Attribution: DuelingAnalogs.Com
This cartoon is clever on many levels, but I truly love the PC/Mac analog as those “holy wars” have been raging in recent decades. Between this sort of thing and the new Anonymous movement aimed at eradicating scientology, they’re in for some interesting times. Recently, we watched the movie Bowfinger where Kit Ramsey, the celebrity character played by Eddie Murphy, found refuge in a place called Mind Head – it was a very thinly veiled scientology play and it was hilarious.
Tweet
That doesn’t really make sense I’m an atheist and I wouldn’t attack a person who believed in Scientology because they are just as unlogical as a person who believes in Christianity. I could however see both Scientologist and Christian fighting and the atheist in the background shaking his head.
god-free, it’s like most humor, it’s not funny if you have to explain it.
beat up the ginger!
Its just a joke, get over it god-free-crap.
It just points out how most people think scientologists are loonys. I mean how smart is this. 75 million years ago, Xenu brought billions of his people to Earth in a DC-8-like spacecraft, stacked them around volcanoes and killed them using hydrogen bombs. Official Scientology dogma holds that the essences of these many people remained, and that they form around people in modern times, causing them spiritual harm.
The funny thing is the guy who wrote this crap was a sci-fi writer.
On a lighter note.
I agree with Lea.
Kill the Ginger!
Destroy the Red-head!
Decapitate the Ranga!
Crush the carrot-top!
Support Ginga genocide!
Up with normal human beings! Down with mutants!(the gingers)
You know what’s not so funny about this?
It’s true.
Scientologists get attacked for the most insane reasons. I know a few Scientologists and they are genuinely helpful people. I’ve never heard one of them talk about volcanoes or extra-terrestrials or had one try to shove Scientology down my throat.
Yet, around certain types of people, some feel that they have to keep their identity as a Scientologist on the down low because they are concerned that they may be attacked or ridiculed unfairly.
Replace the word, “Scientologist” with any of these words and you’ll see how un-funny it is to attack these well-meaning people.
“I kicked his ass because he was a Scientologist.”
“I kicked his ass because he was a Jew.”
“I kicked his ass because he was black.”
“I kicked his ass because he was a N****r.”
“I kicked his ass because he was a Muslim.”
“I kicked his ass because he was a Christian.”
“I kicked his ass because he was a Buddhist.”
None of us would STAND for anyone speaking so prejudiciously in the other examples. Normally decent people say the most horrendous things when influenced by popular opinion or the media. That’s what the media want. Direct the hate in the direction they want it to go to cause ultimate distraction from what they, themselves are doing.
Plus, didn’t we stop feeding people to the lions because of their religion about 2,000 years ago?
Like I’ve told my son for years – “If it seems stupid, don’t do it.” If it doesn’t seem right, don’t say it. It’s only you that you’re polluting.
Ok, haters. C’mon ahead. Now it’s your turn. Attack the nice person who said all that. Bring it on.
Multi-Writer, as a human, I agree with your comment in that there is no reason to actively discriminate against a group. As a godless person, scientology is like any other religion to me and I find it fascinating that other religions feel the need to suppress this religion for its weirdness – they’re all pretty equally weird to me.
As for nice scientologists, it’s much more likely that they are nice, helpful people. Scientology is not the high order bit.
Highly amusing. For whoever said that Christianity is as ridiculous as Scientology…well, I disagree. If nothing else Christianity has the patina of historical mysteriousness. Scientology was made up by a second rate Science Fiction writer in the last century. It’s a hoot!
Leta, patina of history or not, when you’re not attached to a religion, they all look pretty much the same.
Scientology: Thetans and volcanos.
Christianity: Zombies and burning bushes.
One made up by second rate science fiction writers as a bet.
One made up by ignorant goat herders to get people to behave.
Pretty much identical to a non-believer!
Hey Mike, saying that all religions, which vary widely in creed and practice, are pretty much the same, and claiming that Christianity was made up by ignorant goat herders to get people to behave are both opinions that will inevitably dissolve within doing five minutes of research.
Likening religious faith to irrational “weirdness” is stereotypical, unhelpful and uniformed in the same way as saying all liberals are weenies and all conservatives are nutjobs. In fact, the arguments for atheism are so weak that many times people rely on attitude, resorting to name-calling (i.e. “ignorant goat herders”), rather than founding their opinions on solid logical reasoning. The case for faith is much more rational, scientific, historical and ultimately far more compelling than the case against it.
Here’s a resource I encourage you to check out: http://www.reasonablefaith.org
I hope you find it helpful.
Best, mate.
Thanks for your comment god.is.good, at least you can spell!
As for the reference, the very name is an oxymoron on par with military intelligence and jumbo shrimp.
Look, you can believe whatever you like, a little research will demonstrate that these myths were propagated by ancient people who had no other explanation for the world around them and thus credited “gods”. If you want to follow that path, you’re in the majority. Good luck to you.
But for thinking people, people truly able to step back and evaluate this life we’re all sharing, there is no room for religion. You said it yourself, “vary widely in creed and practice” is enough to let you know that it has no basis in fact.
The highest probability outcome for afterlife, etc. is that this is the one life we have – what we are experiencing here and now. And that we should make the most of it. Not because of some karmic justice doled out by gods, but because we can make our shared life a little better now.
And 5 minutes of research will show you that more evil is done in the name of religion and by faithful people than for any other reason. Would people still behave badly without it? Sure, but it would take one more excuse away from the masses for that behavior. All you need to know to see the truth in this is the Nazi creed “God With Us.”
So, you want to surrender your life to a fictional higher power concocted to explain the mysteries of life by ignorant goat herders? Knock yourself out. It’s your right. If you want to direct your brain power toward making this life better, step away from the gods, take a look around, and contribute in some way to making things better because you know it’s the right thing to do without any device like eternal life in heaven as a reason.
It’s liberating and it’s honest.
Mike, you assert, but fail to define why faith can’t be reasonable, and fail to show why there’s no room for religion among thinking people (Craig, who runs ReasonableFaith.org is most definitely a thinker). Your reasoning seems to be rooted in an impatient “quick-fix” approach to deeper questions about life. E.g. “a little research will demonstrate that these myths,” “5 minutes of research will show you that more evil is done in the name of religion,” etc. It’s a pitfall for the intellectually lazy to assume that a few minutes of research and some silly poster-board excuse like the Nazis using the slogan “God with us” somehow proves religion to be bad (a classic “Hitler ate sugar”-style association fallacy).
@You said it yourself, “vary widely in creed and practice†is enough to let you know that it has no basis in fact.
This argument again makes no sense: people having different practices and beliefs doesn’t mean that there isn’t a right way and belief, any more than divergent views of a scientific question would imply that there’s no correct answer, or that science itself is just bogus. Differences in opinions do not change objective facts.
@you know it’s the right thing to do without any device like eternal life in heaven as a reason.
Actually, no. If there is indeed no law-giving authority to define moral laws, there is no objective way to define right or wrong.
JC, thanks for stopping by and commenting. My desire to debate is at a low level today. If you directed your brain power toward analyzing the evidence, you would be able to lift the veil from your eyes and see the reality. I hope that you’re able to do that for your own sake.