OPINION: This Easter, remember it's all just a lie

Tomorrow is Easter Sunday. Christians see it as the higher of their religious year. It's the day they celebrate the resurrection of Jesus after he had been crucified, and is the main event in the teachings that have spread a religion to every corner of the globe.

The fact that there is absolutely no evidence for the events that they claim happened seems to pass Christians by and they say it is their faith that proves to them that they took place.

The fact that nobody wrote anything about those same events until two whole generations had passed, and that not a single person who did then eventually write about those events was an eye witness doesn't throw up any questions to them that maybe things weren't as "reported" in the Bible, their so-called Holy book.

The fact that the tales of a God born on December 25th, who then died and came back to life are clearly stolen from the earlier mythologies of Horus and Mithras doesn't cast even a shadow of doubt in their minds.

The undeniable truth that there is absolutely no contemporaneous evidence that Jesus actually existed is poo-pooed by their wealthy master in his opulent palace in the Vatican because it might show that the whole Christian faith is nothing more than a con is ignored by those too ignorant or stupid to realise they are being made fools of.

And those who believe these unproven fairy stories, based on nothing better than whimsy, then believe it is their right to push the same rubbish and indoctrination that has controlled them onto the rest of society, and they scream and shout Whenevr anyone points out that there is absolutely no substance to the nonsense they spout.

Why, in the modern world, do we tolerate these silly and idiotic superstitions? Most people laugh about horoscopes but they have as much validity as any of the major religions.

Why should people who have been brain washed by con men be afforded privelege and have their faith tolerated when, in fact, any other form of brain washing and undue influence would be outlawed?

This Easter Sunday, I hope all rational human beings take a few moments to think about all the evil that Christianity , and the other religions, have inflicted on the world, and then do seething to help minimise the influence these appalling institutions have on our modern society.

If we sit back and continue to allow the religions to prey on all the most vulnerable in society, if we tolerate their lies and don't stand up to the way they abuse the power that earlier generations stupidly gave to them, if we don't do all we can to bring to end the tax-evading, corruption of the churches that have conned the rest of society, then we are complicit in the way it continues to spread through our society like a deadly cancer, slowly destroying the fabric of everything of any true worth.

Christianity is founded on nothing more than fiction - Islam and Judaism too. The Easter Story is just that, a story, and unless someone can come up with something that shows the opposite, Jesus wasn't the Messiah, and he wasn't even a very naughty boy. Jesus never existed at all - he was nothing more than some old stories nicked so that some priests could start spreading their lies and manipulating others.

OPINION: Skeptics - stop preaching to the converted

Over the past few years, the rise of the skeptics, and the acceptance of rational thought as the norm, has slowly been witnessed on tv, radio, best-selling books, magazine articles and, of course, in theatre shows (mostly, it seems, hosted by Robin Ince and featuring Brian Cox). This is good; it is right and proper that science and fact and knowledge should be given more coverage.

Robin Ince and Brian Cox

There is, though, a little problem.

I think I've witnessed this change not because there has been a widespread media change but only because of the types of television programmes I watch, the brand of newspaper I get my headlines from and the books I read.

I fear that skeptics and rational thought are becoming ghettoised - and largely of their own making.

When Richard Dawkins writes a new book or fronts a new television series, who watches it? I strongly suspect that most of his audience is made up of people who already agree with him. I very much doubt that many creationists tune in to watch RD rip their beliefs to pieces.

And the same can be said of the "Nine Lessons and Carols for Godless people" and the "Uncaged Monkeys" shows - the audience is made up of those for whom rational thought is, well, rational! These events are, to all intents and purposes, rallies of supporters.

Now, there is nothing wrong with a bit of self-congratulation at times, but there comes a point when it becomes, well, pointless.

Stephen Fry has become, in recent years, a "National Treasure" as well as a "professional skeptic", and there are many others, some of whom I've already mentioned. They address meetings of skeptics, they write articles that get published in the more intelligent magazines and periodicals that tend to be read by skeptics, they... well, quite simply, they make a good living from being a skeptic.

I'm not going to protest at writers earning an honest crust from their views - far from it - but I do wish the skeptic movement (if there is such a thing) and the school of rational thought would stop contemplating its own belly button and smugly slapping each other on the back in congratulations.

Yes, we're right.

No, as the London Bus said, there almost certainly isn't a God.

Yes, Creationism and Intelligent Design are both nonsense.

Yes, homeopathy is a con.

The list could go on and on.

It's time to stick our heads above the parapet more. It's time to help others understand why we're right and why they're wrong. It's time to challenge the lies put out by religion and the anti-science lobby, not just in an amusing panel game shows that can be considered a bit naught and a bit tongue-in-cheek, but in a more serious way, and in more prominent fora.

An amusing panel game show

We need skeptics on BBC1 and ITV1, not just tucked away on BBC2 and Channel 4. We need to find ways of making rational thought attractive, interesting and entertaining. We need easy to understand articles in the red tops and in popular magazines. We need to achieve a balance.

For every "my house is haunted" story in a popular magazine there really should be something publilshed pointing out that ghosts don't exist, that they defy the laws of thermodynamics and, to be honest, there is always a better and a more obvious explanation.

For every documentary about extra-terrestrials visiting earth we need a programme that shows that, while this is an interesting and comforting idea that we're not alone in the universe, the chances of aliens from other planets having visited earth is just not worth the time calculating - they haven't visited, it's fun in a science fiction novel but it must be remembered that it's fiction.

There are many other things we, as skeptics, need - some are significant changes to the constitution of our country, others require the media to ensure a proper balance.

For starters, we, as skeptics, should demand that church and state are separated and that the head of state isn't the head of a established church. We need to rid the House of Lords of the unelected bishops. We need religion of all hues removed from state affairs and the official public arena as is the case in both France and the USA. In the 21st century there is no reason or logic for any nation to be anything other than secular.

