Archive for the ‘Social Issues’ Category

European History, Science, and Eternal Life

So I’m taking European history this year in school and I have this teacher whom I’m rather fond of. She’s not exactly a fundamentalist Christian, but she is at least moderately Christian. Today we mentioned the scientific revolution while studying about the witch trials and she goes on a small tangent that goes something along the lines of…

So are you going to put your faith in the scientific revolution? Tell that to a dying cancer patient! Science isn’t going to get you eternal anything.

So it’s not exactly standing up and preaching, but it is sort of clear that she’s trying to convince her audience (public school students) that they need to worry about how they’re getting eternal life and science is useless because of that.

Of course, I disagree with her argument. Epistemology does not get chucked out the window as soon as you’re uncomfortable with what it says because that would be beside the point of having an epistemology (unless you’re of the truth-is-whatever-makes-me-feel-comfortable-with-death-ists). I’m more concerned with how I live the life I know that I have than with another life which can be verified about as convincingly as Invisible Pink Unicorns.

But here’s the thing… for the most part this teacher does not talk about her personal dislike of science, but this is not an isolated incident. It’s happened once or twice before. Do I…

  1. Let it drop
  2. Just speak out in class the next time
  3. Start recording and call the ACLU (I list this in jest… sort of)
  4. Do something else?

Oh, and why the bloody hell do people like to bandy about the word “faith” to people who happen to like science and reason? The most faith involved in science is that this isn’t all some giant hallucination that we’re all sharing, or that we’re hallucinating that people are sharing the same reality. It’s a small amount of faith, yes, but I think of it more as agnostic disbelief. I can’t prove that I’m hallucinating and I can’t prove that I’m not… but if this is a hallucination, it sure is an elaborate one and no harm is done in carrying on with 99.9% certainty.

Advertisements

“Dora the Fashionista with Stylish Purse and Stilettos”: A Fashion Lesson from a Girl Who Doesn’t Know Nothin’ About Fashion

So here’s the deal. Dora the Explorer is expanding into new horizons and audiences and a “tweenage” version of the popular, young cartoon character has been unveiled which will be made into an “interactive doll” (whatever that means).

Parents are pissed. They think that the new Dora is too “sexed up” and the description of her in the above linked article does not help:

Next fall, Dora the Explorer may be trading in her androgynous bob and shorts for big hair, pumps and a miniskirt.

Even better is the petition that is now online, with over 11,000 signatures already, which declares in the opening rant:

Alas, we saw the signs. The cute flower lip gloss, the pinkified look, the sudden separation of Dora and Diego shows. We could have, should have predicted this after we saw the likes of Strawberry Shortcake, Holly Hobby, and Trollz (now with the ubiquitous commodified girl power “z”), all made over in the cute sexy way that marketers sell maturity to girls–the sassy wink, the long flowing hair, the thin waist, the turned out hip pose of practiced lingerie models.

Oh noes! I sense a slippery slope coming up…

What next? Dora the Cheerleader? Dora the fashionista with stylish purse and stilettos? Dora the Pop Star with Hoppin’ Dance Club and “Juice” Bar? We can expect it all, because that’s what passes as “tween” in the toy department these days.

Aahhhhh! And then God will smite all of America and there will be plagues of locusts and blood raining from the skies!

Hold on. What exactly does this new sexed up Dora doll look like?

This:

OMG, like, she looks like... such a whore!

Oh kay… Now, I don’t spend a lot of time worrying about fashion. If an outfit requires more than one minute of thought to put together it’s not worth it for me, and the same goes for hairstyles, but those are hardly pumps and a mini-skirt, k?

She happens to wearing a type of shoe known as “ballet flats” (i.e. these) which I should think are more conservative than sexed up. Hell, even some mary janes have a bit of a heel.

That is not a mini-skirt. It’s… well, I don’t know the term for this, but the point is she’s wearing it over leggings. She has her legs covered and they’re not covered in nylons or fishnets. It’s leggings. I have personal feelings about the aethetics of girls wearing leggings which I will not comment on (because who am I to comment on fashion?), but the key thing is she has her legs covered and it’s not nylons or fishnets. It’s leggings which are sort of like… skin-tight-ish capris.

I think when it comes to leggings, the place where even the prudest of parents should draw the line, which happens to be where my school’s dress code draws it, is when it’s just leggings and a t-shirt and nothing really to cover anything below the waist.

