Posts Tagged ‘David Silverman’

Episode 152 – ShowNotes

January 14, 2016 1 comment

Guest Links:

Pick up your copy of Fighting God: An Atheist Manifesto for a Religious World

Check out David Silverman’s book tour schedule.

Check out

Additional Guest Links:

Click Here to check out the Bi Any Means podcast

Our Links:

Click Here to make a per episode donation at

Click Here to listen to the episode.

Click Here to buy our book.

Click Here to check out The Skepticrat.

Click Here to check out God Awful Movies.

Headline Links:

Roy Moore continues to be a dick:

Lawsuit against Dawkins dismissed because you can’t sue people for being correct:

Dishonest people say Islam had nothing to with Philly man trying to kill cop in the name of Islam:

P-Robes: Look out for rock music and the demons it summons:

ISIS militant executes own mother:

Court rules against couple who said they had a biblical right to spank their foster children:

MSNBC and NYTimes censor latest Charlie Hebdo cover:

Santorum: allowing gay marriage is like changing the chemical equation for water:

Swanson: Hillary will lead tremendous majority of American kids to homosexuality:

Ex-nun says she was forced to torture herself for Jesus:

This Week in Misogyny:

VA bill would require children’s genitals to be inspected before they go to the bathroom:
Archbishop: “The true cause of domestic abuse is women who want divorces”


Embracing the Narrative

July 8, 2013 1 comment

by Noah Lugeons

As many of you know, I recently appeared on the “Thank God I’m Atheist” podcast to speak for the “acerbic” brand of atheism.  The debate was sparked over American Atheists recent dedication of America’s first monument to secularism in the form of a quote-laden bench.  Frank and Dan (the hosts of TGIA) were two of the many atheists who saw AA’s approach as too caustic, too reactionary, too antagonistic.  They wondered why American Atheists hadn’t used the opportunity to present a positive message rather than a chiseled “fuck you”.

Now, when I characterize the debate like this, I do a disservice to American Atheists, as the monument is certainly more than a “fuck you”.  It contains a number of quotes from our founding fathers that demonstrate how important the separation of church and state was too them and how little they cared for organized religion.  But it also includes a list of biblical punishment prescriptions for breaking the ten commandments, which can only be seen as a retaliatory strike to the ten commandments structure that prompted the bench’s existence in the first place.

So Frank and Dan wondered why we were so willing to play the villain?  Why were we so eager to be exactly the people that the Christians said we would be?  If we were going to send a message with the monument, why not send a message like “we all benefit from the separation of church and state” rather than a message like “your holy book is stupid”?  Why play in to “us versus them” narrative?  And, if we were going to do that, why do so in a way that reinforces the “Atheists are callous jerks” stereotype.

I understood their points, but I felt like there were a few major elements missing from their calculus so I had a little email exchange with Dan and before long it led to an invitation to discuss the issue further on their show.  The interview went really well and while I think everyone left with the opinion they came with, I think all three of us also left with a better understanding and more respect for the other side.  And barring the swaying of positions, this is probably the best outcome one could hope for from a conversation.

I think that Dan made some excellent points in defense of soft atheism, particularly in combating the notion that soft atheism is “non-combative” and I think Frank made some excellent points about what message we sent to the vast middle; the wavering believer, the uncommitted agnostic.  In all, I think they did a great job making a case for their side; not just for the utility of soft atheism, but against the utility of hard atheism.

But I also think ol’ Noah made a few good points there, too.  And I think the most important one came toward the end.  We were talking about how big a job American Atheists has as the nations premier atheist organization.  How does one provide a single voice for such an intellectually diverse group?  We were all lamenting the lack of another prominent national group that advocates atheism with an approach that is antipodal to AA.

But, as I pointed out on the show, there are no shortage of groups offering to be that voice.  Sure, they’re not as well funded as American Atheists, but there are plenty of individuals and organizations that represent atheism in a far more ecumenical style and the media isn’t talking to them.  Bill O’Reilly isn’t inviting the warm, fuzzy atheist on his show, he’s inviting the rabid, angry, argumentative villain on.

But, of course, the debate rages on.  Our discussion aired on their show last Saturday and yesterday I had a chance to listen to the follow up episode where, to no surprise, they discussed some feedback they got from their listeners regarding the interview.  Among them were several voices raised in objection to the approach and while several of them were well-reasoned, none of them (and no answer I’ve heard so far) addressed that core objection: If an atheist is nice in the woods and there’s nobody around to hear him, does it make a difference?

