HOME   People do good because they are human, not because they are religious! 

Do not give God any credit for the good they do, they did it!



Tolerance is putting up with something you consider bad in the hope that it will go away by itself or because you think that if you show anger at it you will only make it worse. Tolerance and acceptance are not the same thing - they are completely different. Tolerance has a message, "You do your own thing over there and we won’t bother you so long as you don’t bother us”.


When we talk about tolerance, we must remember that there are different types. Religious tolerance. Social tolerance. Legal tolerance.


Society needs to reduce the need for tolerance by being as libertarian as possible.  Religions with all their rules that we don't want or need only ruin tolerance in the name of tolerance.


Those, and that means religionists and many secularists, who preach religious tolerance are really thinking, “That religion is too big and there is strength in numbers so we must tolerate it.” If you were your own religion and very evangelistic see how much tolerance you will get. The tolerance the bigger religions are getting is more bigoted resignation than tolerance.


Tolerance is a necessary evil. It is wrong then to go out of your way to give people more stuff to tolerate as if there isn't enough as it is. So you have to discourage anything that increases the demand for tolerance. You fix as much as you can of what is wrong in society so that there is no need to tolerate those things. There is enough to tolerate without religion and magic making a contribution.


Tolerance is a two-way street. If you demand tolerance for your views you must demand it for your opponent's views as well.


Tolerance means you have a discouraging attitude to something.


Tolerance has a breaking point. It is irresponsible to test patience too much.
Religion as community and community as intolerance

A community without some intolerance cannot function. There will be no community where thieving is tolerated. The human community is liberal but bans things such as child abuse, rape, theft and so on for these destroy the community. They have consequences beyond the immediate harm they do. For example, thieves lead people to doubt one another more easily.


It goes without saying that religion tries to make a community of a different sort. It will ban more than just the things that stop people getting along. It will ban things that threaten it not as a community but as a religious community. Thus not attending services or believing what you are ordered to believe or failing to pay money to the clergy will be considered disruptive and evil and anti-community. The more doctrines and rules and worship opportunities a religion ordains then the worse it is. Even if it seems to do no harm there is a principle at stake. Harm always starts with bad principles or with good principles not being revered. Harming principles is implicitly doing harm to people as well.


You may persist that some religions are good. But people have more in their lives than religion so other things in their lives might diffuse or prevent the religion harming. That does not mean the religion is good - it is still bad.


The religion will claim to have the infallible message of God. It will claim to be his representative on earth.  It is harmful to make something the truth if it is not for the truth is not about us.  Truth is about itself.


The enablers and perpetrators of violence often do not think of themselves as sinful or doing wrong. The fact that they collectively do this harm reinforces this sense of goodness and virtue. They are proud and feel they gain status for translating ideology into action.
Some Ways Religion leads to violence


By teaching that your religious view should be tolerated for it is not your view but came from God - thus you cannot insist on equal rights for your opponent's view and yours. If you do, you do it on practical grounds and not on principle. If the other person has no right to contradict God there is nothing anybody can do about that but in principle it is a pity they cannot be stopped. When the believer's polite rage against the unbeliever spills over into violent action, the believer blames her own weakness and not the principle. Religion never lets you blame its principles.


By demanding the right to discriminate against people in the name of conscience. A bakery run by Christians is a business not a religious organisation and thus has no right to refuse to bake wedding cakes for gay couples and use the Bible ban on homosexuality as an excuse. But some businesses run by Christians claim that very right!


By using "we are offended" or worse "God is offended and the law must respect God" to try and stifle free speech when it calls the religion's truth claims into question.  Actions can never be as free as speech and yet all agree that free speech is the hallmark of a free and healthy society.


By teaching that evil violent books are God's word


By teaching that other religions are the enemy


By teaching that if God commands violence we must obey for he knows best and he uses evil to bring good out of it.


By admitting that extremists who have joined are still members - eg an extremist Muslim is not an extremist self-styled Muslim - and then refusing to take responsibility for the other side of their religion.  The dark side belongs to all even those who would never be violent. 


By prayer. Prayer is making yourself feel you have done good when you have not. People who like prayer get that buzz. That is why they like prayer. It has led to the extraordinary spectacle of terrorists and abortionist Catholics coping with the evil they do by saying prayers.


