Politics and such


First, let me begin by saying that I am neither Libertarian nor Republican. I do not believe in elitism or any other practice that purposely disenfranchises sections of humanity. I am an atheist middle-of-the-road type who believes in the reality and certainty of Natural Selection as well as the hardwiring of human inclinations to destroy themselves. My statement that 90% of humanity is composed of followers remains true as is demonstrated by the animal in question. 10% of humanity are forward thinkers and less than 2% are natural born leaders, and the 90% drag the 10% down and thwart most of the good that the 10% could ever accomplish. This has been repetitious throughout human history since the formation of villages.

In the village there were village elders who held authority due to experience and charisma and directed the function of the body of people to greater efficiency or to complete ruin, it depended upon the leader. As humanity overcame natural predators, we gathered into concentrations of greater numbers and abandoned the hunter-gatherer way of life in favor of agrarian society. Villages appeared with small governmental structures and alliances or wars were made against opposing human concentration. History remains very much the same in that the elders, kings, whatever they called themselves, were many times afforded the ability to ignore the very laws that they themselves created because they had become corrupt and greedy. Seem familiar?

Today we complain about deregulation and the oligarchs that it has created. The ‘village elders’ have enacted broad deregulation of all of the major industries in this nation which in turn has allowed a select few to buy everything and stamp out small competition and bring the working people under the corporate boot. This is no different from the practices of 10,000 years ago and will continue until humanity has self-destructed or, on the off chance, evolved beyond the need for killing his brother, which I don’t think is possible. We can put a microchip on the head of a pin in 1967 but can’t control base animal behavior in 2015; we’re gonna fucking die!

Don’t be stupid people, we are full on oligarchy in the U.S and are nothing more than a corporate state with 1% of our population about ready to corner 40% of global wealth, that does NOT bode well for anyone and there is no significant opposition to this form of condoned indentured servitude! People are watching the fucking Kartrashians and worrying about what that stupid vapid whore Kim is gonna name her next genetically challenged supertard instead of trying to prevent corporate America from putting chains around their necks! Unbe-fucking-levable! Get your Goddamned face out of Michelle Duggar’s fucking diseased, well-traveled snatch and pay attention to whats going on before you end up having to hoist a rifle to protect your way of life!! But then again, instead of enacting sensible gun legislation, you pussies will probably try to ban them first. Hitler himself said that the best way to conquer a people was to first disarm them, and I truly believe in this. I believe that one of the reasons that we don’t experience the same problems as the Western Europeans is that terrorists fear our legal gun owners and know that they would never make it to trial if they tried the shit that they did with Charlie Hebdo, (Je suis Charlie, by the way, you savage pieces of shit!).

We, as a nation, are living up to the expectations of those who decry our lack of historical knowledge. We are repeating the most basic corruptions practiced by village elders of pre-history, we are excusing the transgressions of our leadership and looking the other way until things are so fucked up that it takes armed bloodshed to correct! We are doomed, I say. I have no faith in humanity to correct their greed and avarice, so I expect that we will destroy ourselves and another species will become dominant, period. All that I can do as a father, is to protect my children for as long as I can and hope beyond hope that humanity is more than just a base animal, I think not.

Fuck the talk about minimum wage and the bullshit about redistribution of wealth, we won’t be around long enough for anything to make a difference. Free-Speech TV is just a granola-shitting attempt to envision the human race giving a shit about one another and that is truly delusional shit. Much of it is crap anyway and doesn’t jibe with any real situation whatsoever, big fucking surprise.

An amazing person!



Planetary scientist Carolyn Porco

Carolyn Porco is the leader of the imaging science team on the Cassinimission presently in orbit around Saturn, a veteran imaging scientist of theVoyager mission to the outer solar system in the 1980s, and an imaging scientist on the New Horizons mission on its way to Pluto and the Kuiper Belt. Carolyn has co-authored over 115 scientific papers on a variety of subjects in astronomy and planetary science and has become a regular public commentator on science, astronomy, planetary exploration, and the intersection of science and religion. Her popular science writings have appeared in such distinguished publications as the London Sunday Times, The New York Times, the Guardian, Astronomy magazine, the PBS and BBC websites, the Arizona Daily Star, Sky and Telescope, Scientific American, and American Scientist.

