The Scathing Atheist - ScathingAtheist 152: Fighting God Edition

Episode Date: January 14, 2016

In this week's episode, American Atheist President David Silverman joins us to talk about his new book Fighting God (spoiler: you don't use lightsabers), plus Pat Robertson and Rick Santorum being stupid.

Warning, these guys put the pro in profanity. This week's episode of The Scathing Atheist is brought to you by the new brand of feminine hygiene products for Christian baby machines, Sunday Massengill. Do you ever get that not-so-pregnant feeling? Well, you shouldn't. You're supposed to be knocked up from puberty to menopause, so you should pretty much never menstruate. But you still want to keep it clean down there. And that's our specialty. Sunday Mass and go.

What would Jesus douche? And now, the skating atheist. Hi, this is Trav Mamone of the By Any Means Podcast. And not only did we evolve from filthy monkey men, but our closest relatives, bonobos, have proven to be bisexual. So suck it, Ken Ham. It's Thursday. It's January 14th.

And if it's not a pi over two radians angle, it's a wrong angle. I'm Noah Lusions. I'm Heath Enright. And from prayer on the side of caution, Valdosta, Georgia, this is The Scathing Atheist. On this week's episode, Rick Santorum discovers the chemical formula for stupid. Catholic torture porn is something that comes up naturally. And David Silverman will teach us how to fight God. I'm guessing he's going to recommend the rope-a-dope. But first, the diatribe.

My niece lives in the middle of nowhere, 50 miles from the nearest city, with wide open fields in every direction. Now, if you're anything like me, you cannot hear that sentence without thinking about stargazing. So we finally got a chance to take the telescope out there this past weekend. Now, I'll admit, it was a hard sell to get her and her husband to hang out with us in the cold until midnight. But neither of them had ever actually seen Jupiter through a telescope. And as soon as they did, it was not a hard sell to talk them into continuing to stand out there with us until 2 a.m. And the whole time we're talking about astronomy, of course, right?

Neither of them know much about it, but they're inquisitive, they're smart, and I know enough to answer most of their questions in broad strokes, at least. So we talked a bit about exoplanets, we talked about supermassive black holes, we talked about dark matter, and we almost talked about the Big Bang. of black holes. We talked about dark matter and we almost talked about the big bang. But it was right there that my niece's husband, my nephew-in-law, I guess, shut me the fuck down. His curiosity disappeared faster than a pan of liquid water on Mars. All of a sudden, he didn't have any more questions. And what's more, he didn't want his wife to have any more questions either. Now, he wasn't rude. He wasn't mean. He just stopped asking questions. He stopped wanting to know because Jesus.

Because we'd reached that critical point in the explanation of anything where it butts up against religion and challenges the mythology he's been taught to revere. And 24 years of indoctrination has taught him that at a certain point in any conversation about true stuff, he has to stick his fingers in his ears. Now, think about that. Nobody saying a true thing would discourage you from learning about the untrue stuff that challenged it. When I meet people that believe the Bible is inerrant, or that homeopathy works, or that astrology has merit, I encourage them to learn about it. But of course, that's a luxury you can only afford when you're right,

so religion tells them the exact opposite. They warn them that the devil's going to try to trick them with all this fancy stuff that's demonstrably true, but don't you fall for it now, or God will melt your flesh off and then he'll give you a new flesh just so he can melt it off again. You know, if this was the only bad thing religion did, it would be too much. If all religion did was stifle curiosity and cure AIDS, it would be a net negative. Now, obviously, religion does the exact opposite of curing AIDS, see Catholicism, Africa, so I don't know that I can say that stifling curiosity is the worst thing religion Obviously, religion does the exact opposite of curing AIDS, see Catholicism, Africa. So I don't know that I can say that stifling curiosity is the worst thing religion does. That'd probably be justifying torture, rape, and murder.

But it's the one thing they do that pisses me off the most often, is that effort to shut down minds. You know, I've told the story on this show before about how I became an atheist activist. I mean, you know, things like that obviously never boiled down to a single moment. But the most influential instance I can recall was seeing some Hasidic Jew on the subway berate his granddaughter for reading a book that was for boys only. And whenever I can't summon the kind of anger I need to get through a diatribe, I think about that. Or I peruse the latest revisions to the Texas textbook standards.

Or even worse, I read the curriculum outlines on Christian homeschooling websites. We're talking about institutions, several national and multinational institutions, that are proudly robbing children of the most precious thing they have, their potential. And even worse, they're robbing the future of all the intellectual contributions that those children might have made if they weren't taught that the cutting edge science was just a plot by an immortal satyr to torture the ghost that lives in their brains. And as if that's not enough, consider that they're also robbing all of these people of a lifetime's worth of that amazing feeling when something shifts from not making sense to making sense

nothing in the world feels better than that at least nothing i've managed to talk my wife into yet learning is the quintessential human experience and people are being robbed of it by the billions whether it's by a zealot of a parent who won't send them to school or a theocratic school board that censors their textbooks or an oppressive government that forbids certain types of thinking or an international effort to stop certain fields of scientific study in their tracks. Because their goal isn't just to keep their children stupid or even your children. They want to keep humanity stupid because smart is in direct conflict with God. And look, this is an intrinsic part of religion. There's no way to pull this part out and still have religion.

They're in the business of selling answers, wrong answers to be precise. And when you're selling wrong answers, right answers are always going to be your biggest competitor. You'll notice that Christian leaders don't invest a lot of energy trying to keep their flocks from becoming Muslims. You don't see imams dedicating much effort to keep their followers from choosing Hinduism. They know that the other guy's bullshit is no better than theirs. But as soon as you start saying true shit, all the religious leaders can band together to denounce that. And like I said, I should be more pissed about the other shit. You know, the female genital mutilation, the murder of apostates, the acid attacks, the suicide bombings. But in so many ways, that stuff is just

a byproduct of the forced ignorance thing. They seclude their followers from any real education and then take advantage of their lack of education. They try to suffocate their curiosity exactly when it's at its most potent, because if you look too far into any subject whatsoever, it'll start disproving God. That's how thin it is. It doesn't matter if it's biology, astronomy, geology, physics, logic, ethics, psychology, neurology, philosophy, history, archaeology, genetics, epistemology, comparative anything. Every one of them has a line you can't cross over without setting down your god and of course religious