The problem is that we still have to rely on the media to get our message out.  Sure, there are blogs and podcasts and media sources that make the mainstream media superfluous, but the only people using those resources are the people already firmly entrenched in our camp.  If we want to be heard, we still need CNN and the Washington Post and, as much as I hate to say it, Fox News.  So how do we get them?

To hear the copacetic voices lay it out, we just be really, really nice so that whenever you see a quote from an atheist group, they’re showing up with an olive branch in hand, ready to explain how their position benefits not only the non-believer, but the vast majority of the nation.  Separation of church and state, for example, tends to benefit everybody who isn’t part of the largest religion in the country and in America, that’s most of us.  They prefer an approach where we take out the “Fuck you” and add a “Thank you” and deflate this stereotype of the negative, angry, arrogant atheist.  I think of this approach when people say (as they do with increasing frequency) “Atheism can’t just be against something, it has to be for something, too.”

And, in a storybook kind of way, this all sounds good.  The problem is that is doesn’t work.  And that’s not just my opinion, it’s been proven for decades.  Atheists didn’t just show up in this country when David Silverman took over as President of American Atheists.  We didn’t appear when Sam Harris called us into existence in 2001.  We’ve been here the whole time.  And our public face, by and large, has been this above-the-fray, all-inclusive, what’s-good-for-the-goose persona.  And yet, somehow, the atheist voice was never represented on the news.  The atheist rebuttal was never given even a cursory glance in the story.  The atheists were ecumenical and invisible.

But along comes somebody willing to play the villain and the media absorbs it like a sponge.  Along comes an atheist willing to be the person that Christians fear and- presto -he’s all over the media.  He’s spreading the atheist message on the most conservative political outlet outside of talk radio.  He’s putting up monuments where all the major media outlets can’t help but go and when they get there, they can’t help but notice the circus atmosphere that these fundamentalist windbags have concocted around it.  After all, you can’t ignore a voice that offends you.

And still, despite the overwhelming success of the Silverman approach, there are plenty in this movement who would have us reign in that acerbic voice.  They’d have us throw a wet blanket over the caustic approach that has come to characterize Silverman’s approach.  They pretend that now that the media has started talking about us, they’ll keep talking about us no matter what.  They pretend that we’re somehow too big to ignore.

But look at the recent bullshit Time editorial that went out of it’s way to belittle the charitability of secularists even to the point of blatantly lying.  Consider the recent nonsensical story on CNN’s website about Christians being happier than atheists on Twitter.  Consider the narrative.  

The major media is still in the business of telling stories and they have the narratives that they’re trying to sell.  If you want in, you’ve got to fit into your niche in the narrative.  They can’t have violent gays or thoughtful scientologists or nice atheists because that doesn’t fit the narrative.  That’s not the story they’re telling.

People often say of David Silverman’s leadership “He’s great at getting press, but I hate the message he sends when he does”… as though we can somehow separate those two things.  As though the caustic nature of his approach is in no way responsible for the amount of press he gets.  As though we’d never tried the olive branch approach before.

Of course, to be fair, I should concede that the number of non-believers is a hell of a lot higher than it was before and it’s possible that the mainstream media is just starting to recognize that they can’t ignore us as a group.  Some would argue that at this point in our movement, we’d be getting the press no matter what and we might not need the caustic crutch anymore.  

While this is a fair point, I don’t think it’s a correct one.  Just look at the mainstream media in the UK, one of the world’s least religious nations.  I’m willing to bet that if you go to the atheism page on the Guardian’s website right now (regardless of when “right now” might be), you’ll find as many stories attacking atheists as you’ll find stories supporting them.  And you’ll find that same damned “angry, militant atheist” narrative being trotted out over and over again.

The primary objection to the copacetic approach to atheism is that I think it’s utopian.  Sure, when you’re talking to your wife’s mom or your kid’s teacher or your co-worker or your brother-in-law, that’s the way to go.  But to dismiss the atheist bench and the acerbic approach to atheist activism represented by Silverman’s leadership as “theological dick-waving” (an admittedly clever term coined by one of TGIA’s listeners/voice mail opiners) is to overlook the fact that this guy has actually hit upon a formula that works.  It gets the atheist message out there in a way that nobody else has been able to do in this country.  He stays in the headlines, he forces the conversation and he’s been damned good at it.