Carolyn’s research over the past 40 years has ranged across the outer solar system to the interstellar medium. The majority of her time has been spent studying the planetary rings encircling the giant planets and the interactions between rings and orbiting moons. In particular, she has been responsible for the discovery of one of the Neptune ring arcs; for elucidating the behavior of the non-axisymmetric rings and ring edges in the rings of Saturn, Uranus and Neptune; and for predicting in 1993 (along with then University of Arizona graduate student Mark Marley) that acoustic oscillations within the body of Saturn could produce specific wave features in Saturn’s rings. This prediction was verified 20 years later using Cassini observations, resulting in the first demonstration that planetary rings could serve as a seismograph and ultimately provide the means to improve knowledge of a planet’s internal structure.

Carolyn has also been responsible for leading the Cassini imaging team in a host of seminal discoveries on Jupiter and its ring during Cassini’s flyby of that planet in 2000/2001, and on Saturn and its rings and moons since the spacecraft’s arrival there in 2004.

In recent years, Carolyn has increasingly turned her attention to the study of Enceladus, the small Saturnian moon whose south polar region was found, in images taken by her Cassini team, to be the site of over 100 tall geysers of icy particles erupting from four distinct, deep fractures crossing the region. This and other Cassini findings point to a sub-surface, salty, organics-rich sea beneath the south polar terrain as the geysers’ source, making Enceladus home to the most accessible extraterrestrial habitable zone in the solar system.

Carolyn Porco speaking

Carolyn continues to be active in the presentation of science to the public as the leader of the Cassini Imaging Team. She is the creator/editor of the team’sCICLOPS website where Cassini images are posted, and she writes the site’s homepage “Captain’s Log” greetings to the public. Carolyn is a popular public lecturer and speaks frequently on the Cassini mission and planetary exploration in general. She has appeared at such renowned cross-disciplinary conferences as TED (2009, 2007) and PopTech (2006, 2005). She is the CEO and President of Diamond Sky Productions, LLC.

For the 1997 film Contact, based on the novel by fellow astronomer Carl Sagan, Carolyn served as the consultant on the main character, Ellie Arroway. In 2008, she was invited by J.J. Abrams, the director/producer of the 2009 release, Star Trek, to join the film’s production crew as a consultant on planetary imagery.

Carolyn was responsible for the proposal to honor the late renowned planetary geologist Eugene Shoemaker by sending a portion of his cremains to the moon aboard the Lunar Prospector spacecraft. She also conceived of the epitaph, engraved on a thin brass foil, which accompanied the ashes to the moon.

Carolyn played instrumental roles in the taking of three iconic photographs of planet Earth from the outer solar system. She participated, along with Carl Sagan, in planning the 1990 “Portrait of the Planets” taken with the Voyager 1 spacecraft, which included the famous Pale Blue Dot image of Earth. Later with Cassini, she and her team took one of Cassini’s most beloved images of Saturn and its rings during the planet’s solar eclipse, with Earth visible in the distance. And she is the creator of The Day The Earth Smiled, an event that took place on July 19, 2013, when Cassini once again pointed sunward to image Saturn, its rings and the Earth. This time, however, a long-distance photo of Earthwas taken with the full advance knowledge of members of the public, who were invited to take part in a day of reflection and celebration of humanity’s place in the cosmos.

Carolyn has been the recipient of a number of awards and honors for her contributions to science and the public sphere. She is the namesake of Asteroid (7231) Porco, which was named to honor her work in planetary science. In 1999, she was selected by the London Sunday Times as one of 18 scientific leaders of the 21st century, and by Industrial Week as one of “50 Stars to Watch”. In 2009, New Statesman named her as one of the “50 People Who Matter Today.” In 2010 she was awarded the Carl Sagan Medal, presented by the American Astronomical Society for Excellence in the Communication of Science to the Public. And in 2012, she was named one the 25 most influential people in space byTIME magazine.

-Seth Andrews of The Thinking Atheist just interviewed her and she is the most incredible person! Voyager, Cassini, Humanist of the Year, technical adviser on TWO of my favorite movies? This person has lived life to the fullest and is good without gods! What a refreshing interview.

Beautiful atheists!




Latest Issue
Contact Us
Syndicate HNN

In honor of Valentine’s Day (and just because we like to have a lot of fun here at Humanist Network News), we’ve come up with the list of the Top Ten Sexiest Female Atheists! Enjoy!

Please note: This article is just for fun. We of course think the women listed below are sexy for both their looks and their brains. 🙂


#1: Angelina Jolie

Goodwill Ambassador for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), actress and director. Won an Academy Award, two Screen Actors Guild Awards and three Golden Globes. Known for roles in Girl, Interrupted, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider and Changeling, to name just a few.

In September 2000, The Onion A.V. Club asked celebrities “Is There A God?”