leaders know that once you've put god down even if it's just for a minute even as just to learn a little biology you might realize that he's not worth the effort of bending over to pick back up joining me for headlines tonight is the best supporting actor no matter what the academy They're talking about your Jesus. We interrupt this broadcast and bring you a special news bulletin. Joining me for headlines tonight is the best supporting actor no matter what the Academy says, Heath Enright. Heath, are you ready to draft your acceptance speech? I'm a proud tracer, but it is an honor just to be overlooked. So that was nice. In our lead story tonight, Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice and future antagonist of Selma to Roy Moore continued to deserve to have his urethra shown shut last week when he issued an imperial

declaration halting gay marriage in his state. He thinks so. This unconstitutional tantrum was issued on Wednesday and then rejected by Thursday morning, by which time gay couples were once again exercising their basic human rights. Inevitable brimstone be damned. Yeah, so that didn't really accomplish anything but this guy is still terrifying oh very much so yeah roy moore thinks he's auditioning for the hero in some way right he has no idea cameron's already working on it national guard shows up and gay marries him at gunpoint god saves the day with an apocalypse yeah great movie unfortunately we'll watch that

now i don't want to imply that this is no big deal because it very much is i mean look the advocate reported that at least one same-sex couple got married in alabama on thursday morning but there aren't enough gay marriages happening in alabama for us to definitively say that this isn't going to have ramifications after one week of you know basically nothing but more importantly there's an acting state Supreme Court justice that thinks he just gets to decide which laws count and which don't. Yeah, and he's not even being consistent about it. He's all focused on this gay marriage thing.

But meanwhile, you've got people getting licenses for gay driving and gay hunting. It just seems arbitrary. I don't know. At least be consistent, bro. Of course, now there are two possible explanations here. One is that Roy Moore is so fucking stupid that he actually thinks state Supreme Court Chief Justice outranks all the other people in the government combined

and therefore mistakenly thought that this would work. Wouldn't put it past him. Well, but the other and far more likely explanation is that Alabama is one of those seven dumbass states that elect Supreme Court Chief Justices who then have to worry about reelection more than they have to worry about obeying the fucking law. Yeah, that actually sounds more like it. And just for reference, by the way, if it's not clear just how awful this person is, fun

fact, if you search Google Images for Roy Moore, a link to a slideshow of George Wallace pops up. You're shitting me. True story. Really does. Right in the middle. Now, it's also worth remembering, by the way, that Roy Moore was already removed from office for ethics violations once before.

This same office. In 2003, he was suspended by the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission for his refusal to abide by a court order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from state property. During a related hearing, Moore argued that, quote, to acknowledge God cannot be a violation of the canon of ethics. Without God, there can be no ethics, end quote. And despite being forcibly removed from the bench for these ethics violations, the good people of Alabama decided to re-elect him to the same fucking office

he'd been removed from a mere decade later. That you're not supposed to elect. Way to go, Bama. And in why are there still monkey trials news tonight. Thanks to a recent court ruling, Richard Dawkins will not be held financially responsible for writing a sentence in 1989 that went on to discredit a 2013 anti-evolution book called The Organized Universe by pseudoscience author Carl Dahlstrom. What?

And therefore, Dawkins does not owe Mr. Dahlstrom $58 million in damages. What? Yeah. Apparently, the judge decided that Dawkins' role in the alleged libelous pre-bunking doesn't matter because that doesn't exist. It's not a thing. And also evolution is real, so it's not libelous. That too.

But a real judge had to decide that. That was a real case. Wait a minute. Okay. Back up here. So in this guy's mind, the guy who wrote this dumbass book, people pick up his book of stupid and they glance at the back cover and they think, yeah, no, I'll buy it.

But then an excerpt from a quarter-century-old book review pops into their mind and they're like, oh, no, wait, never mind. By Richard Dawkins. Never mind. Evolution denialist readers. So not only does he think that this happened like nine million times or so, but he thinks it's the most likely explanation for why his book isn't selling. So here's the remark from Dawkins that the lawsuit's actually based on. This is from a book review in 1989. Quote, if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane.

End quote. And Carl Dahlstrom thinks this sentence is the reason his book wouldn't sell because he's, again, a fucking crazy person. Which, by the way, does not rule out ignorant and stupid. He could be those things, too. We don't know. But he is definitely crazy, as further evidenced by his official complaint. Quote, Mr. Dahlstrom is the only individual on Earth in the history of man that is scientifically disproven, capital E, evolution. This makes him the number one candidate for Richard Dawkins' attack, even though Carl Dahlstrom, i.e. the somebody in the book. Oh, God!

I either somebody could not be ignorant, stupid or insane as scientifically proven by the book. He organized universe and quotes. It's nice to know your courts have time for this kind of shit. Okay, so if I was Dawkins, I think I might have let this go to trial just to watch this guy try to prove in a court of law that he wasn't stupid or insane. I'm dying to know how he would have tried to do that. And also, if I was Dawkins, I also wouldn't tweet about Down Syndrome or rape anymore. In case you're listening. Just to review, here's the chain

of events. Richard Dawkins writes a book review in 1989. Hold on. Let me start again. Chain of events. Big Bang. Evolution. Science on evolution. Richard Dawkins writes the review in 1989. Then in 2013, Carl Dahlstrom thinks he's discovered the argument from intelligent design and writes a stupid book about it.

Lots of smart people don't buy his book, at which point he realizes that it was the review from 24 years ago that pre-sabotaged his entire writing career. Then he does some math and figures he made about $58 million less in book sales than his projection of apparently about $58 million in book sales. Very close. It's all thanks to Richard Dawkins, who, by the way, is the only person in history to make evolution deniers look stupid before 2013. Therefore, lawsuit. That all happened. Yeah. Evolution deniers look stupid before 2013. Therefore, lawsuit. That all happened. Yeah, yeah.

See, now I want to sue this guy for making people too stupid to like our show. We would have more patrons if it wasn't for him dumbing people down. And in apologist in case news tonight, Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney wants to make it damn clear that the Islamist shooting the cop in the name of Islam last Thursday had absolutely nothing to do with Islam. There's a lot of that word in there. Well, no, okay, but in the mayor's defense, according to the shooter himself, quote, I follow Allah and I pledge allegiance to the Islamic State. This is the reason I did what I did, end quote.

So, you know, with him beating around the bush with that kind of nebulous ambiguity, I can see why the mayor was so hesitant to assign a motive. Could be anything. nebulous ambiguity. I can see why the mayor was so hesitant to assign a motive. Could be anything. Well, it sounds like the shooter's hinting at this being the Jews' fault sometimes. But yeah, I mean, it's not clear why he feels that way. No. It's not.