Like it or not, when you embrace the media narrative, the media embraces you back.

And, in the interest of extending an olive branch to the olive branch extenders, show me an example of the other way working; working in terms of getting press and forcing the discussion, and I’ll reconsider everything I’ve said.  But I’m first and foremost an empiricist and what I see David Silverman doing seems to be working, at least by my definition of working.  Until then, I’ll defend every non-aesthetic decision that went into that bench.

Episode 20: Partial Transcript


Today’s episode of the Scathing Atheist is brought to you by Scott’s new brand of retroactive thaumaturgical fertilizer, Post-Mortem Miracle Gro.  Do you have a deceased pontiff a few miracles shy of canonization?  Well just dump this fertilizer on that fertilizer and watch the Miracles Grow.

Miracle Grow… making miracles out of bullshit since 1868

And now, the Scathing Atheist…


It’s Thursday, it’s July 4th and I only like snakes and sparklers.

I’m your host Noah Lugeons and from seasonably patriotic New York, New York, this is the Scathing Atheist.

On this week’s episode:

  • We’ll learn why gay sex makes Jesus cry,

  • Buddhists will weigh in on all that blasphemous YOLO shit

  • And I’ll put the opening of the second chapter of the God Delusion to music

But first, the Diatribe.


I had about half a dozen listeners email me the same article from the CNN Belief Blog this week.  The headline read “Christians are happier than atheists… on Twitter.”  Before I even clicked the hyperlink I was already salivating, ready to skewer the shit out of this pseudo-scientific nonsense.  So I read the article and I took a look at the research and I read their conclusions.

And unfortunately, as much as I’d love to unleash both barrels of my verbal-ought-six on this thing, it turns out that there’s just nothing to criticize.  The research was sound, the methodology was solid and the conclusions were perfectly defensible.  It turns out they’re right.  We’re a bunch of miserable, hateful, unhappy fucks.

I know this may come as a surprise to you, because you might often mistakenly think that you’re happy, but you can’t argue with science.  In fact, you might as well just stop arguing altogether and dive head first into a tub of Caramel-Sutra laced with Xanax, for you will never know joy.

So quick before you slit your wrists while sitting in a running car and drinking bleach, let me explain how the advanced new science of Twitter-ology works.  The first step is, of course, to draw a conclusion.  As you’ll see later, if you don’t start with a conclusion, the data’s gonna be too messy to interpret later.  So start off with a firm conclusion and hold on to it no matter what.

Step two is generating sample groups and remember, this is no time to worry about precision.  To study atheists and Christians, for example, all you need to do is randomly select five prominent atheists and five prominent theists and call all of their followers your two groups.  I know that not everybody who follows Dinesh D’Souza is a Christian and not everyone who follows Richard Dawkins is an atheist, but this is science… it doesn’t have to be exact.

So once you have your suspect samples, you analyze the words usage.  Whatever words are used more often are indicators of deep psychological truths about the people using them.  And we know this, because we just do.  It doesn’t matter that there’s no credible research or even logical reason to believe in the core assumption behind this research.  The people doing it wore lab coats or had pocket protectors or something and that makes what makes it science.

So with our rock solid assumption that people who say “happy” a lot are happy, people who say “family” a lot love their families and people who say “food” a lot are fat, we can go to work on our pseudo-data.  And when we do we discover our conclusion, which, you’ll recall, we decided on before we started the research.

In this instance, we’ve proven that atheists aren’t as happy as Christians and they don’t love their families as much.  Viola, conclusion reached, thesis proven, Nobel prize is in the mail.

Admittedly, some atheists have been a bit more critical about the research than I am.  They point out that there’s no reason to assume that people who follow prominent Christians and people who follow prominent atheists are using Twitter for the same purpose.  They point out that many atheists have multiple Twitter accounts and keep their atheism on one and their family stuff on the other.  They point out that even with a perfect sample the study would still be nonsense, as the average Christian is older than the average atheist, more likely to have children and more likely to come from a large family and any one of these covariances would render all the data worthless.  They point out that even if the data wasn’t useless, the conclusion still would be, considering that what they’ve proved is that a privileged majority is happier than the unprivileged minority.

