of Eli on God Awful Movies, but wonders if that means he'll ever hear Eli on this show again. And in Rex's defense he sent this email before Eli was on the show last week. Right, yeah, but

it has been a while. Obviously that question was answered, but that being said, we'd love to get Eli on the show more often. He's up for it, but the old shtick of him coming on to review movies doesn't work anymore exactly. So if you have an idea for a recurring segment that would feature Eli, by all means, let us know. Yeah, definitely. I was actually kicking around an idea where we have him as a special correspondent covering the Fiorina campaign,

but I feel like that might get us in trouble. Maybe a little. Any ideas for more Eli on the show would be great. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. We also had a Facebook message from Tim, who writes, quote, I don't get the Virgin Mary thing. Was it normal back then to nickname people based on their level of sexual activity?

This is my wife, probably fucking the carpenter Susan. My son's not getting any Tommy and just getting into butt stuff Dave. Sounds weird. Any help would be appreciated. Excellent point. Also strikes me as bizarre that they still call her Virgin Mary even though Jesus had brothers and sisters. I mean, were they all

immaculate? Because everybody used to be a virgin. I don't know. We could try it out. I'll be Carpal Tunnel Heath from now on. And I can be getting as many orgasms in while my dick still works. Noah. And finally, we got a message from Carolyn on Facebook who says,

How much do I have to donate per episode for naked pictures of Heath? No. Really? Heath. First time I ever got that request. Well, if Carolyn knows how to use the Tor browser, she'll probably find some for free. Take some deep binging, but it's out there.

But yeah, if you want to get directly, we'll say $1 gets you one square foot. But which square foot? And that's all the feedback we get. If you want more, keep sending us those emails, tweets, and Facebook messages. You'll find all the contact info on the contact you want more, keep sending us those emails, tweets, and Facebook messages. You'll find all the contact info on the contact page at ScathingAtheist.com. And if you donate to us, I promise no pictures of Heath spreading his cheeks or anything.

No, unless you request us. Before we kick back and light the cigars tonight, I'm going to be a little bit more to get with Eli and break down another one of those. It's been a while. A lot of shit's happened. Should be fun. Anyway, that's all the blasphemy we've got for you tonight, but we'll be back in 10,022 minutes with more. If you can't wait that long, be on the lookout for a brand new episode of our other sister show, Godawful Movies, debuting in a mere 7,141 minutes, 44 seconds. I'm going to be discussing the movie my Netflix seems to think I've been waiting for, Little Boy. It's about God giving an eight-year-old the power to nuke Japan, I do believe.

Should be fun. Obviously, we can't fade to black until I thank Keith Enright for his continued hilarity and for not dude-vorcing me over the God-awful movies concept. I need to thank the brilliant and beautiful Lucinda Lusions for signing on for yet another year of trudging through these depressingly fucked up misogyny stories. I also want to thank the fine folks at Atheist Apocalypse for providing this week's

Farnsworth quote. If you haven't checked out their show, I'd recommend it. A lot of familiar voices, some really creative ideas, very much pushing the definition of what an atheist podcast can be, and for that, I salute them. And, of course, for that, I also include a link on the show notes for them. But most of all, of course, I need to thank this week's most dominant hominids, Aaron, Cecilio, Sean, Frazier, David, Rex, Alan, Mike, and Zamir. Aaron, Cecilio, and Sean, who are so charming, the fourth quark was downgraded to somewhat charismatic in comparison. Frazier, David, and Rex, whose cock rings have to be manufactured at sea.

And Alan, Mike, and Zamir, whose erections would be referred to by physicists as the Strong Force if that name wasn't already taken. Together, this no-net of notoriously noteworthy and the no-nobles notified us of their noblesse this week by giving us money. Not everybody has the calm confidence in the face of ravenous ninjas that it takes to give us money, but if you have exactly that kind of calm confidence and also extra money, you can give it to us through a per episode donation at patreon.com slash skating atheist. Or you can make a one time donation by clicking on the donate button on the right side of the homepage at skating atheist dot com.

And if you'd like to help but you're not allowed to donate to podcasts as a condition of your parole. You can also help us a ton by leaving us a five star review on iTunes, Stitcher or your podcast rating vehicle of choice. Cool smart people also tend to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter in my experience as well. If you have questions, comments or death threats you'll find all the contact info on the contact page at skatingatheist.com. All the music used in this episode was written and performed by yours truly, and yes, I did have my permission. Fuck it, we'll do it live. Fuck it! Fuck it, we'll do it live!