No. Now, interestingly, many of the politicians and news outlets that were reluctant to assign the same motive to the shooting that the guy who committed it used were perfectly happy to pass along dubious and unsubstantiated claims that he was mentally ill after all we wouldn't want to incite prejudice against the one percent of americans who are muslim by reporting a fact when it's so much easier to incite prejudice against the 18 percent who are mentally ill by reporting a rumor and a rumor by the way started by the dude's mom who might just have an obvious ulterior motive yeah yeah this story is offensive to lots of people honestly i mean the mentally ill the mentally healthy scotsman true right yeah lots of groups so okay so just to be clear if this dude had claimed any motivation except a religious one

the press would have reported that that's the reason he did it right i mean the mayor would have identified that as the problem if he claimed he shot a cop in the name of environmentalism or communism or a bengals team that can win a fucking playoff game it wouldn't have been enough i mean he would have just said like of course we all know that most bengals fans are non-violent but instead the mayor said in a press conference quote in no way shape or form does anyone in this room so he's speaking for everybody here believe that islam or the teaching of is Islam has anything to do with the shooting. End quote. Who was standing?

There were reporters there. He's speaking for the fucking reporters, too. But here, look, can you imagine any mayor anywhere in the country ruling out any other motive in the middle of an active investigation? That's the kind of shit that would show up in the goofs portion of the imdb page if you saw it in a movie it's fucking insane and from the patty melts file tonight gotta get it in quick because he's gonna be dead soon right he robs yeah so um host of the 700 club and guy who looks like recently dipped fondue pat robertson some time away from yelling at local kids and stealing their baseball last week

to air another episode of his show. And during the Bye Bye Birdie segment, he fielded an old-timey question from a teenage viewer about whether you go to hell for listening to rock and roll music. We haven't settled that yet. Yeah, so always a master of the nuanced opinion,

Robertson responded, sometimes. Sometimes you go to hell for listening to rock music. Depends on the band and the use of minor chords, I guess. Right, right. Well, maybe he just means stuff like Nickelback. Like, he just means you go to hell until the song's over. Fair enough.

All right, so here's how it works. According to the P-Robes, quote, it depends on the rock you're listening to. Some of the stuff is just evil. They used to talk about killing your parents, and there were just some other things. Sick. But there's some beat that's out there that, you know, probably isn't all that bad. Uh-huh. Although in one Indian context.

Oh, this will be great. One Indian context. You know this is going to be good. They were playing rock music, and the person said, why are you calling on the demons? Because that was the kind of music they used to summon demons. Holy shit. He managed to sneak some racism in there after all.

I mean, you know, he may be so old it looks like a lava flow hitting a Coke can when he takes a piss, but damn it, he's still got it. So yeah, that was a new fun fact for everyone from the p-robes apparently there was this one time when a native american dude i've got to assume he meant native america when he said anything when a native american dude was at the big rock and roll concert yeah and he wondered why the band was calling on demons so because the song was just like the standard Native American demon songs. And that's why rock and roll music is sometimes evil.

So, thanks, P-Rubes. Learning is fun. Yeah, right. The more you know, stars should just float in right here. And in the lighter side of mattress side news tonight, in an impressive effort to make sure nobody loses track of who Earth's worst people are, an ISIS militant publicly executed his own mother when she asked him to leave the group. Keeps him firmly in the lead. Yeah. According to a BBC report, 21-year-old Ali Saker needs more

vowels in his name. Saker? Saker? Anyway, 21-year-old Ali Saker reported to his superiors that his mother had urged him to reconsider his involvement, at which time they ordered the execution. And of course, they ordered him to do it because they're evil compared to Shakespeare villains. In a preemptive statement, by the way, the mayor of Philadelphia assured us that this has nothing to do with Islam. It's probably just mental illness or something. This isn't about Islam, but if I have to deal with this Western imperialism one more day, I'm going to chop my mother's head off in the town square. Yeah, right, right.

Really? You listening, CJ? And in belt, stick, or wrench news tonight, according to the child welfare authorities in Massachusetts, the answer is D, none of the above. They got the right answer. Despite what it says in the Bible, you should beat your kids with none of the objects. Nor without objects. No beating them. Yeah.

Just don't beat them at all is the rule. Yeah, there you go. And while some amount of spanking is still technically legal there, the state's Department of Children and Families will not provide you with any extra abuse victims beyond your own biological ones. No hitting the foster kids is the policy. I like that policy. Now, it seems like you wouldn't need to post that anywhere, let alone argue about it. Yet somehow it got challenged in court last year. No hitting the foster kids got challenged in court last year. But thanks to last week's ruling in favor of sanity, the agency will be allowed to continue that practice.

If you hit your kids, we won't give you more kids. So good news. Yeah. Nice to know that the adoption agencies are allowed to be almost as selective as the animal shelters right now again it seems hard to believe there would be any disagreement about this but the conflict in question arose when massachusetts denied the request of greg and melanie Magazu to adopt a foster child after learning the couple insists on corporal punishment of children due to their Christian faith.

I had religion in my envelope. I knew it was. Yeah, of course. The couple saw this as a violation of their religious right to hit small children righteously, so they filed a lawsuit. Thankfully, they finally lost that case last week when the state Supreme Court upheld an earlier ruling of, indeed, no foster kids for parents that proudly announced, yeah, we're going to beat that kid if you give it to us.

But I can think of one Supreme Court Chief Justice that would disagree. And you know what? Let's hope that they just added an addendum that says, hey, you know what? Anything that you could do to a truck that would disqualify you from renting another U-Haul truck, you also can't do to a child that we give you. Just preemptively, because apparently the don't physically abuse children label that the kids were coming with wasn't doing the trick. So the misguided aphorism you'll often hear to describe the Bible's teaching on this subject is spare the rod, spoil the child, which is actually a paraphrase of a line from the book of Proverbs. And when taken literally, as is the case with millions of Christians, it means you should assault your child with a weapon sometimes. Right. That's what it means. Especially if you get back sassed.

Now, that's awful by itself. But consider for a second what else it says in the Bible. What if Christian parents are trying to adopt a black kid, and they're pretty sure he's a Moabite? I think it's reasonable for the state to be certain they won't enslave the child or beat the kid unconscious even if it's only for 47 hours at a time. Both of which would be protected by religious freedom laws, according to the people behind legislation like RFRA.