But I think these critics are looking at it the wrong way.  So before you toss out this study just because it’s poorly constructed, obviously biased, impossible to blind, poorly conducted, unscientific and stupid, I should point out some other things this study finds.

Consider the fact that atheists were shown to be far more likely to use words like “reason”, “think”, “idea” and “knowledge”, so if we accept the flawed premise of this  flawed study it also proves that atheists are smarter than Christians.  In addition, it shows that atheists are more likely to use words like “dick”, “fuck” and “pussy”, so clearly we’re also getting laid more often than the Christians.

After all, if we accept the first conclusion and the others are reached through the exact same process, it’s hard to ignore… not so hard that the researchers didn’t manage to ignore it, but hard to ignore nonetheless.

And if you need any further proof that this is sound science, consider the alternative.  If this study isn’t legitimate scholarship, CNN just ran an article that used unproven science and half-ass conclusions to reinforce a hurtful stereotype that has no basis in fact and wouldn’t be newsworthy even if it did.  And we all know that could never happen.


“The God Song”


Well Jesus is great, he’s my best friend.

He’s the kinda fella who would die for your sins.

He says women should obey their men,

And ownin’ slaves is fine every now and again.


Well Jesus is my buddy and I’m really glad.

He’s the best buddy that a guy ever had.

And if you think some stuff he said was bad,

At least it’s nothing when compared to Jesus’s dad:


“Now let me tell you about that fella…”


He’s a homicidal, genocidal, pestilential, filicidal,

Petty jealous racist full of rage and spite.

Wicked and misogynistic, he’s a sado-masochistic

Homophobe that massacred Amalekites.

And Midianites.

And Sodomites.

And Perizzites and Moabites and Philistines and Benjamites,

Syrians, Assyrians, Ethiopians and Amorites.

And Egyptians.


“But we’re not yet, because he’s also…”


A Maleficent, Malevolent, Omnipotent, Irrelevant,

Megalomaniacal vindictive beast.

He’s ruthless and he’s useless; he’s an evil, brutal, futile nuisance.

Turned a chick to salt just for looking east.


Heartless, inexorable, rancorous and horrible,

He’s got a torture chamber and a thirst for blood,

He’s a fictitious, injudicious, vile, vicious, angry bitch;

His temper’s like a two year old with global floods.


He’s capricious and malicious and flagitious and pernicious

And an ethnic-cleansing bully of the highest sort,

Injurious, Inglorious, Nefarious, Notorious,

And when he raped a married virgin? Paid no child support.



Joining me for headlines tonight is my consiglieri Heath Enwright.  Heath, are you ready to con-siggle?

I’d be happy to.

Well, not according to those Twitter-ologists, you aren’t, but I’ll overlook it.

In our lead story tonight, we’re one step closer to legalized goat-sex thanks to the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act.

According to Rick Santorum, it’s not just one step closer… We’ve actually legalized the equivalent of goat sex.  

As all but one of our listeners know, the nation’s highest court recently struck down a 17 year old piece of bigoted legislation that denied federal benefits to same-sex spouses.

And just fucking barely.  The highest court in the land, which should be 9 of the most rational and intelligent people in the country, came as close as possible to a tie on this issue.  Which is almost as embarassing as the fact that gay marriage and gay rights in general are even an argument that’s still on the table.  

  • “If we could have made no decision on gay rights, we would have, but there’s fucking 9 of us, so we couldn’t tie.  And since Kennedy’s not a complete asshole, gays are people …  according to 55.6% of us here at the highest court.”

The reaction of America’s religious leaders was surprisingly muted and tolerant:


The ruling was even enough to prompt scientifically-anomalous unhappy Tweets from Christians, calling the decision a “Tragic Day for Marriage and Our Nation”, declaring that the “Supreme Court Overrules God” and that “Jesus Wept”.

But don’t worry, it’ll only be a few decades before the prominent Christian voices are taking credit for this.

We’re forgetting the real victim here . . . the good people over at Merriam-Webster, who will now have to work tirelessly around the clock to go through every dictionary, and cross out the part that says, ‘between a man and a woman’.

No, trust me, I’ve read the Tweets, Jesus is the real victim here.  Now, in honor of the DOMA ruling I put together my three favorite insane overreactions.  My number three was Rick Santorum and you already beat me to the punch on that one.  But I will say, in Rick’s defense, what is the difference between two consenting men or women entering into a legal bond of love and raping a donkey?