If you look after your neighbour for the sake of God that implies, "Pity I have to do this but I have to please God." Your neighbour is seemingly just tolerated. This is not tolerance but being forced to put up with the person. Mild force is still force.  You can be forced a little.  You don't need the gun to your head.


We are all socially pressured and legally pressured to be tolerant.  And we fear the bad results of intolerance. To force a person to be tolerant is as impossible as forcing them to be loving. It cannot be done. You may manage to make them seem to be tolerant but that is all. It follows then that, strictly speaking, there is no such thing as tolerance. Tolerance is just the label we put on people being unable to give free rein to their hate. But how long with the prevention hold up?


Christianity says you must hate sin absolutely for it is an act of contempt for the boundless love of God but it cautions that you are still to love the sinner. As the problem with sin is what it says about the sinner as a person, it follows that you must be very sure there is a God and take care not to be seeing sins where there are no sins and take care not to make sin out to be worse than what it is. You cannot call yourself tolerant of the sinner if you fail to do these things. And who succeeds? Is there anybody?
A thought: Tolerance is a big virtue these days. It is insulting for it implies putting up with something undesirable or immoral. Religious tolerance means one religion merely stomaching the others that disagree with it. There should be no religion as there is enough around to test our tolerance without it adding to the problems. Religion like a lot of things that is going around is inherently sectarian. Intolerance always starts with repressed hatred as signified by tolerance. Ecumenism - different religions being friends as religions - is just snow over the manure heap. It's good effects cannot last. And they don't!


Tolerance is putting up what you consider bad. It is an offensive insult. And the insult is compounded when you cannot provide evidence for your religious belief while you say you tolerate other religious beliefs. Why is it offensive? For tolerance implies that the tolerated are less than good or right and that sincere or not they do harm. Every religion claims to be right and that the others are wrong so tolerance is the best it can give. For somebody that cannot give sufficient evidence for their religious faith to tolerate me is to insult me and they show how bigoted they are.


Many humanists reject tolerance for tolerance means putting up with something bad so it is quite insulting and grudging. If people believe what they are doing is good we should encourage them to do it even if it is contrary to our principles. But nevertheless we have to try and win others to our way of thinking because it is the only way to certainty and joy for them and us.
Humanists hate spiritual opinions that look down on Atheism and the scientific method.


Humanists hate it when religion tries to promote its teaching in a way that affects the public sphere and politics. Humanists know that Humanism is the method of getting to the truth. Religion opposes that method thus for religion to promote itself at all is for it to damage


Humanism and the majesty of its ethos that we believe nothing until we learn the case in its favour.


If my religious group claims to be sure that its doctrines are all objectively true, then what if yours disagrees? Clearly religion has to undermine tolerance. If it acts tolerant it is being hypocritical. It may act tolerant but that does not change the fact that it is in essence intolerant. A dog that is trained to sing like a bird is still essentially a barker even if he never barks. It is his nature.


Anything that can be done without such as religion that embodies intrinsic intolerance is bad no matter how inconsistent it is with its intolerant nature.


Hating the sin is not just about hating the fact that people chose to do wrong. It is hating the wrong action. So you should hate it when an insane person has sex outside marriage without knowing what they are doing as much as you would hate it if they did it deliberately.
The hate sin love sinner tripe demands that society be very strict indeed. If an unbeliever won't go to Mass, that person is still a bad harmful person if going to Mass is right and good and God's law. It must not be tolerated. Catholics are bound to hate this action whether or not it is intended to be a sin. To complain that being compelled to go to Mass is against one's rights will invite the retort: "But what about our rights as Catholics to hate what you do?"


Suppose we pretend that it is possible to love the sinner and hate the sin. The less evidence you have that an act that somebody did is wrong or sinful the more you hate them. And the more you think it is the sin you hate then the more you are in denial. You need proof (in theory) to be able to say you love them. Christianity plods on without proof. It has all these sins it cannot prove are really sins. Thus when it claims to be the only right religion and the only way to learn what right is, it follows that its morals should be enforced on people and those who say they can't be proved must be silenced.


The Catholic Church did not declare that the heretic had rights though errors have none until Vatican II (page 7, Human Rights; page 6, Religious Freedom).


Christian doctrine says we are all connected in Jesus so if somebody murders we are all part of the problem, we are all to blame and we are all sinners. The terrorists and the political movements that support them adore this message for it makes them feel good about what they do. The terrorists in Northern Ireland consecrated their murderous activities by prayer. Prayer is seen by sceptics as making yourself feel good for doing nothing.


