Advocatus Atheist

I am taking a break from blogging about religion and related philosophical questions for the rest of this month, so instead of just leaving a void of nothingness in place of your regular broadcast, I thought I'd fill it with the white-noise of my other unrelated ramblings; in this case a review of the graphic novel Planetary.  A decade in the making, Planetary, a comic series written by the brilliant Warren Ellis and drawn by the unlimited talent of John Cassady, began in 1999--the year I graduated high school. Due to numerous delays the series wasn't completed until 2009. But now the massive 864 page omnibus collecting the complete saga along with some bonus team-up issues and specials is now available. Needless to say, I burned a hole in my pocket faster than you could say "shut up and take my money!" Over the past several days I read it, slowly. All I can say is the wait was well worth it. This has to be my all time favorite graphic novel. It's

As the book is being sent off to the editor, I thought I would share the bibliography with you all. I think it is rather telling that the book I am responding to, Christian apologist Randal Rauser's The Swedish Atheist, the Scuba Diver, and Other Apologetic Rabbit Trails had a grand total of 13 bibliographical notes. That's it. But that didn't stop Randal from lecturing as if he were a professional in all the fields he talked on from theoretical physics, to sociology, to anthropology, to biology, to neurology, to psychology, to ethics, to ancient history and so on and so forth.  Needless to say, Randal's books was under sourced to be at all authoritative, but that didn't stop him from trying to sound the part. I know I am making Randal sound rather bad here, but come on, he is an academic with a PhD. Only thirteen bibliographical notes that don't even take up half a page for a book which the author professes to be an expertise on a plethora of fields

A concerned Christian reader who goes by the name Israel Lattimore contacted me with some concerns. Here is the original letter in full: Mr. Vick: First of all I understand you, your arguments are not uncommon. Out of curiosity, is your work stimulated by the desire to know the truth, existentially speaking? It seems that to question the validity of the notion of "God's" existence inevitably prerequisites the collapse of any belief of truth at all. If one doesn't believe that true or false exists, then what is existence altogether? I would like for you to get to yourself, slow down and honestly ask yourself, Do I really believe that I am a worthless, bastardized being and that when my body dies I will simply cease to exist? (Pardon me if I have assumed the idea that you do not believe in any afterlife). I want to tell you my dear friend that you are not a worthless, bastardized being and that you have a Creator that loves you and cares enough for His cre

People are making much ado about nothing with regard to the American Atheist's lawsuit against the 9/11 cross (see here ). That's not even a controversial lawsuit.  For starters, the cross is on public land where zoning laws restrict the preferential treatment to sponsor religion. The reason zoning laws restrict such things is because if one religion gets to do it then, legally, all religions could put their iconography up. Then you have space issues, safety issues, and a whole slew of other legal issues which come with granting such trivial leeway. Then there's the fact that it's unconstitutional, because the government, city or otherwise, is not to endorse any religion over another if at all.  The lawsuit will succeed, because if it doesn't, they can appeal and bring up an additional lawsuit of religious discrimination, since part of the lawsuit entails that if they allow the cross to stay up they have to allow the American Atheists to put their own mon