Mostly just the consent of the ass, I guess.

Number two was the verbal gymnastics of the guy with the most Christian name ever, Monsignor Charles Pope, who proposed the “freedom fry” option, suggesting that Christians just drop the word “marriage” altogether and switch to “Holy Matrimony”

Shit, yeah that would entirely disempower us f-word-lovers.  Is that really what he’s going for?

But the gold medal goes to the head of the Catholic Church’s matrimonial court, Archbishop Oscar Cruz, who answers the question “Can gay men get married?” with “To lesbians, sure.”

What is he, multiplying negative numbers in his weird little head?

Supreme Court Decision on DOMA and bigoted reactions from churches: &

Catholic Priest: It’s okay for gay men to marry lesbians: & Catholic Priest Suggests that in the wake of DOMA they should drop the word “marriage”

And in a follow up to a story we talked about in episode 17, American Atheist president David Silverman unveiled America’s first monument to atheism in Fuckville, Florida last week.  And, in the humble, deferential manner we’ve come to expect from Bible Belt Christians, a number of Evangelicals showed up to help us dedicate what inaugural Farnsworth quoter and blogger Hemant Mehta has deemed a “Non”-ument.

I was gonna say Skepti-Couch . . . or Secu-Lounger . . .  or Seat of Doubt.

Protesters blasted Christian music and carried signs that read “Honk for Jesus”, “Preserve Florida’s Christian Culture” and “The South is a Christian Nation”.

Where the fuck do southern, conservative Christians get the balls to have pride as a group?  And how does Christianity get southern blacks on board so well?  Shouldn’t there be more awkward guilt around the South?  You don’t see conservative Germans flying Third Reich flags . . . 

And as if to lend validity to your point, according to our friends at Bar Room Atheist one of the signs actually read “Hook for Jeses”.

One lover of the lord tried to place a toilet seat on the bench during the ceremony, but not to be out-douched, prominent creationist and son of a felon Eric Hovind jumped on top of the monument to scream about how awesome Jesus was.  Hovind said that he was happy that the American Atheist had provided him a platform to preach from that was 48 inches high; ten inches short of being one inch tall for every felony conviction for which his father is concurrently serving time.

So the genius who – at one point – was carrying around a toilet seat in public . . .

I’m just guessing, but he probably wasn’t making an artistic philosophical statement relating to Marcel Duchamp, was he?

I really hope somebody out there gets that.

The big news out of the unveiling ceremony is that the show was so popular they’re taking it on the road.  Silverman announced that American Atheists are prepared to put up as many as 50 similar monuments all over the country in a social counter-offensive to the fundamentalist assholes who put Christian monuments on public property.

Excellent . . . Looking forward to The Seat of Doubt Tour <bunch of assholes>

Atheist Bench Unveiled in Starke, FL: &

And in this week’s “How many felonies can the Catholics fit into one Scandal?” report, the Milwaukee Archdiocese was recently forced to release 6000 pages of Sexual abuse documents due to allegations of bankruptcy fraud stemming from some financial shenanigans allegedly intended to shield money from abuse victims.

Atheist Podcasters are already – as I speak – calling this the “Anal Leaks Scandal”.

Depends . . . but this could get messy.  

And as it happens, Cardinal Timothy Dolan appears to have his hands about elbow deep in the anal leakage, too, as included in the documents is a deposition where he suggests moving money to a “cemetery maintenance fund” to keep it shielded from future claims.

So if it wasn’t obvious to everyone already, the Catholic Church is officially – financially . . . and morally – bankrupt.    

  • “Ok, yes . . . we raped a bunch of kids, but if the courts make us pay for it, that would be prostitution, which is wrong.  We didn’t want to make whores out of these kids, just innocent rape victims.  Rape victims go to heaven.  Think about that trade.  Rape victim for several decades on earth, but then eternal bliss.  We’re doing favors, here.  We’re raping stairways to heaven for these kids.”

To Dolan’s credit, most of the documentation I’ve seen up to this point shows him impotently trying whatever he can to get these pedophiles the fuck out of the priesthood and while I’m not sure I’m in love with his proposed solution of paying them to leave and never turning them into the cops, he’s made to seem far less villainous by the merit of the people writing him back and saying, “No, pedophile or no, we need all the priests we can get.”