Also, against those who say religion in itself never does harm but people do harm in the name of religion, we have to point to the harmful doctrines of the Church. They said Jesus was right not to walk away from his death to save us though God could have saved us another way. They say a baby that isn’t baptised is like a bastard – not a proper child of God. I could go on and on. And there is the small matter of the Bible and the Koran commanding violence in the name of God.


Some Christians believe that religion is a terrible evil thing that causes wars and general misery and they say they do not offer a religion but a relationship with Jesus. But the Bible, which claims to be the written word of God who is its author, is full of religion. It was God the Bible says set up the religion of the Jews. Moreover, every religion is composed of individuals who are their own religion unto themselves for the beliefs differ in interpretation and are based on different reasons. For anybody to claim to be a Christian who opposes religion is seriously confused thinking at best. Any religion could say the same. For example, the Mormons could say they are not a religion but a relationship with God the Father. A Muslim might say that Islam is not a religion but a way to Heaven.


The doctrine of God implies that since God is the law and is not subject to the law, that people must agree with him. The doctrine implies that they must not divorce goodness from God but fuse the two. Since God is supreme, there can be no law over him to punish him or reward him for what he does which raises the problem of how we know we can trust him. Christianity says just trust him. But it is unfair and bigoted to just trust a being that makes such serious and heavy demands on us: love me with all your heart and do what I say and condemn what I condemn even if my rules make no sense to anybody. It is like marrying somebody within seconds of meeting them.


The God concept then is inherently violent and intolerant and bloody.


Believers insist that we Atheists have no business judging God and finding him guilty of abusing the human race if he exists for we are not above God in order to sit over him in judgement. It implies that they think that all who oppose the true religion or philosophy must be stopped not to destroy freedom but to maintain it. People have a right to the truth and those who plot against the truth are denying them that right. But that does not mean it is necessary to force silence on people or to persecute them for differing from the truth. If you think you are right you have to work against other ideas by talking and by helping the promoters not to be one-sided. They can refer you to something that gives you the evidence for an alternative view. It is your duty to try and be right and anybody who is wrong has not tried hard enough.


We need to start seeing that when we say, "Only God can judge" we are saying that if we could see into people's hearts we would judge too. We are saying that we only refrain from judging because we cannot see. In fact, saying that only God can judge translates as, "If you are being bad then I'd judge you if I could prove it." Christian love always comes with a but. Such teachings only lead to tolerance of homosexuality not acceptance. They make indirect bigots of people.



Information is the best antidote to religion and RELIGION AND SECTARIANISM AND BIGOTRY ARE ONE AND THE SAME. People like us are to blame when religion thrives so we cannot punish anybody for being wrong.