Angelina Jolie: “Hmm… For some people. I hope so, for them. For the people who believe in it, I hope so. There doesn’t need to be a God for me.”

#2: Mira Sorvino

Actress. Won an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress her role in Mighty Aphrodite. She is also known for her performances in Romy and Michele’s High School Reunion, Attack on Leningrad and Multiple Sarcasms.

In a 2007 interview with GQ magazine, Mira stated, “When you are a Christian, your law is laid out for you in codified form. You can have some kind of debate about this or that, but basically you’re supposed to accept God’s will. There is no argument about whether there is a definitive right and wrong. And once you know this law, nobody else can be right unless they agree with you. And so you wind up with, ‘You are wrong. You are mistaken. You are sinning. You are in error.’ I find that extremely restrictive and impossible.”

#3: Julianne Moore

Actress and author. She has been nominated for four Oscars, six Golden Globes and nine Screen Actors Guild Awards. She is known for roles in Short Cuts, The Big Lebowski and Far from Heaven.

On Inside The Actors Studio:

Host: “What would you like to hear God say to you at the pearly gates?”

Moore: “Well…. I guess you were wrong, I do exist.”

#4: Janeane Garofalo

Satirist, comedian, writer, actor, political activist. She has had TV roles on News Radio, The West Wing and The Larry Sanders Show, among many others. Her films have included The Truth About Cats & Dogs, MatchMaker and The Laramie Project.

Janeane frequently discusses her atheism, including in the past on her former radio talk show and on Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher, and has said: “The Bible, I’ve said it before, is a beautifully written work of fiction.”

#5: Adrianne Curry

Model and actress. She was the first winner of the reality television series America’s Next Top Model.

Tweeted: “I am more agnostic. I do not believe in organized religion, nor do I think the human mind capable of the complexity of reality.”

#6: Annika Sorenstam

Professional golfer (until 2008). While playing as a professional, she won 90 international tournaments, including 10 majors.

Was quoted in an article conducted in her native Swedish as saying: “I believe in the good message that’s found in religion. But I doubt there’s someone up there above the clouds running the show.”

#7: Kari Byron

Co-host of the TV program MythBusters and host of Head Rush.

Said in an interview with Suicide Girls: “I am an atheist, but I don’t begrudge anyone for whatever belief systems they hold.”

#8: Nigella Lawson

Journalist, food writer and broadcaster. She has written the books How to Eat and How to be a Domestic Goddess and has had successful cooking shows on the UK’s BBC Two and Channel 4, as well as Food Network’s Nigella Feasts.

Told The Times (UK) (and quoted on Wikipedia): “I was brought up an atheist and have always remained so. But at no time was I led to believe that morality was unimportant or that good and bad did not exist. I believe passionately in the need to distinguish between right and wrong and am somewhat confounded by being told I need God, Jesus or a clergyman to help me to do so.”

#9: Asia Argento

Italian actress, director, singer, writer and model. She won awards for her roles in Perdiamoci di vista! and Compagna di viaggio, as well as an award for directing. She has written novels and magazine articles, and appeared in online outlets and music videos.

In an audience Q+A session, Argento answered a question about her religious beliefs by saying: “God is a concept by which we can measure our pain. I just believe in me. Yoko and me. And that`s reality. The dream is over. What can I say?”

#10: Eva Green

Actress and model. Her films include The Dreamers, Kingdom of Heaven and Casino Royale.

She told Total Film magazine: “I have no religion. I wasn’t raised that way, and I have nothing now.”

Think your favorite atheist celebrity deserves to be on this list? Let us know in the comments section!

-Hmmmmm, strong women who do not believe in the misogynist God concept created by the dominant males of the time!!!!

The Selfish Gene.


The selfish gene describes the essence of the human race in the genius of the Richard Dawkins book of the same name. As a reader of the Four Horsemen, as they are called, Hithchens, Dawkins, Harris and Dennett, I am stricken by the almost clairvoyant observation into the nature of mankind and it’s complete relevancy in the genre of the study of our base nature. Humanity likes to deem itself special in the world of mammals because of the ability to build societies and reason over the lower forms of animals, but they fail to realize that their predilection for self preservation places them pretty much at the base as with any other life form.

Humans are treacherous, feeding off of and hunting themselves in just as savage a way as the most base form of life. They think that because they can record their history that they are a bit more evolved than those species that lack a serial killer, but that is the ultimate weakness, the chink in the armor. Please Chinese people, don’t take offense in my offhanded use of the word chink. 4:20 people still describe their hazy eyes as this.