What are you dressing your girls in anyway? Heel-length dresses and petticoats? Are you members of the FLDS or something?

Back to the petition:

We don’t need any more tween dolls teaching girls that growing up means turning into a fashionista, excited about secrets and crushes and going shopping.

What’s wrong with fashion, secrets, crushes, and going shopping? I hardly get excited about shopping, fashion, and secrets, but I don’t have a problem with being dragged out to the mall once in a while. My only qualms with that would be if were the only thing tweens get excited about. There is, after all, a whole other universe out there.

Any other complaints?

We don’t need dolls that replicate the thin ideal. The APA Sexualization of Girls Task Force report shows that teens only rarely achieve this body type and when they don’t they are vulnerable to depression and body image problems.

Body image is a valid concern, but are you bloody kidding me? I can’t really tell in real life people, or from animated people but she hardly looks like a size 0. If anything the dress-thing, while fashionable, may make her look like she’s not entirely flat around the belly.

Sure, all of the above are valid concerns, but I think that they’re obviously misplaced in the case of the new Dora. Feel free to disagree with me. Like I said, I don’t know nothin’ about fashion either way.

But I can sympathise. Fashion is not the most important thing in the world. Not by a long shot. I’m going back to reading about science now.

Is Twilight-Fandom a Problem?

we’ve been blogging about abortion, politics, religion and boobs. turns out, people want to read about Twilight and guys wearing headsets

Elyse

I honestly don’t care about Twilight anymore. I never really continued after chapter 14. The best way to describe the book’s plot is the Douglas Adams quote “For a moment, nothing happened. Then, after a second or so, nothing continued to happen,” except nothing continued to happen for 300 pages.

Given the commenters on my post I wrote on Teen Skepchick, and MasalaSkeptic’s post on Old Skepchick I’ve since given up on doing what I had originally set out to do: Get people to think critically about a popular cultural phenomenon.

The key thing is I never advocated banning the book, nor did I truly ever say that there was a problem.
To quote myself in my post…

The way a girl reacts to a fictional novel is most likely not the same way she would react in real life. To be perfectly honest, I don’t actually think there’s much to worry about, but I do think that it can only be healthy to point out more often that the level of stalkerishness in Twilight might be on par with the level of stalkerishness in Lolita.

All I ever really sought to promote was not to get teenagers all across America to drop Twilight and begin reading Demon Haunted World (although I would like to promote reading Demon Haunted World), but to just use that as a way to stimulate some discussion of the book.

What do I get? A bunch of angry comments with poor grammatical skills and a lot of ad hom.

Special commendation is to be given to this commenter for what I found to be a rather polite, well-reasoned dissenting comment, although I do disagree with her. The issue about Edward’s stalkerishness that I find potentially worrisome is not that he’s unaware of his stalkerishness but that Bella, and the droves of readers are. Also, even if Edward is hormonally a teenage boy, he still has quite a lot of experience which should have given him a fair amount more wisdom.

Truly, I’d like to say it’s just a minor annoyance, but it’s not. It would seem to me that these people follow Twilight more religiously than religious people follow their religions. I’ve seen civilized conversations between religious people and people critical of religion. I’ve yet to see civilized conversations between Twilight fans and those critical of Twilight.

Perhaps it is far too extreme to say that Twilight fans follow Twilight religiously, but they get offended in the same way as religious people do to the point of saying…

You have no right to say that and u ought to keep ur opinions to yourself!

One blogger suggested that Maria would have angry mobs go after her if she didn’t take down her post. I really doubt that anybody would really kill for Twilight, and I really doubt that they are offended enough to do any sort of violent action. Let me make this clear: There is no evidence to suggest that Twilighters are offended to the point of forming violent mobs.

But they certainly get offended enough that they seem to want to leave behind all civilized, reasoned discussion.

Forget the stalkerishness, the creationism, the Mormonism. The readers are obviously not going to face any problems because that sort of thing is idealized as long as they’re thinking. The real reason why Twilight is  a problem is because people are so fervent about it that they stop all rational discourse.

On the other hand, I’m going to say that in the real world the vast majority of the Twilight fans are perfectly reasonable. They know that the things being idealized in Twilight are silly, but they just read it for entertainment and that is wholely, perfectly fine. But we may want to keep an eye on the rabid Internet fangirls.