Milwaukee Archdiocese releases sexual abuse files:

And in “We’re-worse-than-we-thought” news, a new international religion poll from German non-profit Bertelsmann Stiftung makes me want to swim with toasters.

So I take it we didn’t do that well?

The survey compared religious views of 13 nations and if you’re grading this thing fairly, the US lost to pretty much everyone on pretty much everything.

Among the study’s findings:

  • Americans lead all 13 nations in believing that (quote) “Only politicians who believe in god are suitable for public office”.

  • The very first amendment clearly says, “Don’t do that.”

  • Americans are the most willing to make sacrifices for their religion

  • It’s really just happiness and societal progress . . . so not THAT big a sacrifice.

  • And 50% of Americans find atheists (quote) “threatening”.

  • They fucking should.  We’re expediting their inevitable removal from the political decision-making process.        

The survey doesn’t offer any answers to the obvious follow up question: “Is it too late to un-secede from England?”

I’d be down for an Evolutionary War, where we get back with England for atheist reasons, by taking them back over.  And then give away Northern Ireland for spite.  Maybe drop the South on waivers.

I’d also like some answers on what, exactly, that 50% is afraid we vile secularists are going to do.  Are they afraid we’re gonna incur the wrath of their petty god?  Are they afraid we’re gonna make it legal to gay-marry a harem of chinchillas?  Or are they afraid we’re gonna prove they don’t get to go to eat sky-cake when they die?

Well I probably shouldn’t even be talking about this, but Phase 2 of our plot IS complete.  That’s all I’ll say, but they should certainly be threatened.

Or . . .  Is it that everyone on the wrong, backwards, misinformed side of every argument ever, is threatened by the truthier side?  The 50% number would be higher if more theists were smart enough to recognize their obsolescence.

New Survey: 50% of Americans find atheists “threatening”:

And from the “How-Much-Will-You-Give-Me-For-This-Golden-Rule?” file, Australian priest, Anglican opportunist and shining example of Christianity in practice Terry McAuliffe got a little unwanted press last week over an incident involving a lost bracelet and an asshole.

Please tell me this dude found a bracelet in his asshole.

…or in his gay lover’s asshole.

No, were that the case it would have been the lead story.

Oh, so instead we’re sticking it somewhere in the rear?

The story goes like this; he finds a bracelet valued at around $6,500.  He tracks down the owners and offers to sell it back to them for half the price.  But don’t worry, he wasn’t only trying to fuck them on the deal.  He also suggested that they continue to claim it as lost and recover the money by scamming their insurance company.

“Wait… you’re telling me I get the bracelet that demonstrably belongs to me and I get to pay you $3000 and all I have to do is commit felony insurance fraud?  What’s the catch?”

Yeah, if it sounds too good to be true…

The one good thing he does here is suggest screwing the insurance company, but that doesn’t exactly make him Robin Hood here.  He’s stealing from the rich, and stealing from the poor.

Once the story hit the news the good reverend had a quick change of heart and offered instead to return the bracelet at no cost, stop being an asshole and wonder why he hadn’t just raped some kids instead.

Anglican Priest finds bracelet, tries to sell it to owners:

And in “God-Hates-Your-Jiggly-Bits” news, the Christian Post brings us the story of two Christian ministries in Southern California who are willing to bravely venture deep into the heart of the satanic underworld of strip clubs and porn conventions to win souls back for Jesus.

Among those brainwashed into doing Christian charity work, I imagine a “missionary position” like that is highly prized, so they probably only have a couple of holes to fill at once.  

With names like (I shit you not) “JC’s girls” and “XXXChurch”, the ministries go to strip clubs armed with gift baskets that contain things like (I still shit you not) “Lotions, lip gloss and hot pink bibles” these groups send their crew to (again, I still shit you not), “strip clubs, brothels and between 8 and 11 porn conventions a year”

“If just one hooker find solace in her new pink bible, after getting sodomized for money, then we’ve done our job.  And if just one porn star uses her pink bible to block a money shot, we get some good free product placement.”

Ok let’s put 20 seconds on the clock – Church Porn Titles . . . Go!

Lord of the Thighs

Cream Piety  

How about Nympho Nuns Nine: The Naughty Nazarite?

Missionary Impossible

12 Apostles, One Cup

Numbers Colon 69

Can you reach the colon, in a 69?