Altruistic demonstrations are but a built in nature for protecting the species and not an actual show of sacrifice for the individual. As described in The Selfish Gene, these acts benefit the race and are necessary to continuing genetic superiority and have nothing to do with a higher form of being, only a proliferation of a superior gene. Primitive beings have throughout the ages proscribed natural occurrences to supernatural deities but have gleaned through science a more sensible explanation for these things as technology progressed to advance civilization.

Fringe fanatical belief sects still reject the reality of science and posit their completely unfounded notions as to the origins of man, but these are as ancient a fallacy as the Greek and Roman myths of old who held to that which could never ever stand the test of logic and reason. God, in the Abrahamaic notion, is as fantastical as Apollo and Zeus in the foolish supposition that He could have been the creator of the known universe. The scholars of the time were not even regaled with His knowledge that the Earth was round, let alone that the ark couldn’t possibly have performed the way that the fable describes.

Christians are burdened with the task of refuting impossible statistics and continuing the circuitous arguments of the likes of William Lane Craig and Cye Ten Bruggencate. When did God begin? Where was his beginning? No answer! If the Universe can’t come from nothing, the same rules apply to your God!! Read The Selfish Gene and learn from it! I could care less about PC feelgood bullshit! Personal responsibility is where it’s at, euthanasia is awesome and fuck your feel good take on people opting out of responsibility! If you can’t get your shit together than there sure as Hell shouldn’t be a safety net to catch you!

BULLSHIT extraordinare

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost’s signature lineup of contributors
Hot on the Blog

Pastor Rick Henderson

Pastor, blogger and grace addict

GET UPDATES FROM Pastor Rick Henderson


Why There Is No Such Thing as a Good Atheist

Posted: 12/18/2013 11:13 pm




You clicked on this post for one of two reasons. Either you’re hoping that I’m right or you know that I’m wrong. For those of you who are eager to pierce me with your wit and crush my pre-modern mind, allow me to issue a challenge. I contend that any response you make will only prove my case. Like encountering a hustler on the streets of Vegas, the deck is stacked, and the odds are not in your favor.

Before our love fest continues, allow me to define an important term, “worldview.” A worldview is your view of everything inside (and possibly outside) the universe: truth, religion, beauty, war, morality, Nickleback — everything. Everybody has one.

While it is true that there is no definitive atheistic worldview, all atheists share the same fundamental beliefs as core to their personal worldviews. While some want to state that atheism is simply a disbelief in the existence of a god, there really is more to it. Every expression of atheism necessitates at least three additional affirmations:

1. The universe is purely material. It is strictly natural, and there is no such thing as the supernatural (e.g., gods or spiritual forces).

2. The universe is scientific. It is observable, knowable and governed strictly by the laws of physics.

3. The universe is impersonal. It does not a have consciousness or a will, nor is it guided by a consciousness or a will.

Denial of any one of those three affirmations will strike a mortal blow to atheism. Anything and everything that happens in such a universe is meaningless. A tree falls. A young girl is rescued from sexual slavery. A dog barks. A man is killed for not espousing the national religion. These are all actions that can be known and explained but never given any meaning or value.

A good atheist — that is, a consistent atheist — recognizes this dilemma. His only reasonable conclusion is to reject objective meaning and morality. Thus, calling him “good” in the moral sense is nonsensical. There is no morally good atheist, because there really is no objective morality. At best, morality is the mass delusion shared by humanity, protecting us from the cold sting of despair.

For those of you who think you’re about to light up this supposed straw man and raze me to the ground, consider the following:

“Modern science directly implies that there … is no ultimate meaning for humans.”
–William Provine

“The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. … DNA neither knows nor cares. DNA just is. And we dance to its music.”
–Richard Dawkins

“No species, ours included, possesses a purpose beyond the imperatives created by its genetic history.”
–Edward O. Wilson

Based on the nonnegotiable premises of atheism, these are the only logical conclusions. But I’ve never met an atheist who’s managed to live this way. All the atheists I’ve known personally and from afar live as if there is objective meaning and morality. How is this explained? In a Hail Mary-like attempt to reconcile the inescapability of objective morality and their assurances of atheism, two possible answers are launched.

1. Morality is the result of socio-biological evolution. This is a two-pronged attempt at justifying moral claims. First, a sense of morality evolved to ensure human survival. Much like an eye or tooth, it is necessary for the human race to continue. If this were true, for any claim to be moral, it would have to serve the practical purpose of advancing the human race. So compassion for the dying would be immoral, and killing mentally handicapped children would be moral. Perhaps the most moral action would be men raping many women and forcing them to birth more children.