I want to say that there isn’t much of a problem, but I think there does seem to be some encouragement of not using intelligence going on here in the phenomenon of Twilight fandom. It would be idiocy to suggest that there is a causal relationship between reading Twilight and having YouTube-quality comments. I don’t think that Twilight makes people stupid. But there seems to be something going on here.

I’d like to open this up to the readers:

Is Twilight-fandom a problem or is it just an extension of the general Internet discourse expected from the masses? Should we do anything about it?

Personally, I just want them to go away, for my posts to sink into oblivion, but then, maybe I will do what I set out to do and get just one or two of those Twilight fans to think about what they’re doing for a little while.

Cue the angry Internet Twilightites.

Just Read and Weep

*sigh*

So I send out the FFRF lawsuit thing to my friends in the school district. Here are the responses I’ve been getting. I’m not going to bother giving any further responses to the latest two as easily as I could pwn them.

Kid:

this is disgusting
i fail to see whats wrong with an environment that teaches children basic morals and values

Me:

I fail to see why you need to violate the secular values this country was founded on to teach morals.

While I’m at it, Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Therefore your argument is invalid.

Kid:

im not christian so i dont follow your argument

besides, said sign is encouraging freedom of religion cuz it encourages religion in general which could range from budhism to atheism
the ffrf is just trying to restrict religion or in other words, violating the 1st secular value this country was founded

and

how is teaching kids values such as the ten commandments not morrally right
or do you have issue with not stealing or being respectful to parental figures

i guess their perfect world would be one in which their is one philisophical belief: nothing
and in this world their would be no guidlines to living a fullfilling and ethical life and any attempt to disrupt this eutopia would result in a lawsuit that helps no one

Me:

You’re all over the place.

First of all, the FFRF isn’t saying you can’t practice your religion. It’s saying you have a right to not practice religion if you don’t want to.

Speaking of the 1st secular value this country was founded on…

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

In other words, there shall be no state endorsement of religion.

The Ten Commandments do say a few agreeable things. Don’t steal, don’t kill, don’t be mean to your parents, etc. Let’s ignore for a moment that they recommend the death penalty for all of them (and even if you support capital punishment as I do in some cases, we can surely agree that you shouldn’t be killed for not helping your mum do the dishes cause you have homework), and look at the first four of them.

1. I am the Lord your God
2. You shall have no other gods before me
3. You shall not make for yourself an idol
4. You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God

Not much room for polytheists, eh?

Now, if the state were to endorse these four commandments there would be no freedom of religion. That’s why we also need freedom from religion.

I also reject your suggestion that Atheists have no philosophical beliefs about morality, and that we can have a fulfilling life. What have I ever done to you, hm? Are you really going to insinuate that I’m a murdering, raping, pillaging, disrespectful twat based on my lack of belief in a supreme deity alone? What makes you think that kind of sick prejudice is morally justifiable?

I volunteer every weekend in a museum, I give money to charities, I’m polite, and, God damn it, I enjoy life. I think that the universe is an awesome place and I have some wonderful friends, teachers, and family. I’m no less happy than the next person.

Kid:

first of all
you are focusing in to much on specifics zoom out a bit
the ffrf is sueing because a sign was posted by a school district saying that kids can find support in a religious community

if you have ever been to a sunday school type program they dont actually force religious beliefs upon the kids, but teach them essential values such as not to steal and to do right by your mom and dad, not the gory details, so that one day they will be able to make an educated decision on what beliefs to follow

advocating for that isnt a breach of church and state
so if they were forced to take that sign down it would be interfering with their free speach rights

im sure this wouldnt be a problem if their was an established religion called atheism
but since there isnt they can still stand and openly oppose all religion and sucessfully combat moral values

you are twisting my words
i am saying that by the forceful taking down of this sign is setting a precedent by which any good that could come to children by means of religious establishment can not be advocated by a school district, or basically any secular force in society henceforth placing personal beliefs over the common good

also i never said anything about classifying atheist as possesing no morals
i respect all religions, and more importantly the support and good that can come from religious institutions, which is why im advocating the side of what is most likely the lutheran church even though i desagree wholeheartedly with many of their views

i dont respect the general denouncement of religion, which is the problem i have with most atheists
i dont have a problem with people saying they dont believe in a higher power or any of the other beliefs held by atheist, but when they go on to criticize established religion and say that it holds no validity i have a problem

Me:

I have been to a Sunday school program. They told me a story about a guy who got eaten by a big fish and stayed in its stomach for three days, and was told that he was punished for not following the Judeo-Christian god. They then essentially told me I was a sinner and that I was going to Hell if I didn’t keep coming to their church.

