I love it when Atheists proclaim to know more about people of faith than those people know about themselves.
The March 3 hatchet job
on Christians perpetrated by the Secular Progressive Atheist Clown Phil Zuckerman
is another case in point. Now, Christians don't need me to defend them. They are the MSM's favorite religious target. The sad thing about Zuckerman is that it isn't enough for him to just espouse his own lack of faith. He has to attack other people's faith. I guess that's part of the "new tone."
Never mind that Zuckerman's way into the article is to make a completely false statement derived from a Pew Poll. Never mind that demonizing Christians for their support of the death penalty is done without mentioning that even left-leaning Californians support the death penalty
. Never mind that Zuckerman could have presented an intriguing non-partisan sociological study of religious and political beliefs among Evangelicals (he is a "Professor of Sociology" after all).
No, Zuckerman's huge revelation -- his entire reason for writing the article -- is that Evangelical Christians are hypocrites when it comes to reconciling their religious and political beliefs.
Hypocrites. Imagine that. People…actual human beings….are flawed. They say one thing yet do another!
Why did Zuckerman choose to attack Evangelicals, without ever once mentioning that Jews can be hypocrites? So can Buddhists. Most of all, where is Zuckerman's condemnation for the Islamic hypocrites
who, when they defy the tenets of their peaceful religion, do far more damage in comparison? You know, like killing people
Would there be any backlash if Zuckerman had entitled his article, "Why Jews Hate Hashem"? Of course. The ADL would rightly skewer him. How about, "Why Muslims Hate Mohammed"? Me thinks Zuckerman would be in hiding from the fatwa issued on him. Christians, however, are much easier to attack. After all, this is the HuffPo were talking about.
What's the deal?
I think Phil Zuckerman hates God. Before attempting an answer, allow a quick clarification. Zuckerman doesn't exactly hate God, as I've provocatively asserted in the title of this piece. He really
hates people of faith. Zuckerman hates people of faith because of what it does for him. Through Atheism's magical grace, the lack of faith saves him from admitting that he isn't God, because Liberals are all-knowing, all-seeing, and are unerring in their position. Atheism allows Zuckerman to avoid admitting that he does not know everything. That he doesn't have the ability to see into other people's hearts.
But the real kicker is that by refusing to have faith, there is no ultimate moral authority that Zuckerman must answer to. He can pen his hateful screeds and feel good about it. He can insist on the taking of other people's property for the alleged good of others. He can demonize those he doesn't agree with. It's all relative, after all. Even the Scholastics like my old high school math teacher
, who placed reason and faith on the same pedestal, wouldn't approve of Zuckerman's approach.
For this "tolerant" Liberal, he seems to have nothing but disdain for people of faith. This is nothing new. Liberal atheists see in their ideology what they want to see, and deny or despise the rest. As is the case with most atheists, what they ignore is actually the very heart and soul of humanity.
It's called tolerance. Sharing, not greed. Love, not violence.
Interestingly, it is Zuckerman who is intolerant and hateful of Evangelicals. Christians, however, will love Zuckerman no matter what he writes about them. As for sharing, let's compare Christianity to Atheistic Liberalism for a moment. Jesus taught that, "what's mine is yours." Liberalism teaches that, "what’s yours is mine." The state whose population gives the most to charity as a percentage of income: Mississippi. The state that gives the least to charity: Massachusetts. Do I need to mention which state has a lower income per capita, a higher percentage of Evangelicals, and a lower percentage of Liberals?
Hypocrisy? Stop the presses!