Well, and also it's the same book they're using to justify this shit as the one that talks about the joys of swinging babies into rocks headfirst. That's the one. That's the book before the one they're actually using in the Bible. So perhaps this court ruling was a small step in the right direction, but there's still plenty of similar cases that could easily go the other way in other parts of the country. So if you were wondering how many kids need to get physically abused before we get rid of nonsense like RFRA, the answer is at least a few more. Not quite done with that.

And on that note, I feel like I need to curl up in a running shower for a few minutes. So we're going to take a quick break and hand things over to my lovely wife, Lucinda. A man wrote the Bible. A whore is what she wants. If it's a legitimate race. If it's a slut, right? Cooking can be fun. Hey, I'm proud of a man.

This Week in Misogyny. I was pretty sure I'd get through my whole life without uttering these words in this order. Whose job is it to check that kid for a penis? If you'd asked me at any point from the time I was born to the time I started doing this show, I would have thought at powerball odds that I'd ever need to formulate that sentence. But here I am, staring at a news story about some Republican butt bubble who wants to pass a law that would make it illegal for kids to use the bathroom that this asshole doesn't think they should use.

And, of course, his definition of the correct bathroom rests entirely on a kid's genitals, which leads to the unavoidable question, whose job is it to check that kid for a penis? I mean, think about it. A kid is accused of using the wrong bathroom. Somebody says, hey, this person's anatomical sex doesn't match their gender expression.

Where do you go from there? And why is it that in the span of this new segment, you and I have already given this more thought than the idiot that wants to make it into a state law? His name is Mark Cole, by the way. So if you live in Virginia, look up his picture online. That way, if he ever happens to be walking into a public restroom as you're walking out, you remember to block the door until he proves he has a dick. I swear we're going to need the National Guard escorting transgender people to bathrooms in Virginia as soon as they're done escorting gay people to county clerk's offices in Alabama. But to be honest, Virginia Republican Mark Cole is a distant second on my list of assholes this week. My asshole of the week award definitely goes to

Archbishop Brulio Rodriguez Plaza of Toledo, Ohio. To be fair, this little tidbit of asshole already happened last week, but I didn't hear about it until this week. But this shit earns him at least a month's worth of that honor. So he was delivering a sermon on the problems of domestic abuse within the Hispanic community. And I'm sure right now you're thinking to yourself, how can a professed virgin with no relationship experience and the employee of the second most sexist institution in the world offering up his opinion on domestic abuse possibly go wrong? But believe it or not, he found a way. As far as Rodriguez Plaza could figure it, there were two real culprits when it comes to domestic abuse. The first is the lack of true

marriages, and the second is uppity bitches, both of which he blames on the ease with which women can file for divorce these days. That's right. He noticed a correlation between abusive husbands and women seeking divorce and drew his arrow of causality from those damned independent women. The end result is an authority figure standing behind his pulpit and telling abused women that it's their own fault for wanting a divorce. And oh yeah, he's speaking for God here. So there's also the unmistakable implication that the abuse they're getting now is nothing compared to the eternal abuse they'll get if they get a divorce and make the baby Jesus cry. And finally, the big short was really good. Funny throughout, but also poignant.

I know that has nothing to do with anything, but I just hate leaving you on depressing stuff like that domestic abuse story. So on that artificially positive note, I'll hand things back over to Noah and Heath. Thank you, Lucinda. And in Charlie and Charge news tonight, on the one-year anniversary of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, the New York Times happily reminded us that the only reason those innocent people were targeted in the first place is that they were the only publication with the balls to keep their heads above the trenches while the publications like the New York Times were tying their tidy whiteys to a stick. In a story about the publication's commemorative issue published on the anniversary of the tragedy, the Times elected to censor the cover because it might piss religious people off. Yeah, centuries of religion-fueled violence doesn't piss them off as long as nobody draws a political cartoon about it. That would be over the line.

Exactly, right. So now the cover itself shows God with blood all over his robe and his beard and a machine gun strapped to his back. And even without a translation of the caption, which, by the way, reads, one year after the assassin is still on the run, the meaning is obvious. Unless, of course, you give it the description offered in the Times. Quote, the cover shows a bearded man in a blood-stained robe and carrying a machine gun end quote no details on which bearded man we're talking about so you would oregon well i mean you would probably assume it was uh muhammad i mean but it could be osama

bin laden could be fucking abraham lincoln so not only did they refuse to show the cover that they themselves deemed newsworthy they refused to even accurately describe it yeah it's ridiculous for the next cover uh next cover, Charlie Hebdo, I'm picturing the UN Security Council trying to have a meeting, but there's a giant religion elephant right in the middle of the room trampling people. And of course, the Times headline would say, Ban Ki-moon goes on safari. Yeah, right. Yeah, the description is really relevant. A large mammal is shown in a room. And this story strikes me as particularly interesting, coming as it does on the heels of the story we covered last week about Pakistan censoring an article in the New York Times International because it talked about atheism.

So I guess the lesson that they took from this is that when they encounter stories that threaten religious sensibilities in the future, they should just save Pakistan the trouble. Do it preemptively. And in hydrophobic homophobia news tonight, Christian dominionist, GOP presidential candidate and NP complete problem for search engine optimizers. Rick Santorum continued his failed campaign last week, the radio appearance in Iowa, during which he unveiled his awesome new analogy about same sex marriage being contrary to the very fiber of the universe combining his extensive knowledge of chemistry and hate speech centaurum explained that allowing states to redefine marriage is just like letting them decide on a new chemical formula for water that's his well that would be as silly as thinking you could just wave your hand and suddenly the water would be wine or something. That's just stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Yeah, so apparently Santorum thinks this is an issue of federalism, gay federalism, as it relates to water molecules. Of course. That's what the presidential candidate is spending time on. As it relates to water molecules. Of course. That's what the presidential candidate is spending time on. According to Dickie Sands, quote, when you say the states have the right to define marriage, it's like saying the states have the right to redefine the chemical equation for water.