Do I necessarily object just because it’s religious values being advocated? No.

I do, by the way, go to a Unitarian Universalist church. I do enjoy the sense of community, and being taught values like being nice to each other without having them invoke their particular brand of god.

Yes, they teach you values, but what makes you think you have to go to a CHURCH to learn those values? What you get support from is having a community and there are other ways to find a strong community without being told you should participate in religion every week. If I don’t want to participate in a religious thingy to learn my values, I shouldn’t be told to.

First of all, taking the sign down is not criticising established religion. It’s just saying that the government can’t endorse an establishment of religion. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech, but everything to do with the first amendment.

Second of all, why shouldn’t we be allowed to criticise establishments of religion? I have no problem with people practicing what they want. No problem with freedom of religion at all. The problem is sometimes those practices include actively screwing with government and taking away other people’s civil rights. There are people just two and a half hours south of Denver who would stone people for privately, in their own home, committing a consensual act of love with a person of the same sex. Would you hesitate to criticise a piece of legislation that advocated that?

The rest was just me pointing out again that I have no problem with community, but you don’t need a religious community to get a feeling of community.

Other kid:

Hey, why dont we go ahead and take more money away from our already poorly funded school systems with a lawsuit. Our state is only 48th in the nation in school funding. So yes, lets take money away, lay off teachers, increase classroom sizes, and neglect building maintenance and upgrading. Heaven forbid the ONE plaintif be offended.
Ive been in this school district for almost 11 years, and not once have those 40 assets had any impact upon my education or the way i live. I have known that they exist for a long time, but hardly any students take the time to read them. Our constitution was also loosely based on teachings from relligion. In god we trust is written on every piece of our monetary system. Why dont you sue the entire government. See how far that gets you.
I am christian, and i dont care if the quaran is referenced in one of those assets, or nothing is referenced at all. Good can be derived from almost any religious text or not from one at all. Borden your horizon

As far as I’m aware the lawsuit has nothing to do with money and I’m not sure where she got that from. I’ll look into whether or not money’s involved anyway, but I’m pretty sure it’s class-action cause that’d make the most sense.

Other other kid:

Sorry, quick question. What are the other 39 “Developmental Assets” implemented by this program?

Also, I fail to see the harm in recommending that a child adopt a religious lifestyle. Please, before you all bitch me out-
All that this program does is RECOMMEND that a child adopt a religious lifestyle, which means that the child gets a choice. By simply recommending that a child make that choice, there isn’t technically any ammendment “breakage” here. If the document flat out said “you must worship this particular god or you will burn in hell,” then there would be an issue. This document doesn’t seem to be laying down a certain set of rules and regulations for a child to follow, just suggestions. It isn’t actively forcing anything on children here. But then again, I can see how that poster could be considered propoganda. In which case, it becomes a matter of what’s legal and what’s right.

For all you students out there who went through the first year of US History with me and forgot the first amendment, here’s the text:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

And in case you missed that, I think I’ll make it clearer. The government can’t endorse religion. My school paid for a subscription to the Oxford English Dictionary, but endorse means to support.

If they still fail to see what the problem is… to Hell with it. Edumacation has failed us. This post has a word count of 1776.

Why I’m Proud to be Coloradoan

Ah… Colorado. The upcoming DNC, Focus on the Family, and Stan Romanek. A list of reasons why I am so fucking proud to be Coloradoan right now:

1. CBN is claiming that the Bible could be censored in Colorado due to Section 8 of Senate Bill 08-200.

Mmm… Legalese, I know. But it basically just says that you don’t get to publish things that would discriminate on the basis of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry if you work for a place that offers some form of public accomodation. The big question is if this means employees can’t do this in their private time or if they’re only restricted to not doing it through the business. If they’re only restricted to not doing it through the business then the worst that could happen would be the Bibles they leave in motel rooms would have to be removed but only if you could prove that it does discriminate against sexual orientation. It doesn’t mean you couldn’t keep a Bible on your shelf at home.