Sheri Brown, lead coordinator of the San Diego Chapter of JC’s Girls told the Christian Post that god calls them to “reach out in love”, “form bonds with desperate women”, “offer them fulfillment” and “bring them to their knees for Jesus”; and then honestly expects us not to make fuck jokes about it.

Ok so what you’re saying is, “Last call for missionary fucking jokes.” . . .

“The Consu-Matrix” immaculate conception porn, starring Holey Trinity as the Virgin Mary. . .

It’s a threesome with Mary, Joseph, and God.

I love the concept of immaculate conception porn.

Yeah, kind of looks like masturbation… you can’t really tell.

Christian Outreach focused on Strip Clubs and Porn Conventions:

And with those sexy images swimming through your head we’ll close out the headlines for the night.  Heath, thanks as always for joining me.

And when we come back, you’ll realize that we never really left.

Bible Story:

Run grab the young ‘uns, folks!  It’s time for Lucinda Lugeons’ Bible Stories for Kids!


Gather around boys and girls.  Today we’re gonna open the bible up to Genesis and talk about the story of Lot’s daughters.

Now once upon a time there was a man named Lot.  Lot had two daughters whose names weren’t important enough to record in the bible, because they were women.

Lot and his family grew up in a town called Sodom, a town where a lot of daddies loved a lot of other daddies in the butt.  God hates gay people so he really, really hates whole towns of gay people.  So one day he decided to destroy the town and all the people who lived in it.

But don’t worry, kids.  Lot’s daughters were safe.  God loved them more than the other people who lived there, so he sent two angels to warn them.  They wouldn’t have to die.  It would only be their sisters, all of their friends and all the little dogs and cats and hamsters that lived there that would perish in a fiery catastrophe.  And trust me, boys and girls, the hamsters that lived in Sodom were begging for death.

But when the two angels showed up to warn Lot and his family, all the villagers, young and old gathered around because they wanted to anally rape the angels.  But anally raping angels is very naughty so Lot said “No villagers!  Don’t rape the angels!  You can rape my daughters instead.”  And he threw his two virginal, innocent daughters to a mob of diseased, rape-starved perverts.

But luckily for Lot’s daughters, the villagers really wanted to rape the angels instead, so the angels struck them blind.


Lot and his family had to move very quickly because death and torment was about to befall everyone they’d ever known.  So mommy, daddy and their two daughters ran away.  But mommy looked back at the town, so god killed her by turning her into salt.  Because if you look in the wrong direction, sometimes god kills you.

So with their mommy dead and all of their friends and pets burned alive, they hid in a cave and slept on rocks with nobody to keep them company but their drunken daddy.  And what’s even worse, they had nobody to have sex with except their daddy.  Of course, daddy wouldn’t want to have sex with them because daddy’s having sex with their daughters is naughty, so they got daddy really drunk and they force-fucked him several times.

They both got pregnant with inbred rape-children who they loved very much and the few people who lived through the story lived happily ever after.

The End.


Henchman: “Heath, Noah… SCOTUS has overturned DOMA.”

(Sinister Laughs)

It’s all proceeding exactly according to plan.

Gather the others.  We must meet tonight.

(Scene Switch Sound Effect)

I hereby call this meeting of the League of….  

Um… Doctor Myers, Mister Dillahunty… The buffet is supposed to be for after the…

Whatever, I now call… you’re really gonna just take all the baby-bacon?  The whole platter.  No… that’s fine.  Um… yeah.  That’s fine.

Like I was saying, I hereby call this meeting of the League of Sinister Secularists to Order.  The honorless Noah Lugeons presiding.

Thank you, Heath.  Now obviously we all know there’s big news this week, but first things first.  Heath, can you read us the minutes of the last meeting?

We all started off pledging allegiance to Darwin, we hated America for a little while, Greta gave us an update about her cats, Doctor Myers and Mister Dillahunty ate all the baby-bacon before I got to the buffet, and we decided to go with the bench instead of the Trojan-Horse Satan Sculpture I submitted.

Thank you, Heath.  Now if there’s no new business, I’d like to move on to the… Um, Hemant, can you practice your sinister finger steepling some other time?  This is important.  Thank you.  And um… Tom, Cecil… We’re all still really impressed that you can both do that with your testicles, but if you don’t mind, we’re trying to have a meeting here.

Now, as you all know, we’ve received word that the Supreme Court has struck down DOMA, leaving marriage completely defenseless.