It can be H3O instead of H2O. Well, states can't do that. Why? Because nature dictates what water is. Nature dictates what marriage is. And the states don't have the right to violate what nature has dictated end quote he knows his audience he had to throw in the why because they're probably going yeah why can't they change that to more hydrogen he better finish this point no i gotta say this offends me less as an atheist and more as an analogist okay so he's got no criterion whatsoever because he can use anything it doesn't have to be related to what he's talking about apparently and the best he

can come up with is changing h2o to h3o but like they can't turn grass from green to somewhat darker green you're not even trying i'd be like calling a crocodile a crocodile wearing a hat if it wasn't wearing a hat put down the analogies before you hurt yourself man so as much as i enjoy watching rick santorum mangle the mechanics of an analogy my favorite part about this is that santorum clearly thinks h3o doesn't exist and that's the crux of his point but it does exist it's called hydronium so you're an idiot but here's the thing even if somebody explained all the chemistry to him he'd still find some kind of homophobic rant in there somewhere guaranteed right gay people are

like hydronium ions am i right am i right fucking extra proton freaks no just just take it easy just roll it back and talk about the chemistry for a second. It's ridiculous. A presidential candidate needs a hate speech wrangler. Most. Most presidential candidates. That needs to be a whole fucking industry at this point. SPLC should send their guys around.

Don't worry. I'll keep you off our list. Here's your bill. It's fine. I'll just follow you around. And in freaks and Greeks news tonight, in one of his recent bi-hourly gay apocalypse predictions colorado pastor and man skinny enough to climb out of his suit through the neck hole kevin swanson warned the listeners of generation radio that if america elects hillary as their next president she will see to it that the tremendous

majority of american kids choose gayness all right well that's that's mostly just speculation mostly yes as far as i know clinton campaign hasn't said anything about how they plan to adjust the sexuality of small children one way or the other they haven't said a word i i'm sure they'll ask about that in the next debate though so yeah yeah right we'll find out soon but that's probably nixon's secret plan on Vietnam or something. So in a Poean rant that literally including the outing of a cartoon character from How to Train Your Dragon, Swanson outlined Hillary's secret plan for what he dubbed the Greek form of education, which is apparently butt-fucking in school, like mandatory butt-fucking in school like mandatory butt fucking in school which i i think he's

implying is how the greeks educate their children that by forcing them to butt fuck but of course he doesn't he can't say butt fuck so here's how he describes it quote the greek form of education which as you know involves whatever's going on in gymnasia. Very, very ugly stuff. Okay, hold on, hold on. End quote. First of all, first of all, if Kevin Swanson had ever been to a gym once, he'd know that you get beat up if you say gymnasia. And he'd also have a little more trouble

climbing out of the neck hole of that suit if he'd been to a gym once, too. And he would also know that there's very little butt sex involved. If any, if any, depending on your trainer. But more importantly, what does he think is happening in Greek gym class? That's madness. Which part of like hetero volleyball gets switched out for sodomy in gay volleyball?

I don't understand. Dying to know now. Someone send me a video. But of course, Kevin Swanson isn't the kind of guy to blame an imaginary social problem on gobbler from how to train your dragons without also bringing solutions oh good according to swanson as though trying to offer a citation for this week's diatribe the only way to save america is to keep your children out of public schools where they're being taught to be polytheists and socialists. I love the polytheism.

Gay ones, too. Butt-fucking polytheists. Also, pornography has something to do with this. He just kind of threw it. That and divorce got thrown at the end because gays and the guy who taught Hickam to fight dragons. You can't even lampoon this shit.

And finally tonight, from the Essen emulating Jesus file file according to a recent report out of italy the sister of the immaculate convent and as many as 14 other catholic missions run by the same priest were allegedly forcing their employees to torture themselves because that's the kind of weird shit God's son was into as well. It appears this information came to light after a nun that used to be a member of that order was lucky enough to have her brainwashing wear off and realized that she was the victim of several human rights violations rather than the recipient of Jesus magic or whatever. So she told the newspaper about it and i think it's important

to emphasize that when he says torture here he doesn't just mean the torture that like being a nun in a convent would just naturally be we're talking about like the truly brutal type of shit that everybody but us would have too much tact to make jokes about yeah so according to this nun's account among other things members of the convent were being told to write vows using their own blood as ink. They had to pierce out of themselves. They were instructed to self-flagellate with a whip every night. And they were told to eat spoiled, rancid food. And despite assurances from Catholic management or whatever that Jesus can cure botulism, they got sick from stuff like botulism.

Not surprisingly. Yeah, right. And again, what makes this extra depressing is the brainwashing part. These victims weren't so much forced as they were tricked into doing horrible things willingly. Right. It's like a voluntary internment camp in there. But I feel like smiley slaves don't really justify slavery very much despite what it says in the bible about that yeah to the contrary and i think it's a real testament this story to

the power of indoctrination i mean think about how thoroughly rinsed and wrung out your brain has to be for you to not immediately balk when somebody says yeah we're going to need you to write that in your own blood like when that's not a trigger for you that this something's fucked up here you're oh man yeah and uh if anyone out there listening is playing fantasy priest scandal at home by the way person who founded all the torture convents is reverend stefano manelli damn it lots of points he got taken two picks before me in the sixth i knew i was gonna get i was sure i'd get him in the sixth all right it's not bad and uh anyway, given the recent news about Mother Teresa, it is no surprise that Mr. Minnelli is actually in the early phases of attaining sainthood.

Really? Yeah. And also, unless rule number 34 is wrong, he also very clearly owns an extensive collection of religious degradation porn, which makes me feel like it would be irresponsible for us to spend any less than 30 seconds talking about his collection of videos that involve religious people swallowing things that they're not supposed to. So just to be safe, let's not be irresponsible. Let's go ahead and put 30 seconds on the clock.

Porn titles from Father Minnelli's collection about religious people swallowing things they're not supposed to. Go. This was bound to come up eventually. Came up naturally. All right. How about a gilf point about the old lady that swallowed the fly? We're talking about the only nursery rhyme that ends with a woman choking to death while deep-throating a horse.

I don't have a title yet, but I think that could be our plot. All right. What about nunny shots? Atheism is tough to swallow, but old habits dry hard. Great. Yeah. I already had the visual image, but I appreciate it that you really dug that in. Okay.

How about we'll keep all the religions represented here. How about niqab kebabs? Grab a sausage and haram at home. What about Treif Badawi's Miracle Whip Because you know Swallowing Saudi

Atheist cum Probably is a kosher Palala Or a suck his dick These aren't my movies Ask Father Minnelli about this This story Actually got worse

I didn't think That could happen Alright how about Pastor James David Manning Starring in A Whole Latte Love Cause he's The sperm latte guy Yeah yeah How about Pastor James David Manning starring in A Whole Latte Love? Because he's the sperm latte guy.

