There is such a thing as a semi-intelligent Christian. As there's a lack of a better word, let's just say they're the ones who "believe" in science as well as religion. This is opposed to lobotomized zombies who cry, "Repent your sins, evil atheists, or our kind and loving God will send you to burn in hell for an eternity, as any loving father would." But even with these semi-intelligent Christians, whom I like, because they are such a stark contrast to the crazies, there is worry in my mind.
It's obvious I do not like religion, and Christianity is the one I write about most, because it is most relevant. Arguably, Islam is the worst religion of the twenty-first century. Their wackos are, well, maybe not more wacko than Christian wackos, but they're more violent. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of comments by Christians who suggest certain individuals should be executed for being traitors and unpatriotic, amongst whom we find a certain president who wasn't born in America, as some would have you believe. If one disagrees with Christian extremists, they're un-American and unpatriotic. Sigh. That said, I am un-American, since I'm not American. I don't see that as a bad thing, necessarily.
But my problem with Christianity in the twenty-first century isn't the violence; most Christians have moved away from, "Let's kill heathens." The ones that haven't are mostly talk, no action, which is fortunate; it's hard to keep a civilization civilized if the citizens aren't civil. My problem with Christianity is twofold.
First of all, something that applies to mostly only the retarded... poor terminology. Something that applies to mostly only the brainwashed Christians is the complete and utter disregard for proof dangling before their eyes. "Global warming? Nah, that can't be true. Only God can change the weather, which he does as he pulls the sun around the Earth." Good logic is good. This is the most dangerous problem I see with religion. We are treading water here, with important issues like climate change. And climate change policies are not even about saving the planet; they are about saving humanity. The planet has, indeed, gone through numerous climate changes, all of which led to mass extinctions, just like this one is causing as you read this. The difference with this one is that it is occurring during our lifetimes, threatening our very existence. It's undeniably caused by man; actually, it is clearly not undeniable, as millions of uneducated, ill-informed humans, for whom I feel sorry, deny it like drug addicts deny they have a problem. Conservatives do, indeed, need their daily fix of stupid!
Christianity goes against what is best for mankind—all of us, so not just men; not just white men; not just white, straight men; not just white, straight men, born in wealthy families; but ALL HUMANS. And not merely humans, but fellow animals, with which we share this beautiful planet. We kill off species, as though they are loose teenagers from a slasher movie. We're arrogant in the thinking it doesn't matter because only humans are important and the complete and utter annihilation of a living creature couldn't possibly touch us. We're not at all dependent on... let's say, bees? Yes, we're dependent on the creatures all around us, many smaller and "less significant" than we are.
While I cannot say I am a big fan of disease-bearing rats, I still reject the notion of calling them "pests". Yes, they do cause trouble, but why are we so arrogant as to think they don't deserve life because they're a nuisance to us? I'm not a bullshit activist and I'm not saying rats are more important than humans, as it would be crazy, but this fucking dogma that human life is the only life that matters is something that disgusts me. Surely, if a superior species of aliens comes across our puny world, they will treat us like we treat the creatures around us. What goes around must also come around, and if we're lucky it hits us in the head and knocks us unconscious instantaneously.
What annoys me infinitely is conservative absurdity and arrogance, the thought that mankind is the center of everything. But something else that affects my views of not only blind Christians, but semi-intelligent ones, is they worship the deity on which the Christian faith is centered. I mean, he's so obviously wholly evil, with his murdering of firstborns for the sins of their parents; his genocide of man and beast alike, in a humane way like drowning; his testing of our faith by ruining our lives to see if we'll still worship him; his sending us to hell, for failing the test of belief, even though we might be good people; and finally his hunger for power and desire for us to be slaves, lest we be tortured in hell. Who would want to worship this god? Who could justify it, what he has done? Nobody considered intelligent could see God as a just and fair being, at least not based on the Bible and perhaps more accurately the Old Testament. To be fair, Christians do take the New Testament, which is a little bit more peaceful, more seriously.
And I also don't see how one can be a Christian and believe in the perfect God, upon whom the perfect book called the Bible is based, but also reject some of what it teaches. It's sorta like saying you believe in molecules, but not all the atoms. It makes no sense. It's great that these "intelligent" Christians chuck out all the hate and bigotry. The Bible pretty directly states women are the property of the fathers, until they get married, at which time the ownership is transferred to the groom. Sounds great if you're a man, right? "Spread your legs, bitch, or I'll punch you." It's not all about sex, but also stuff like making sandwiches. Men are considered better, which isn't weird, since the Bible was written during a time that wasn't very enlightened.
But while I do think it's great Christians understand the Bible is not flawless and that some of its messages are blatantly horrific, it is in and of itself dumb to pick what to follow and what not to follow. If it is supposed to be the word of God, why is so much of the Bible bad? Was God high when he wrote the immoral stuff? Like… SLAVERY or misogyny? If one sees some parts as truth, why are the others in a separate category?
Personally, I think it is crap. This, of course, means Christians will think I am an angry atheist who is possessed by the devil and working against God, who is so perfect and good that he feels a need to drown people. I resent that argument, and especially the part that I am "angry" because I don't believe in God. I'm not angry; I am just frustrated about attempting to convince a brick wall to move, if only by merely an inch. If I say, "Here's proof," and the Christian says, "Who needs proof when there's faith," of course I'll get frustrated! The basics of argumentation is both parties present what they see as valid facts, and the outcome can possibly be one party changes their mind, realizing, "Oh my, I never thought of it like that." But discussing religion, or for that matter politics, with a religious nutcase is like trying to convince a dog to take a shit in the toilet. And then flush.