Yes, we should all be proud of the job we’ve done, but this is no time to rest on our laurels.  The family isn’t destroyed yet.

You can’t even legally marry a sheep yet.

That’s right!  Polygamy, bestiality, child-sacrifice; none of that is legal yet.  And nevermind gay adoption… why aren’t those kids being aborted in the first place?

Or made into bacon?  Or both?  Fetus bacon is like the pre-veal filet mignon of atheist cuisine.  In French, ‘mignon’ means cute, so this makes sense.  If babies are cute, then fetuses are fucking adorable.  And small strips of that tender, undifferentiated fetus meat, slowly smoked, and then fried in its own almost babyfat . . . fucking delicious.      

Exactly.  We’ve won an important battle, but we can’t lose sight of the war.  Heath, what are we doing to further cement the destruction of traditional American values?

We’re drafting legislation now that would make happiness illegal in the month of December.  We’ve got some of our top agents planting more apocryphal evolution fossils.  And we’re still looking into that end-of-the-world-building from Ghostbusters, see if that’s for real, but it’s not looking good..

That’s not enough!  Is it still legal to be heterosexual!?  Why haven’t we fixed that yet?  Is it still legal to love your neighbor and be moral?  We’ve been fighting against that for centuries to no avail.

I think it’s time to enact phase 3 of the plan.

Is that the one where we cease human births and turn to cloning just to piss god off?

No… that’s phase 6.

Oh, right.  Three is the one where we kidnap Anna Kendrick and chain her up in your basement.

No, that’s phase 13 and that one was tentative.  Phase three is the part where we make Christians get UPC symbols tattooed on their wrists and foreheads.  I tell you, I’m starting to think nobody’s reading my memos but Glenn Beck.  And how the hell did he get a hold of those anyway?

Yeah, we’re still looking into that.

Hemant, the steepling.  Don’t get me wrong folks; I don’t mean to downplay the significance of this ruling, but as long as happiness, democracy and virgins are still out there, we can’t afford time to celebrate.  Remember, we can’t take away their ignorance, but we can damn sure take away their bliss!


Before we cash in our chips tonight, we need to take a few seconds to recognize this week’s most exceptional mammals; Lindsay, April, Jason, Douglas and  Geoff spelled the cool way.  The quintessence of non-quiescent quercine qualities, this quick-witted quintet quietly quelled the quarrelsome quandary about quartering our quirky, quodlibetical quest by quantifying their appreciation and giving us money.

If you, too, would like to be the subject of some archaic alliteration and earnest appreciation, you can help keep this whole experiment going by clicking on the donate button on the right side of our homepage at Scathing Atheist (dot) com and giving til it hurts.  And then continuing to give because you can take it.

All jokes aside, in all seriousness, we really do want your money.  But if we can’t talk you out of your hard earned dollars, you can always help us out by leaving us a glowing review on iTunes because that’s free.

That’s all we’ve got for you this week but if you want more, there’s more.  Frank and Dan at Thank God I’m Atheist invited me over to defend the utility of acerbic atheism the other day.  It was a really good discussion and you can find it on episode 85 of their show, which will be linked on the shownotes for this episode.

TGIA Archive:

I also need to thank Heath once more for all he does to make this thing possible, and of course, my lovely wife Lucinda for providing the bible story this week and, of course, for performing adult services for me for 17 years and counting.  I also want to offer a concurrent thanks and apology to my muse Richard Dawkins, whose voluminous vocabulary acted as the inspiration for the song this week, as anyone who’s read the God Delusion probably already figured out.

I should also point out that I’m in a constant state of scrambling for Farnsworth quotes so if you have a blog, a podcast, a facebook page or even a consistently interesting Twitter feed, I’d be happy to throw you a plug in exchange for a 5 second audio clip of you quoting the 22nd century’s most stylish professor.

And finally tonight, I want to thank you, dear listener, for giving us 30 minutes of your life.  We’ll be hard at work trying to earn 30 more minutes next week but until then, you can also check out our erratically published blog and get occasional nuggets of Scatheism by following us on the Twitter, liking us on the Facebook and subscribing to us on the YouTube.

If you have question, comments or death threats, you’ll find all the contact info on the contact page at Scathing Atheist (dot) com.  All the music used in this episode was written and performed by yours truly and yes, I did have my permission.