Yeah, yeah. What about One Yolk Over the Line, Sweet Jesus? Tagline, I will not eat fertilized eggs and ham. Will not do it, Sam. We've got to get a Jewish one in here. How about Putting the Ass Back in Passover? A story of non-kosher exposure where everybody gets leavened. All right.

What about skeet cakes by Melissa? Iced by the Antichrist. And again, eating cum is the joke. No, yeah. Eating demonic cum like they force the catering staff to do at gay weddings. All right, all right. Well, that'll make this one look light. How about a Father, Son, and Holy Ghost Bukkake video called The Three Splooges? Doesn't matter if you put your hand in the middle.

Still get poked in the eye. All right, last one, last one. This is Schrodinger's Cat of Spirits. Love it. Last one. And I'm going Shakespearean for this one. Oh, nice, nice nice what about digesting hamlet two girls one couplet oh wow that was highbrow though that was highbrow

cheeks parting is such sweet sorry i shall spray good okay okay no wrong play that's why i need to stop because the wrong yeah exactly exactly if not for that we could anyway since i don't know any better way to close the headlines than a shit-gargling Shakespeare joke, we're going to wrap things up there. Heath, thanks as always. Red Rover! And when we come back, David Silverman will be here to see how long I can make it before going all fanboy on. Between October of 2006 and May of the following year, a series of four books were published that would earn their authors the collective appellation, The Four Horsemen, and mark a new chapter in the atheist

movement. This first generation of what some have dubbed new atheist literature definitively answered the why question. Why does atheism matter? Why is it important not to believe in God and not to give in to those who do? Now, since then, a number of authors have tackled the obvious next question. How? How do we effectively counter the pernicious influence of religion on our culture, our government, our families, and our children? And I would dare to say that none has done so as definitively as my next guest. David Silverman is the president of American Atheists. He's Bill O'Reilly's impromptu physical oceanography coach. And he's also the author of the new book, Fighting God, an Atheist Manifesto for a Religious World.

David, welcome to The Scathing Atheist. Noah, thank you for having me on the show. Oh, I'm so glad to finally have you on. I'm a big fan of the work you do. Oh, thank you so much. You bet. Now, before we talk about the book, I want to talk a bit about the title. Because I know that some people are going to look at the word fighting and they're going to say it's too aggressive. Some people are going to look at the word God and say it presupposes God.

And still others are going to look at the subtitle and say, well, atheism is just a lack of belief in God. How can it have a manifesto? So rather than going one by one on those, I'm just going to ask you why you chose the title that you chose. A very, very simple answer, Noah. I did not. Oh, wow. When you have a publisher, my publisher is Macmillan St. Martins.

It's one of the largest publishers in the world. My publisher is Macmillan St. Martins. It's one of the largest publishers in the world. And when you sign a contract with them, you get to have input on your title and you get to have input on your cover. But oddly enough, the title that I submitted, originally this book was called I, Atheist. And it was 50% Firebrand Atheism and 50% David Silverman. And when I submitted this book to them and they accepted me, they said, okay, take out everything about you and then fill in the rest with Firebrand Atheism.

And oh, by the way, the title I Atheist totally doesn't work. Think of something else. So I worked and I worked and what I submitted to the publisher was entitled The Atheist Art of War. Now that I like. Yes, I like it too. And they thought that was too violent. And OK, so they thought it was too literal.

They said fighting God is less about violence. It's more about the idea. God is less about violence. It's more about the idea. And fighting God as opposed to fighting the lie of God or fighting the idea of God or fighting gods or fighting God in quotes or whatever that is.

As far as they were concerned, everybody would understand that the concept of fighting a concept of God, they wanted as few letters as possible so the print could be as big as possible. When I was fighting back against that, because I didn't originally like that concept, I noticed on my bookshelf, I just happened to be talking to them on the phone while I was staring

at my bookshelf, and right in the middle of my bookshelf at eye level was God is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens. And that kind of won the argument for them. So it became Fighting God, the Atheist Manifesto for a Religious World. I picked exactly zero of those words. That was totally them. And when it comes down to it, why did they pick this title?

Because they figured it would sell more books. Right. And there's no other way around it. And so far, it's working very well. I do like the fact – I mean there's a certain guerrilla marketing involved here. If you look back at our – at the American Atheist Billboards in 2014, it was a little girl writing a letter to Santa Claus saying, all I want for Christmas is to skip church. I'm too old for fairy tales. And people were arguing, you know, she's writing to one fairy tale

and she doesn't believe in another. She's writing to Santa Claus and she doesn't believe in God. And this does the exact same thing. It gets people talking. Yes, they're complaining. Yes, they're criticizing. I don't care. And you can see this when you look online, when you look on the Twitter feed for Fighting God,

you can see Christians tweeting out, you know, hey, there's this book called Fighting God. They obviously believe God exists. They're talking about your book, yeah. That's fine. Who are they tweeting to? They're tweeting to the Christians and the closeted atheists who are following them.

And so they're being used as a marketing tool. It's the same thing I did in 2014. It's the same thing I did with You Know It's a Myth. And I've always talked about using theists as a marketing tool, and this is exactly what it does. Yeah, right, right. Obviously, the provocation is having some effect. Now, I've got to say, I love this book. I thought the first chapter alone was worth the price of admission.

In it, you offer up the most compelling and comprehensive argument that I've ever heard for owning the label atheists. Yeah. So let me open that discussion with a question that's been infesting my inbox of late. Why does it matter what we call ourselves? Okay. So in the end of Fighting God, I talk about how many atheists there really are in this country. And I have a number in the end of Fighting God that's defensible. It's aggressive. It's admittedly aggressive, but it is defensible that we're about 27% atheist in this country right now.

Now, according to the polls, self-described atheists are about 2.5% of this country. So that means 90% of the atheists in this country don't call themselves atheists. They call themselves anything else. Agnostic, secular this, secular that, nun, bright, humanist, Jew, Muslim, Christian. They call themselves anything and everything to call themselves. Now, let's just take for the most obvious example, George W. Bush. He's a president and he gets a call from the Pope, and the Pope says, stem cell research is bad, you should ban it. And he says, okay. And I maintain that that

would not have happened, that that kind of stuff would not have happened if we were known, if we were united, if we didn't push ourselves apart from each other, if we actually used the right word to convey the correct message, I don't think we would have lost stem cell research. I don't think we would have Jesus in the history books. I don't think we would have Moses as a founding father. I don't think we would have any of the problems or at least many of the problems that we have right now. It's a direct result, in my opinion, of the problems or at least many of the problems that we have right now, it's a direct result, in my opinion, of the fact that everybody thinks atheists are few and far between when we're nearly, when we're more than a quarter of the country. And that's why I say that it is my

business what atheists call themselves. So often people say, don't tell me what to call myself. No, I am going to tell you what to call yourself because it's my business, because my life and my livelihood and my life expectancy, my quality of life expectancy is lower today because atheists don't call themselves atheists. And that goes for every person in the country, every citizen of the world. Every time religion gets in the way of science, it's our fault for staying silent. It's our fault for dividing ourselves from power. I mean, think about it. If you go out into the street and you ask a Methodist what his religion is, he'll say Christian. You ask a Presbyterian, he'll say Christian.

