Church for Atheists

This sounds a bit like the old joke about an atheist at his funeral: all dressed up and no place to go, but it seems to be real enough. I read about the first church for atheists at wnd.com.

It’s believed to be the first “atheist church” and it is scheduled to hold its first “service” on Sunday in London, according to a report from The Christian Institute.

“Stand-up comedians Sanderson Jones and Pippa Evans, who are behind the ‘church,’ say they like many aspects of religion but don’t believe in God,” the Institute reported yesterday.

So no problem. They’ve created plans for now for a once-a-month meeting for those who, well, don’t believe.

“We thought it would be a shame not to enjoy the good stuff about religion, like the sense of community, just because of a theological disagreement,” Jones said in a report by the Institute.

The result? “It’s part atheist church and part foot-stomping show. There will be a speaker on a theme each month but there will also be an awesome house band, which Pippa will lead. We’ll be helping people try and stick to their new year’s resolutions in the first service.

Actually, if they want the “good stuff” about religion without the trouble of believing in a deity, they need not go through all the effort of founding their own church. All they really have to do is join the nearest Unitarian Universalist congregation. There, they will find a church where belief in God is optional. Or, since this is in London England, they should just join the Anglicans. They really don’t believe in much of anything these days except, perhaps, the desirability of Britain adopting Sharia law.

Seriously, though, I am not sure if Pippa Evans and Sanderson Jones are going to find what they are looking for. There are many churches of various denominations that have become little more than social clubs and in which God is rarely mentioned, except as a sort of cosmic security blanket. These churches that make no demands on their members, whether of faith or standards seem not to flourish. If this Atheist Church is little more than a place for atheists to get together and talk about how wonderful it is not to believe in God, than I don’t expect much to come of it.

 

Hammer Control

English: Standard Hammer
Deadly weapon

 

According to the FBI more people are killed with hammers and clubs than rifles. I read this article about it at Breitbart.com.

 

According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.

This is an interesting fact, particularly amid the Democrats’ feverish push to ban many different rifles, ostensibly to keep us safe of course.

However, it appears the zeal of Sens. like Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) is misdirected. For in looking at the FBI numbers from 2005 to 2011, the number of murders by hammers and clubs consistently exceeds the number of murders committed with a rifle.

Think about it: In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618.

And so the list goes, with the actual numbers changing somewhat from year to year, yet the fact that more people are killed with blunt objects each year remains constant.

For example, in 2011, there was 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs.

While the FBI makes is clear that some of the “murder by rifle” numbers could be adjusted up slightly, when you take into account murders with non-categorized types of guns, it does not change the fact that their annual reports consistently show more lives are taken each year with these blunt objects than are taken with Feinstein’s dreaded rifle.

Another interesting fact: According to the FBI, nearly twice as many people are killed by hands and fists each year than are killed by murderers who use rifles.

 

We have to adopt reasonable restrictions on the possession and use of hammers and clubs. I suggest that only registered contractors be permitted to own hammers. It may be a bit inconvenient if you need to hammer a nail or something, but we must do something to end this horror.

 

By the way, I am almost afraid to post this. It is just possible that Mayor Bloomberg or Diane Feinstein will happen upon this post and take it seriously.

 

And since I am talking about gun control, I might as well mention this article by Dylan Byers at Politico. He observes that the conversation over gun control sparked by the Sandy Hook shooting entirely ceased after two weeks.

 

On the day of the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting in Newtown, Conn., we published a chart showing the Sisyphean nature of the national gun control discussion. In the immediate aftermath of a shooting, such as the one that took place in Aurora, Colo., mentions of the term “gun control” spike in the news media. In a matter of days, that discussion all but disappears.

This time was supposed to be different. “It is hard to believe this will not be a watershed moment when we start to talk about, deal with and even perhaps legislate on guns,” ABC News’s Z. Byron Wolf wrote. He was one among many in the media who believed the momentum for gun control legislation was strong enough to turn the tide on a familiar pattern.

Blame it on the fiscal cliff, blame it on Christmas, blame it on our ability to forget, but the national discussion about gun control has once again ebbed. Mentions of the term “gun control” on television, in newspapers, and in online media are down to pre-Sandy Hook levels, according to the Nexis database.

 

Here is the graph.

 

guncontrol

 

The reason the discussion was dropped was because the conversation wasn’t going the way the media wanted it to go.