Via Skepchick

2. Oh, and you know how everybody’s hyped up about the DNC? The inter-faith panel won’t include the second largest religious group in America, those without faith. The Secular Coalition for America protested this and an opinion article appeared in the Colorado Springs Gazette on the subject:

Yet an amazing number of atheists have taken to confronting and insulting believers of other religions. They pretend that atheist beliefs are proven true, while others are proven false.

It’s not so much that I am (or any atheist I know is) aiming to insult religious people as I am aiming to criticise their beliefs. I respect good people. Not stupid beliefs. If they don’t like me not respecting zombie Jesus then they don’t have to respect my belief in dancing pink unicorns on Neptune. At the end of the day, if they want to come with me to get some gelato or lunch and just hang out I’m fine with that… even if they believe in a 6,000 year old Earth.

I don’t believe that my beliefs are proven or that religious beliefs are disproven so much as I believe that religious beliefs aren’t proven and are highly improbable. I’m open to evidence like the Ten Commandments suddenly appearing on the moon in letters so big you can see them with binnoculars or something appearing magically.

Hitler imagined a world without Jews. The Freedom From Religion Foundation rented a billboard near the Colorado Convention Center that says: “Imagine No Religion.”

Ok, ok. John Lennon was Hitler and mass-murdered religious believers for saying those words.

Atheists might bring pseudointellectual proselytizers, who are intolerant, self-aggrandizing and rude. Atheists should fund universities and hospitals. They should feed and clothe starving kids. They should act more like Christians and Jews. If they do some of that – if they contribute to a diverse humanity – they might get better party invites.

That’s right. Atheists never volunteer for non-profit organizations, never send money to the Red Cross, and are involved in an evil eugenicist plot to murder starving black kids in Africa.

What a polite article!

Seen, ironically, at Friendly Atheist.

3. Oh, and yesterday I had the opportunity to see evangelicals waving a Christian flag with a sign saying “Support Amendment 48” which would define a fetus as being a person at the moment of conception. This would also mean that a woman who had a miscarriage could be charged with involuntary manslaughter.

4. And to top it all off, Denver might be the first city to have its very own Extra-Terrestrial Affairs Commission. I can’t think of a better way of spending tax dollars and time…

The good news is there will be a lecture at Auraria campus in Denver, CO on October 23 from 3-5 pm in the North Classroom building of University of Colorado Denver by science author and curator of astrobiology at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, David Grinspoon on why astrobiology says we don’t need an extra-terrestrial affairs commission. I’ll post again on this later.

Why does Colorado feel more and more like the Bible Belt all of a sudden?

Duck and Cover

From the front page of MSN.com today:

I’m no fan nor despiser of John Edwards but… A politician had an affair? Oh no! That’s going to mean whatever foreign policy plan he makes is going to cause global thermonuclear war! The world is going to come crashing to a halt! 8/8/08, it must be a sign! It’s the end! THE END!!!

Run to the grocery store, stock up on food and water, and most importantly… DUCK AND COVER!

When a normal man has an affair, it’s a private matter. When a public figure has an affiar, not only to the supermarket tabloids but also to the mainstream media, this is a “developing story”. I didn’t bother to click.

Piss Off The Catholics Month

EDIT: Apparently my tactics are considered a bit extreme. I do not want people ransacking the homes of Catholics. I want them to mock them for their beliefs. Religion is not immune to criticism. It never has been, never should be, and if we can pull this off, never will be. Keep this is mind when reading the post.

The Inquisition has recently targeted one of our own, PZ Myers, so it’s time to retaliate with excessive force. I intend to desecrate as many Jesus-bits as I can over the next month. I think I’ll make it into a game.

Why am I doing this? Good question. Primarily because it’s really, really fun, and because we’re showing that we will not be intimidated into respecting idiotic beliefs. Fuck transubstantiation, it’s a piece of crappy pseudo-bread that tastes like cardboard.

For anyone who wants to participate in Piss Off The Catholics Month, there are plenty of guides which will tell you how to take communion. Consider the church service you sit through to get a Jesus-bit a learning experience. If you’re lucky, they might have some pretty music.

The key is to get the Priest to place the Eucharist into your hand, and somehow make it look as though you placed it onto your tongue and let it dissolve, when you’ve really kidnapped the Jesus-bit. If you don’t make it look like you ate it, I assume no liability for your funeral expenses.