You ask a Catholic, he'll say Christian. Even if you ask a Mormon, he'll say Christian. They unite themselves despite huge differences. And we, atheists, we divide ourselves over nothing, over literally nothing. And we make ourselves look tiny, and we make ourselves look powerless, and we make the other guys look strong because we refuse to unite. Because we don't want to be part of a group. We don't want to be a joiner.

Or worse than that, we don't want to call ourselves an atheist. Now think about it, Noah. What's exactly the best thing for atheists to do as far as religion is concerned? as religion is concerned. Next to converting, the best thing for them to do is to stay quiet, call themselves something other than atheist, and shut the hell up. That's the best thing they can do for religion, and that's what we're doing en masse. And that's why it's important for us to understand that we have a responsibility to ourselves, a responsibility to each other, and a responsibility to this

country and indeed to this world to come out as atheists by name. And not just to the pollsters, but also to the people we meet on the street who ask, you know, what church do you go to, etc. You also made the great point that if we avoid the term atheist in that instance, we're just passing that bigotry on to the next guy and that's it i mean you're you're if you're going to pass that bigotry on and that's exactly what you're doing okay let's just take the stereotype of i'm talking to a person that i know doesn't like atheists and he asked me what my religion is and i answer with some stupid ass name that nobody knows what that knows what it maybe humanist. By the way, 90%, approximately 90% of the country doesn't know what a humanist is. So I say, oh, I'm a humanist.

And he says, oh, well, at least you're not an atheist. And he walks away. And then the next atheist that that atheophobe meets is going to get a face full of anger. On the other hand, if I call myself an atheist, I get that face full of anger. It's okay. I can handle it. And then the next atheist that that guy meets is going to get less of a face full. That's why calling yourself an atheist is in and of itself activism. And that's why calling yourself an atheist is more humanistic than calling yourself a humanist because you're taking it on the chin. You're killing bigotry and you're making it better for the next person.

Well said, man. Well said. It's not just a logical imperative. It is a moral obligation. Now, if you don't mind, I'd like to talk a little bit about firebrand atheism because it seems like in a lot of ways I've been watching you swim upstream on behalf of this movement for six years, often taking heated criticism from within, and despite empirical evidence that your tactics are working, I still hear the naysayers dismissing them, deriding them, denouncing them. And this is something I've always wondered. Perhaps you have some insight on this. Why are people so resistant to firebrand tactics? Well, it's because we're all brainwashed, okay? We're all victims of the brainwashing,

and we've all been exposed to this idea that religion deserves to be put on a pedestal, that religion deserves respect, that when people have closely held religious beliefs, that's the time for us atheists to step back and say, oh, okay, well, that's different. Well, it's not different, okay? And the analogy that I use is my mother, who used to go to a psychic, and she didn't have a lot of money, and went to a psychic and I got right up in her face one day and I said, don't you go to the psychic anymore? And I convinced her not to go anymore. And that was the right thing to do. That was the moral thing to do because psychics are scams.

Psychics are cons. Psychics are liars. And religion is nothing better. We put religion on a pedestal. It's okay for me to talk down about psychics to my mother, but if I talk down about her closely held religious beliefs, I'm destroying something that she holds dear. Bullshit.

What we're doing is stopping a lie. What we're doing is stopping a scam and helping the victims out of it. But we are all victims of that scam too. We all feel that because we've been told over and over again that closely held religious beliefs are somehow above everyone else. And if we're to work in a situation, if we're to work as a society, we have to yield to the pedestal of religion. If they think that there's an invisible magic man in the sky that says it's okay to do this or do that and break this law and break that law, we have to say, okay. Well, we don't. And when we do say okay, we are making ourselves second-class citizens. We are doing, once again, exactly what religion wants us to do. Shut up,

once again exactly what religion wants us to do. Shut up, sit down, and give religion respect even when it's not deserved. Noah, religion deserves no respect at all. It's a lie, it's a con, it's a scam, and it deserves to die. You're absolutely preaching to the choir here, but in the interest of playing devil's advocate, I'll ask, can't we be honest and speak up without being as provocative? Well, what's the difference between being honest and speaking up and being provocative? If I say I'm an atheist, I'm being provocative to some people. If I'm saying there is no God, I'm being provocative. In fact, just simply just living my life is provocative to some people. I get so many death threats. It's ridiculous. And when I say – and when we talk about being provocative, what are we talking about?

I don't call religious people stupid. I call believing a lie stupid. It's a stupid thing to do. I don't call religious people morons. I don't want to hurt religious people. We provoke no violence. But religion is a scam. Religion is a con. And it is an ethical and moral imperative

to fight it. We don't need to coddle it. Religion has all the coddling it gets, it needs from the government and from the majority that it has. And of course, from all the money that it has, which of course comes from our pockets. So given the fact that religion takes money from us, takes rights from us, invades our lives and does not leave us or anyone alone, I don't see why we need to protect it from being provocative. I don't see why we need to give it even the slightest bit of respect

and by the way, it's not provocative to tell the truth. Telling the truth against a horrible lie is a good deed. If somebody is telling the truth about tarot card readers, is he being provocative? No. He's being helpful.

He's doing good work. If somebody exposes a con, a scam, if they have the news stories on your local news about these unethical business people doing unethical things, are they being provocative? No. They're exposing a con. And we are doing the exact same thing. And we should be very proud of everything that we do, because we're doing good by the people who think we're doing bad by. Right, even at their great resistance, again, even within the atheist movement, a lot of these people, you kind of have to drag them kicking and

screaming over the finish line. So let me shift gears here a little bit. One of the most common questions that I hear from my listeners is, you know, what can I do? And in the past, I've done my best to point them towards local groups or secular charities that are in need of volunteers and donations. But I think after reading your book, my new answer is going to be the title of your sixth chapter, Be Everywhere. You might give us a bit of a summary on what you mean by that. And being everywhere starts out with calling yourself an atheist, right? So being everywhere starts with calling yourself an atheist. And just to divert the point, it's calling yourself an atheist, not calling yourself an agnostic or a secular or whatever, or whatever, or whatever.

