Halleluya brother Jean Marc! Ho Glory!

------------------
TAK
http://www.shovel.net/

Jim Engel--

Thanks for your response. I started this thread because I think there needs to be a dialog about religion as it relates to comics, and religion in general.

I haven't read the full text of Ventura's remarks, but (as Charles pointed out) I gather he was criticizing all organized religion of all faiths. And I don't want to be in the position of defending anything he says, except to say that as an atheist I found his comments a refreshing departure from the 'sacred cow' status organized religion enjoys.

You said, 'It's almost impossible to imagine the same remarks being made about any other group,such as Muslims,Orthodox Jews,Hindus,etc.' And later you said, 'As for exposing my children to "positive portrayals of unbelief",from my perspective as a believer,there is no such thing.'

If I'd used the phrase 'positive portrayals of Hinduism,' would you have publicly made the same remark? I doubt it. That's what I'm concerned about. People have learned to be tolerant of other religions. But they think nothing of making the most scathing and unjustified criticism of atheists and secular humanists. I don't think it's because they're bigots. I think it's because they have never encountered, as I said, a positive portrayal of unbelief.

Take for example, your remark, 'With things like Spawn,Lady Death,Dawn,Purgatori,Hellraiser,Verotik (and on,and on,and on) available in almost every comic shop, I would say that the interests of atheists,pagans,hedonists,occultists,anti-Christians, and Satan-worshipers are represented in force.'

I have little or no familiarity with the titles you mentioned. They don't speak to my philosophy or values in any way I know of. I wonder sometimes what the creators of these kinds of books believe in; but I doubt that they have much in common with me.

When I think of atheists, I think of guys like Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke-- people who want to build a better world based on reason and fact.

If you or any other reader is fair-minded enough to want to find out what secular humanism is really all about, I urge you to go to the site http://www.secularhumanism.org/pr/
and look at the page devoted to the Secular Humanist Manifesto 2000. I think it's a very inspiring document.

Joe Zabel you rule!

As a cartoonist and atheist, I would like to say that ol' Joe is right on -- there are very few positive portrayals of free-thinkers in comics or any other medium. And that's a crying shame. One good portrayal that I can think of would be Jim Ottaviani's books, Two-Fisted Science and Dignifying Science. These are essentially comics versions of the lives of scientists, and while there is little direct discussion of science as relates to religion (the exception being the story about Galileo), many of the scientists in question were certainly atheists or agnostics. They are shown using reason, demanding proof, going through the various logical processes of science ... and it's a positive portrayal without the question of belief even being raised.

Something I've had to struggle with in my own work is that it takes place in the Middle Ages, and you simply can't have a plausible Medieval scenario without the church and other superstitions. I have gotten around this to a large extent by making the church of my fictional Medieval country into a cult of saints -- people pray to various saints (all of whom I've made up), I never have to mention the words "God" or "Jesus," if any of my characters become loud-mouthed blasphemers I don't have to worry about offending anybody because it's not a real religion, and I can feel like I'm still remaining true to myself because I'm not promoting something I don't believe in, I'm pedaling fiction, which I do believe in.

I do have to add, just as a final note, that I don't think I could vote for Jesse Ventura just because he's an atheist, for the same reason I don't think I could vote for Elizabeth Dole (which is even more tempting, to me) just because she's a woman.

--RH

------------------
Níl aon tóin tinn mar do thóin tinn fein.

Joe:

"People have learned to be tolerant of other religions", you say.

I'm not so sure. I wish it were true. There's an awful lot of bigotry emanating from some Christian groups, including well established, "maintream" groups such as the Southern Baptists.

I hate to think what they would do if they weren't leashed by our laws.

Philosophically, of course, from the moment you believe in one system of faith exclusively, it automatically means that all the other people are wrong.

Jim is totally convinced Jesus will save him, while to a Roman Catholic he is going to hell (unless he repents and takes the extreme unction before he dies, but let's not get technical).

Anyway, it's a short step from knowing you're right to wanting to covert others (for their own good), and then eliminate those who obstinately and aggravatingly refuse to be converted.

What you see as "tolerance", I sort of see as a "balance of terror" in which is is the job of the Secular Law to stomp on any religion that steps beyond its legal boundaries.

Like, if a wild animal gets out of its case, you trank him & put him back in the cage.

In this country, the Christians need to be stomped on regularly for the sake of the other guys. If they see it as persecution, fine.

JM

Gee, isn't Clinton a Southern Baptist?

Charles,

So you are an atheist? Fine. This a an example of an universal negative. In other words, you are saying: "In the whole universe, there is no such an entity as God." To make such a statement, you would probably have to be God. Ya gotta have faith to be an atheist. Had you said agnostic, you would have been in a better position. End of lesson 1 in elementary logic. Stick to comics.

Ventura is a bigot. Religious bigotry is the same as any other.

Personally, I don't think the religion of evolution should be taught in school, ya gotta have faith to believe in mutations over millions of years without transitional forms....


Sam

Hah, hah!

Sam,

I'll let my original post stand as a rebuttal. (If anyone else pipes in and thinks Sam actually made a counterpoint that wasn't already covered by me, then I'll elaborate.) You're making it easy on me.

Your spin on evolution is embarrassing. The Pope understands evolution as a science, so you're fighting a battle that was lost by a few Fundamentalists long ago. I recommend (2 times in 1 week) Richard Dawkin's The Blind Watchmaker, or any number of articles written in The New York Review of Books by Stephen J. Gould, as well as any of his wonderful books. However, pictures are kept to a minimum, and you'll find the discussion of the influence of gamma rays on the elasticity of one's skin somewhat inadequate.

