I didn’t mention it previously, but I did dash off a reply to Mr. William Michael’s email which I posted earlier. Here’s what I said:
That’s some impressively tortured logic you’ve got going there. Doesn’t tend to lend well to your claim that you can answer any argument I might be able to put forth. Atheism is simply the lack of theistic belief. It has no bearing on politics, marriage, or holidays. How you figure those three things imply an “end to human life higher than survival” is beyond me. I bow to your superior, if somewhat spurious, logic.
I do appreciate the email, though. It’s sure to amuse the folks who drop by my blog. Thanks for sending it along!
I figured that would be enough to piss him off and he’d wander back into whatever dark recess he had scurried out from as most of the Catholics I’ve gotten email from tend to do. Usually it’s the Evangelicals that are persistent, but it appears Mr. Michael is of sterner stuff as he replied back:
As I expected, you suggest that my logic is flawed, but provide no reason for your criticism other than your opinion. That kind of dumb response is what I meant when I said you should leave the little pond of idiots and put up some real reasons for your views—-which you obviously think are important enough to post on a website. Your too acustomed to picking on the little girls, like Georgie Porgie…”when the boys came out to play, Georgie Porgie ran away.”
Having opinions without demonstrable reasons is called “prejudice” and suggests a lack of proof rather than any real thought. Every fool has an opinion. Rhetorically, if you had reasons you were ready to stand behind you’d be able to let them speak for you, rather than suggesting that the support of your blog viewers is proof. If numbers of supporters is proof, then I think Catholicism would win on a worldwide contest. Knowing you don’t think that, what are your reasons?
Here are some questions I bet you will struggle to answer in a positive way.
- What is the purpose of human life? You obviously cannot have an opinion about what a government should do before you can state what the purpose of life even is. I would love to read your answer to a question like this. Again, not you picking on other people’s answers, but something of your own for consideration.
- What makes a day or event greater than any other? After all, to set a holiday as a day of rest from other activities, or to recognize one event over another, implies that one is more significant than the other. What exactly is this system of ranking events in the mind of an atheist? Also, if holidays are intended to be celebrated in common, what would be the link that bound these groups together? Or would there be as many holidays as individuals?
- What is the starting principle from which you define human rights? I’d like to understand how an atheist concludes that humans have any “rights”. The idea of a human right assumes that (a) there is a law higher than that of the individual and (b) that right is evident to humans in general, not in particular. What exactly do you believe those rights are and what is your justification for them?
Again, refutations are a dime a dozen, demonstrations are the proof of reason and truth. State your ideas positively, and we’ll know whether you really have anything to say. Maybe you can post your answers to my questions on your blog and let people offer criticism of them. After all, you’re a free thinker and no prejudiced or narrow-minded individual, right?
William Michael, Director
Classical Liberal Arts Academy
I’ve not replied yet as I thought I’d take some time and consider my answers, but I will get to it eventually. I thought you folks would be interested in seeing his latest missive, though, so here you go.