Call yourself an atheist because that's what's understood by 90% of the population. But it's more than that. I wear my atheism on my sleeve and I'm proud to do so. The most obvious place where people can do a lot of good right now is in politics. And the big program that American Atheist is pushing right now is the Atheist Voter Campaign. And the Atheist Voter Campaign is simply doing that. It's being out as a voter and as an atheist, going to meet candidates wearing atheist voter shirts and asking questions. I'm an atheist and I would like to know this. I'm an atheist and I would like to hear your opinion of that. This is the kind of thing that puts atheism into the conversation, even if the question isn't about atheism. And even if the question isn't about atheism, I'm an atheist and I'm concerned about your position on separation of church and state or even gun control or anything else. The purpose is to get out and to be seen as atheists because we have to normalize atheism in order to get the people who don't call themselves atheists to call themselves atheists. We have to normalize it. We have to make it not bad. We have to make it not bad. We have to make it not scary.

And the way we do that is to make it there, to make it exist, to make it not absent, to make them not the first atheist to come out. So if there are people out there who are interested in doing something that has a big bang for your activism buck, we have atheist voter shirts. Atheistvoter.org is the name of the website.

Go there. You get shirts and just basically you wear those shirts and you go see candidates while wearing the shirts, Atheist Voter Shirts, Atheist Voter bumper stickers, all that stuff just to make sure that they know they're talking to an atheist. And if you can, get a question in. Ask the question.

Ask any question you want as long as it starts with I'm an atheist and I'd like to know what. And get it recorded and we'll put it up on the website and people will see that we are actually doing – people will see that we're actually involved and the candidates will see that we're actually involved. And the interesting thing, Noah, is that we have gotten some recordings from some very surprising people. There's a recording of Chris Christie talking about the separation of church and state that I completely agree with. Wow. Yes. And this is something that I was really, really surprised at. Now, yeah, politicians talk out of one side of the mouth and then the other side of the mouth. I get that. But at least now they're talking to us.

At least now they're seeing us. They're addressing us. They're using the word atheist. They're acknowledging us. They're seeing us as a part of the process. And this is the first major step to getting people coming out en masse. Awesome, man. And, of course, atheistvoter.org. We'll have it linked on the show notes And this is the first major step to getting people coming out en masse. Awesome, man. And of course, atheistvoter.org, we'll have it linked on the show notes for this episode.

All right, so I've made it almost all the way through this interview without fanboying at all. So I'm going to reward myself with a tiny bit right here. I honestly don't know that there's any single person that's more responsible for my move into atheist activism than you. Without the work that you've done, I almost certainly would be doing something a lot less rewarding and a lot less important with my life. Can't thank you enough for that, but I'm going to thank you anyway. So thank you. And here's hoping I can say it to you again in person at the Reason Rally on June 4th in Washington, D.C.

Thank you, Noah. That's very nice of you. And I really enjoy hearing that. I love that story. Thank you so much. I appreciate that. You bet. You bet.

And of course, if you want to pick up a copy of the book, and trust me, you do, the title once again is Fighting God, an Atheist Manifesto for a Religious World. You can get it wherever good books are sold. You can also pick it up as an audiobook read by the author, which I recommend, or of course, you can get it on Kindle or your e-book provider of choice. And if you'd like to see David live, you can check out atheists.org, I'm sorry, atheists.org slash fighting God, where you can find the stops on his book tour, which will also be linked on the show notes for this episode. David, thanks again for your time, sir. Thank you so much, Noah, for having me on.

Before we lower the blinds tonight, I wanted to give David's book, The Hard Sell, one more time. There will be links to pick up a copy of his book on the show notes for this episode at skatingatheist.com, and I truly cannot recommend it enough. I said it on Facebook and Twitter, and I stand by it. This might be the most important atheist book published since 2007. 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 much-awaited, brand-new episode of our sister show, The Skeptocrats, debuting on Monday at 8 a.m. Eastern, and, of course, an equally brand-new episode of our sister show's brother show, Godawful Movies, a mere 24 hours later. Obviously, it wouldn't be a show if I didn't thank Heath for never stopping short of way too far. I also need to thank the lovely and talented Lucinda Lusions for all the loveliness and the talent.

I need to give one more big thanks to David Silverman for taking time out in the middle of a hectic book tour to chat with me tonight. I also want to offer a quick thanks to Trav Mamone from the By Any Means podcast, that's B-I-By, by the way, for providing a Farnsworth quote which will forever haunt Ken Ham's nightmares. If you'd like to check out his podcast, you'll find links on the show notes for this episode as well. But most of all, of course, I need to thank this week's best bundles of Baryonic matter, Seth, Jeffrey, James, Michael, Bob, Andy, Juan, Kenobi, Mara, Matt, Sean, and Joe. Seth, Jeffrey, and James, whose Powerballs are worth a hell of a lot, than one and a half billion dollars.

Michael, Bob, and Andy, Juan, Kenobi, whose penises, Edward, Bo, were light and was thinking of when he a lot, than one and a half billion dollars. Michael Bob and Andy Juan Kenobi, whose penises Edward Bull were light and was thinking of when he wrote that thing about them being mightier than swords. Mara, Matt, and Sean, whose mighty fists serve as the backup in case one of the proton beams goes down at the LHC. And Joe, who's so hot your smoke detector

probably went off when I said his name. Together, this decorated decouplet of decided disbelievers declared their dedication to our declamations about declawing the decrepit decay of the clerics and helped decrease the degree that decrees on their decalogue our declamations about declawing the decrepit decay of the clerics and help decrease the degree that decrees on their decalogue and decadence dictate decriminalization this week by giving us money. Not everybody has the money to give us money,

but if you do, you can make a per episode donation at patrion.com slash skating atheists, whereby you'll earn early access to an extended edition of every episode, or you can make a one-time donation by clicking on the donate button on the right side of the homepage at skating atheist.com. And if you'd like to help, but you had to burn all your money to keep warm you can also help us a ton by leaving a five-star review on itunes or by sharing the show with a friend you can also

follow us on twitter and or like us on facebook because that would be nice 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 truly and yes I did have my permission puppy rapist keeps looking at me just shit