Morality, in this view, can only mean those actions that are helpful to make more fit humans. It does nothing to help us grapple with the truth that it’s always wrong to torture diseased children or rape women.

Second, morality was developed to ensure the success of societies, which are necessary for human survival and thriving. Like the rules of a board game, morality is contrived to bring us together for productivity and happiness. If this were true, there is nothing to which we can appeal when we find the behavior of other societies repugnant and reprehensible. Because morality is the construct of a social group, it cannot extend further than a society’s borders or endure longer than a society’s existence.

Furthermore, within our own society, the most immoral are not merely the ones who transgress our code but the ones who intend to change it. This would make those fighting for marriage equality the most immoral — that is, until they become the majority and institute change. I suppose they then become moral, and traditionalists become immoral. But it’s the math that determines rightness or wrongness of a side, not the content of any belief or argument.

So this view of morality does nothing to provide a reasonable answer for why it would be objectively wrong to torture diseased children, rape women or kill those who don’t affirm a national religion. It only provides a motivation for continuing the delusion of objective morality.

2. Morality is logical. Atheists who take this route start in a position of checkmate without realizing it. First, the temptation is to pervert this conversation into a debate about whether atheists can be moral. Of course they can. That is not the question. The question is how we make sense of moral claims if we play by the rules that atheism demands.

Morality may be logical, but logic does not equate to morality. The only way to make a logical moral argument is to presuppose morality and meaning to start with. Try making a logical argument that slavery is wrong without presupposing morality. It is impossible. A woman wrote to me with her attempt at doing just that. Her claim was that slavery is logically wrong because it diminishes other human beings. The problem is that that argument presupposes human dignity. In the strict framework of atheism outlined above, what reason is there to ever assume human dignity?

All logical arguments for morality assume that human thriving, happiness and dignity are superior to contrary views. The strict framework of atheism does not allow for those starting points. So any person arguing for 1 or 2 would not be a good atheist. That is, he lives in contradiction to the mandates of his worldview.


Intelligent people ask serious questions. Serious questions deserve serious answers. There are few questions more serious than the one I’m asking. How do we explain objective meaning and morality that we know are true? If a worldview can’t answer this question, it doesn’t deserve you.

One sign that your worldview may be a crutch is that it has to appeal to an answer outside itself — becoming self-contradictory, unable to reasonably account for the question. Any atheist who recognizes objective meaning and morality defies the atheism that he contends is true.

If your worldview can’t makes sense of the things that make most sense to you (like objective morality), then it’s not worth your allegiance. This new reality may launch you onto a journey of reluctant discovery. Whoever you are. Wherever you are. Whatever you believe. You deserve a foundation that is strong enough to carry the values that carry you.



Follow Pastor Rick Henderson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Rick_says

REALLY?? Really dude!!?? This tired old bullshit riff again? Are you up with current events? Have you learned of all the horrible things done by the churches in the NAME of your religion??!! Do some real secular research instead of trying to prove the bible WITH the bible! I, personally, have a higher moral standing than your mytical barbarian god mainly because I do not sit idly by while terrible things happen and explain it off as “free will.” I also would NOT fuck with one of my followers and take him nearly to suicide to make him prove his loyalty to me! I would not bless the family of Noah for his daughters’ incest while I was in a drunken stupor! Why on goddamned Earth would any sane being trust a fucking drunk to save mankind? This entire fable is an amoral affront to the reader, and YOU speak of morality? What a joke! Please don’t let us forget that this barbarian egotistical piece of shit also admonished a man to kill his son to prove loyalty. This is plainly the written work of a primitive, Bronze-age author who, at the time was writing to a bunch of illiterate followers.

To even use the WORD morality in the same breath when extolling the virtues of blindly following an ancient myth, leaves me shuddering in a 21st Century when so many people still follow this obvious delusion! Please let me tell you that I will remember this little speech the next time I read the hateful vitriol of some deluded preacher or once again am reminded of the pedophilia in the Boy Scouts, Catholic Church, Mormon Church and many OTHER fine moral bastions of christianity! Yeah bubba! You people REALLY cornered the market on morals, let me say! Also, an atheist is just a person that is not stupid enough to blindly believe in a foolish myth, not someone who absolutely believes in spontaneous being from nothing! On a lighter note, if your myth is so powerful, then why does he require prostration from his followers like some egomaniacal troll in the mountain…HMMMM?