Rachel,

I think it's incorrect to think of faith and free-thinking as mutually exclusive categories. Many of the greatest thinkers of the past 2000 years have been theologians (pick any of the great Medieval scholars). In fact, some of the most amazing thinkers of the past 100 years were devout Christians: William James, Alfred North Whitehead, Henri Bergson, etc.. Conversely, some of the most dogmatic leaders of this century were professed atheists. My point is that one can be on what you probably consider the consider the wrong side of the origins argument while still being a free-thinker.



[This message has been edited by Charles Reece (edited 10-10-1999).]

Sam, you're a perfect illustration of what I was saying, i.e.: why certain types of Christians ought to be stomped upon regularly when they step over the boundaries.

Evolution is no more a matter of religion than Einstein's theory (note the word) of relativity, or for that matter Newton's theory of gravitation are.

There are also plenty of transitional forms. They did a whole spread of these in TIME magazine a month or so ago. Heck, if you raised dogs, you'd have a few of them running loose in your backyard.

As a catholic, I know that evolution is accepted by the Roman Catholic Church, and that's good enough for me. By interfering in the legitimate educational process in the name of your *HERETIC* beliefs, you're also depriving my children of a modern education.

If you want your kids to grow up to be heretic savages, that's your problem, but please stay on your side of the cage and don't come and foul up mine, OK?

JM

Wow. Congrats Joe for opening a truly interesting thread here. I agree with Charles Reece: We all know the Hulk is strong.

First let me say that I am a Christian. That said, I do not take issue with the points you made in your opening post. I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of the press as whole-heartily as anyone. If cartoonists, writers, etc. who happen to be atheist wish to deal with the subject, then so be it. It's no different that people presenting other points of view that they feel strongly about.

As for presenting "positive portrayals of unbelief at any early age", I'm being totally honest in saying I don't know how I feel about that. In my home, we preach tolerance. I don't want my children ignorant to the fact that other philosophies exist, but I also don't want them exposed to any of the various idealogies out there in a manner in which they are taught as the sole truth. The responsibility for the moral upbringing of my children is totally mine. Likewise, your children (if you have any) are your responsiblity, etc. I have no right to teach your children that Christianity is the sole truth, etc. If that makes me less than the perfect Christian, I accept my imperfection. And that statement goes for Hinduism, Buddism, Islam, New-Age, etc. Freedom of religion does not stop at the "big three" and I do not wish to give the impression that I feel it should.

Another interesting point about this thread is that learned people with so much in common can find it so easy to fall into the name-calling rituals that give religous peoples of all faiths such a bad name. I know several atheists and none of them have ever tried to convert me. Likewise I dated a Muslim, and have counted among my friends Mormons, Jewish people, Catholics, persons from various Protestant sects, and others who study New Age. Several years ago, I attempted to query about Buddism from my Korean former-boss but discovered his family was Baptist! I've never found any of the conversations with others a threat to my personal faith. We can learn a lot from each other if we all remain open-minded.

That in mind, I do feel that Jim Engel got a little picked-on for saying "As for exposing my children to 'positive portrayals of unbelief', from my perspective as a believer, there is no such thing." Nowhere in this statement does he reference anyone but his own children. Educating them is Jim's right and responsiblity. Let's not turn this into some anti-tolerance call to arms. Can we appreciate his honesty and respect his point of view? After all, I gathered that's what this thread was all about.

As for me, I was raised Southern Baptist and converted to Catholicism several years ago. I have not been ostracized from my family and friends. In fact, many of them have become more tolerant of the RC as a result of discovering our basic beliefs are the same. JM, although I appreciate the humor in which you presented your case and I admit that I don't know how the Catholic church operates in France, I must say that here we have an organization called LARC (Lutheran, Anglican, Roman Catholic) which promotes unity among Christians and encourages exchanges among congregations. We don't promote torches and the like. (I couldn't stay on the roster if we did.)

On a historical note: Many attrocities have been committed in the name of Christianity (and other religions) throughout history. If we look at these events closely, however, we can see that much of this intolerance was an excuse to further human greed. It sounded better to the uneducated populace to say that the crusades were about furthering Christianity than about raiding other countries for territory and wealth. Greed is the enemy here, not God or the lack thereof.

And finally, as for Jesse Ventura, I haven't read his comments but if they focused on organized religion (Keyword: Organized), how is this any different that what Karl Marx said decades ago?

As for electing him President: In a country that was never supposed to be run by two-party politics, Kudos for getting someone elected who doesn't belong to the either of the two.

Religion is like abortion. It's a red-herring that policians throw around to sway votes. It has little or nothing to do with government. This, however, won't stop until we refuse to be swayed and until we all decide that morality cannot be legislated.
Thanks,
Kimberly Edmisten, RHP http://www.redhillsonline.com

[This message has been edited by Kimberly Edmisten (edited 10-10-1999).]

"Religion of evolution". Sam really doesn't have so much as two brain cells to rub together, does he?

Hi Joe, great thread topic.

I understand what you are asking. Go into any book store and look in the religious section and you'll probably see some Bible Tales for Kids and stuff like that. Books aimed at kids telling them tales of the bible with the purpose of converting them to christainity. They've been around for a long time I don't think they'll disapear.

But imagine if someone were to do something similar, but in attempt to convert kids to free thinkers/Atheist? Books aimed at kids that show how the great flood and Noah Arc (or other tales) is not scientifically possible. That try to convince kids that they should question what they here and not believe anything based on blind faith.

I think some people would have some *real* problems with books like that. Especially if they were produced and had the circulation/popularity that religious books of the same nature did.

Then consider the same for cartoons and so forth. Wow. There would be an uproar.



------------------
Regards,
Jamie Coville
The History of Superhero Comic Books!
http://www.sigma.net/comichistory/