Schools in England and Wales are still required BY LAW to have a daily act of worship of a largely Christian nature and the teaching and study of R.E. is compulsory up to the age of 16. R.E. in the curriculum does cover religions other than Christianity but the is little time for rational thought. Why do schools have to help the churches recruit?

A school assembly

The school curriculum should, instead, have philosophy or a study of world cultures rather than the horrendous child abuse that is R.E.

And yes, a daily act of worship? That's blatant indoctrination. The times I've taken assembly there have been no prayers involved. I guess there are militant Christians who think I should be locked up for that!

Anyone or any company who make a scientific claim should be forced to publish the science behind that claim in peer reviewed publications. That would, instantly, put homeopathy out of business. Or homeopathic treatments should carry large warnings on them: "YOU MAY AS WELL BE FLUSHING YOUR MONEY DOWN THE TOILET AS TAKING THIS SNAKE OIL"

Then there's smaller things. Balance in the media. Here's an example:

It is time that BBC Radio 4's Thought for the Day had regular atheist, or antitheist, contributions. On the Today Programme, of which Thought for the Day forms part, it would be expected that political coverage is balanced, so that when a government minister appears saying me thing, a member of the opposition can give their view too. Why doesn't his apply to religion, faith and rational thought?

Radio 4's The Today Programme

I cringe every time that breakfast television shows or other daytime television give over airtime to a priest - they get to say their piece but there is never (well, very rarely) a balance. If a priest is allowed on, given soft questions and able to get away with saying anything he wants, the a skeptic should be allowed to challenge every point and show what rubbish the priest is saying.

The problem is that the establishment as is relies on the lies and superstitions of the majority. Without the blind faith of the masses that inexplicably support church, monarchy and quackery, the current kakistocracy would collapse. We need to help that collapse.

I'd strongly support a more militant skepticism.

Why should "faith" be respected? Surely such lunacy deserves pity but nothing else? Those with "faith" should be considered mentally ill or poorly educated. When someone spouts nonsense they need to be challenged - and not in an apologetic way, using simple facts that demonstrate the error.

The judgmental so-called "moral majority", all wrapped in their New Testaments, have happily protested outside Jesus Christ Superstar and, more recently, Jerry Springer - the Opera - why don't skeptics protest outside some churches? Protests could highlight the church's hypocrisy with its huge investments in stocks and shares, or the massive wealth the church accrues but still has exemption from paying taxes.

Jerry Springer - the Opera

I find it sad how many people will be attending church over the next couple of weeks and genuinely think that there is any evidence of any part of the nativity story. There is barely an iota of truth in it (there may well have been shepherds in the fields near Bethlehem, but that's it). And those who justify Jesus as "well, I'm sure he existed but was probably a spiritual leader" - no the is no contemporaneous evidence of any Jesus within two generations of his supposed existence. Jesus simply didn't exist, and those writing about him were, attest, grandchildren of eyewitnesses but, in reality, were religious activists out to prove a point and gain notoriety - and, of course, like the current religious leaders, power.

I would like to hope that, in 2012, we witness the rise of rational thought and skepticism beyond the back slapping of those who already accept science and fact and into the mainstream.

I fear that the frauds that control society will get in the way, but it is a battle that is worth fighting and it is a war to which all skeptics should subscribe.

Stop the back slapping and self congratulations. Stop being nice to the frauds and con men of anti-science and religion. Start fighting for what is right on a bigger scale.

OPINION: The Firebombing of Charlie Hebdo

The firebombing of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in the early hours of this morning should send a shiver down the spine of all right-thinking and responsible people.

The editorial team had decided to make the next edition of the weekly magazine an "Arab Spring Special Edition" - to celebrate the new freedoms countries like Tunisia now had. The cover cartoon mocked the fact that Tunisia's new "freedoms" included the imposition of Sharia Law and had a cartoon of the prophet Muhammad saying: "100 lashes if you don't die of laughter".

The "Arab Spring Special Edition" hadn't even hit the newsstands yet.

Of course, cartoons of the prophet have been known to cause controversies before; the Jylands-Posten cartoons of 2005 caused no end of trouble with death threats, etc. The editors at Charlie Hebdo could, perhaps have thought things were different in France where, in 2007, their right to re-publish the Danish cartoons was upeld.

The Quran does not explicity outlaw images of Muhammad.

In fact, it is only in some supplementary teaching, called hadith, that Muslims are forbidden from making visual images of figures. Somehow, though, the fundamentalist and fanatical Muslims have decided that images of the prophet are a bad thing and to make such an image makes you a target for violent retribution.

Any sane person can see this is a nonsense. Can you imagine a ban on images of Jesus or the Buddha? Those religions not only allow for artists to create imagery of their religious figures but cope when those images are used to mock their religion. Why can't Islam be the same? Is Islamic belief that fragile?

And why make up extra rules that aren't in the Quran? It's not like art wasn't around before Muhammad had his revelations.

The Christian church has been worryling quiet about the Charlie Hebdo firebombing today. I realise that Rowan Williams is a bit busy trying to dig himself and St. Paul's Cathedral out of the huge hole they have created for themselves with their tepid response to the Occupy London protesters (and the huge finiancial investments and links the catherdal has with the City of London), and the Pope, well, he's always busy trying to cover up the wrong-doings of his clergy - but, surely, they should have stood strong and spoken out against this evil and dangerous fundamentalism?

Let's hope that politicians can stand up to this aggressive bullying by lunatics. No one should be in fear of their life because they draw or published a cartoon. No society should tolerate these extremists.

The story of the Arab Spring is yet to unfold - let's hope it is not the story of how fanatical lunatics took over a large amount of the world.