I mentioned that I’d make this a game, so here are the rules:

Piss Off The Catholics Game

For the month of July, do as much as you can to piss off the Catholics. The more points you get by the end of the month, the more you win. You don’t actually win anything, but it at least makes it fun. Compete with your friends. Brag to your enemies. Eat chocolate. The rules are included in parentheses beside the point values.

The following actions earn you the specified numbers of points:

1 Point – Sit Through a Minute of a Catholic Church Service (One point per minute. A two hour Sunday service gets you 120 points, plus more if you can kidnap a bit of Jesus)

10 Points – Wear Anti-religious Clothing (The clothing must be visible and worn in public for a minimum of three hours.)

10 Points – Sinful Sexual Activity (Participate in a sinful sexual act such as masturbation or premarital sex. Another 10 Points if it’s gay.)

15 Points – Anger a Catholic through the Internet (They must make obviously angry remarks through some Internet medium relating to your Piss Off The Catholics actions)

15 Points – Get Someone to Participate in Piss Off The Catholics Month (The person must play the Piss Off The Catholics Game and score at least 100 points of their own. They may only be counted once, so make sure others don’t recruit them.)

20 Points – Be Mistaken for a Satanist (Self explanatory. If a catholic is under the impression that Atheists are devil worshipers, 20 points. Each catholic only redeemable once.)

20 Points – Break One of The Ten Commandments (Please don’t kill anybody, obviously. Lusting, worshipping false idols, etc. gets you the points. Kidnapping Jesus-bits doesn’t count since that’s already counted. Only one broken commandment per day.)

25 Points – Anger a Catholic in Real Life (They must make angry remarks related to your Pissing Off the Catholics actions in real life. Yelling makes it an automatic Anger a Catholic score.)

25 Points – Receive Hate Mail (25 points for every piece of hate mail you receive. This must be through e-mail or the archaic and mythical “paper mail”.)

50 Points – Link to This Post or Post About Piss Off The Catholics Month on Your Website (May be redeemed once per website per Piss Off The Catholics Month)

50 Points – Kidnap a Eucharist (you must obtain the Jesus-bit at a Catholic Church and get it back to your home intact. After that, you have successfully kidnapped Jesus and can do what you want with it. Remember that it is only the “actual body of Jesus” for the time between when the Priest gives it to you, and you eat it. The key is to not eat it.)

50 Points – Confess To Heinous Sins or Be “Disrespectful” at a Confessional (Confess to obscene and incredibly sinful activity at Confession or disrupt by talking on a cell phone, etc. in the booth)

50 Points – Submit Your Score (At the end of the month, submit your actions and score to pissoffthecatholicsgame@gmail.com)

100 Points – Obtain some Holy Water and Use For Daily Tasks (Drink it, water your plants with it, etc.)

100 Points – Desecrate the Eucharist (do something demeaning to the Jesus-bit)

250 Points – Read Atheist Literature (This includes books such as The God Delusion, god is not Great, etc. Books read previously do not count. 30 points per book. Must read entire book.)

250 Points – Debate a Catholic and Win (You must win a debate with a Catholic which would fill a minimum of two pages of text were you to transcribe it into a word processor. IM conversations should be four pages due to the formatting involved in copy pasting them into a word processor. You may consider yourself victorious if they concede, resort to declaring logic invalid, saying you “need to have faith” and presenting no evidence when pressed, or repeat already discredited points more than twice.)

500 Points – Receive Death Threat (500 points for every piece of hate mail containing phrases such as “I will kill you…” or “These people will kill you if…”. If they appeal to the Muslims being willing to kill you if you were to do a similar thing to their religion, it doesn’t count as a death threat.)

1 000 Points – Convince a Catholic Fence-sitter to Give Up Their Religion (A conversion to Atheism or Agnosticism is acceptable. Unitarian, Deist, Pantheist, etc. all count as well. As long as it isn’t Catholicism, you get the points.)

Try to get as many people to play as you can. If I get enough valid responses, I’ll recognize the winners in a post at the end of the month. Remember, scores, suggestions, and anything else related to the game should be sent to pissoffthecatholicsgame@gmail.com. Merry POTCM, and happy Christaunting!

Bunnies.