A Critical Review of Humanist Manifestos 1 & 2, Homer Duncan MC, International Publications, Lubbock Texas.
A Shattered Visage The Real Face of Atheism, Ravi Zacharias, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Tennessee, 1990
A Thief in the Night, John Cornwell, Penguin, London, 1990
A Woman Rides the Beast, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1994
All Roads Lead to Rome, Michael de Semlyen, Dorchester House Publications, Bucks, 1993 (page 120 recounts Cardinal Konig of Vienna’s testimony that the Vatican helped Nazi war criminals to escape)
Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine, Part 1, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, M H Gill & Son, Dublin 1954
Apologetics for the Pulpit, Aloysius Roche Burns Oates & Washbourne Ltd, London, 1950
Blind Alley Beliefs, David Cook, Pickering & Inglis, Glasgow, 1979
Catholicism and Fundamentalism, Karl Keating, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1988
Christianity, David Albert Jones, OP, Family Publications, Oxford, 1999
Convert or Die, Edmond Paris, Chick Publications, Chino, California, undated
Correction and Discipline of Children, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1946
Crisis of Moral Authority, Don Cupitt, SCM Press, London, 1985
Documents of the Christian Church, edited by Henry Bettenson, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1979
Does America Need the Moral Majority? William Willoughby, Haven Books, New Jersey, 1981
Does Conscience Decide? Bishop William J Philbin, Catholic Truth Society of Ireland, Dublin
Ecumenical Jihad, Peter Kreeft, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1996
European Union and Roman Catholic Influence In Britain, David N Samuel, The Harrison Trust, Kent, 1995
Fascism in the English Church, A London Journalist, Henry E Walter, London, 1938
Fifty Years in the “Church” of Rome, Charles Chiniquy, Chick Publications, Chino, California, 1985
God and the Gun, The Church and Irish Terrorism, Martin Dillon, Orion, London, 1998
God Is Not Great, The Case Against Religion, Christopher Hitchens, Atlantic Books, London, 2007
‘God, That’s not fair!’ Dick Dowsett, OMF Books, Overseas Missionary Fellowship, Belmont, The Vine, Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 3TZ] Kent, 1982
Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1995
Human Rights, Michael Bertram Crowe Veritas, Dublin, 1978
In God’s Name, David Yallop, Corgi, London, 1987
Is the Roman Catholic Church a Secret Society? John V Simcox, Warren Sandell and Raymond Winch Watts & Co London, 1946
Is There Salvation Outside The Catholic Church? Fr J Bainvel SJ, TAN, Illinois, 1979
Jesuit Plots, From Elizabethan to Modern Times, Albert Close, Protestant Truth Society, London undated
Jesus the Only Saviour, Tony and Patricia Higton, Monarch Tunbridge Wells, Kent, 1993
New Catholic Encyclopedia, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
Radio Replies, Vol 1, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1938
Radio Replies, Vol 2, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota 1940
Radio Replies, Vol 3, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota 1942
Religious Freedom, A Fundamental Right, Michael Swhwartz, Liguori Publications, Missouri, 1987
Roman Catholicism, Loraine Boettner, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, Phillipsburg, New Jersey, 1987
Rome – Our Enemy, Clifford Smyth, Puritan Printing, Belfast, 1975
Secular Humanism – The Most Dangerous Religion in America, Homer Duncan, MC International Publications, Lubbock, Texas. Undated.
Sex Education in Our Public Schools, Jack Hyles, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1969
Sex, Dissidence and Damnation, Jeffrey Richards, Routledge, London 1994
Spy in the Vatican 1941-45, Branko Bokun, Tom Stacey Books, London, 1973
Summa Theologica of St Thomas Aquinas, Part II, Second Number, Thomas Baker, London, 1918.
The Case for Faith, Lee Strobel, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 2000
The Christian and War, Robert Moyer, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1946
The Church of Rome, Wilson Ewin, Bible Baptist Church, Nashua NH USA
The Encyclopaedia of Heresies and Heretics, Leonard George, Robson Books, London, 1995
The End Of Faith, Religion, Terror And The Future Of Reason, Sam Harris, Free Press, London, 2005
The Inquisition of the Middle Ages, Henry Charles Lea, Citadel, New York, 1963
The Last Temptation of Christ, Its Deception and What you Should Do About it, Erwin T Lutzer, Moody Press, Chicago, 1988
The Pestilence of AIDS, Hugh Pyle, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1987
The Rise of the Spanish Inquisition, Jean Plaidy, Star, London, 1978
The Sacred Executioner Human Sacrifice and the Legacy of Guilt Hyam Maccoby Thames and Hudson, London, 1982
The Secret History of the Jesuits, Edmond Paris, Chick Publications, Chino, California, 1975
The Truth About the Homosexuals, Dr Hugh F Pyle, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1978
The Truth that Leads to Eternal Life, Watchtower, New York, 1968
The Unequal Yoke, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1946
The Upside-Down Kingdom, Donald B Kraybill Marshalls, Hants, 1978
The Vatican Connection, The Explosive Expose of a Billion-Dollar Counterfeit Stock Deal Between the Mafia the Church, Richard Hammers Penguin, Middlesex, 1982
Their Kingdom Come, Robert Hutchison, Corgi, London, 1997
Unholy Sacrifices of the New Age, Paul de Parrie and Mary Pride, Crossway Books, Westchester, Illinois 1988
Vatican USA, Nino LoBello, Trident Press, New York, 1972
Vicars of Christ, Peter de Rosa, Corgi Books, London, 1993
Walking with Unbelievers, Michael Paul Gallagher SJ, Veritas Dublin 1985
War and Politics The Christian’s Duty, Peter Watkins, Christadelphian Bible Mission, Birmingham
What About Those Who Have Never Heard? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1986
Whatever Happened to Heaven? Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Publishers, Oregon, 1988
Fascist Romanism Defies Civilisation by Joseph McCabe
Democracy is not a good form of Government by Citizens for the Ten Commandments
Is Christianity a Cult?