There is a large school of thought in Christendom and in Atheism that sees religion as an academic matter – that sees the Christian story as an entertaining theory to be discussed, when disagreed upon, in the equivalent of hallowed, air-conditioned halls or informal gatherings with enforced, tolerant voices of measured calm. There are also atheists who prefer to look at the Bible merely or primarily as a rather interesting piece of literature that simply has relevant metaphors to explore, and these atheists can discuss the Bible as if they are meeting for a book club discussion of, say, a Twilight series novel.

These atheists are very well respected, oftentimes, by their Christian comrades as being more tolerant, more intellectual, and as having a rather deep and more measured understanding of the biblical text than their more shrill counterparts, the “militant atheists,” tend to have.

In case you haven’t noticed, I am not of this polite school of counter-apologetics, nor do I have any desire to be. I have no desire to speak in a hall in which my comrade and I mutually compliment each other on our tremendous respect for our intellectual abilities in a way that even remotely indicates I think any views deserve respect that license the disturbing views of the Old Testament, the hell of the New Testament, the definitions of sin, the internalization of shame from nonexistent beings, and any of the other elements constituting the long list of travesties in the book as it is commonly interpreted, especially by its more conservative advocates. I would much rather, I think, engage in a forcible shotgun shell insertion sthrough my temple than suffer through such discussion.

I will not for a moment give quarter to the disturbing nature of many denominations of the Christian church, will not shy away from dishing out harsh criticism where needed, and will call out bigotry, heartlessness, misogyny, and serious errors in prescribed psychology — in addition to logical and factual errors — as they come up with discussion — using non-misogynistic and non-homophobic “obscene” words, as need be, to show that this is not polite tea-table conversation, but conversation of grave matters concerning deeply damaging and disturbing views that ought to be treated as such.

In attacking these views, I care very little whether those who insist on a regular subscription to them begin to think less of me; if anything, I take that as a compliment. But I promise that I will try my utmost to be fair and empathetic even as I strongly speak against views that are manifestly detestable, and my insults will keep their focus on ideas and reversible attitudes as opposed to unimpeachable characteristics of individuals. For example, I may say an idea is stupid, and I may even say that a person is stupid with regard to a certain subject in a way that may be remedied by additional information, but I will not say that a person is permanently stupid in a way that fundamentally insults their intellectual capabilities.

There are, in my experience and by my barometer, no shortage of atheists who think this is too strident and who try a politer approach – although even the ones who seem to me to be, at times, exceedingly polite are seen, often, as exceedingly rude by the Christians they engage in debate.

These atheists may continue in their way, and sometimes to preserve this way they may have to condemn or speak against my approach. I have enough understanding of their position to accept the occasional rebuke, but it is unlikely my stance will change.

My view is that any view stating that a significant contingent of humanity deserves eternity in hell, especially for arbitrary and bigoted reasons, deserves no respect, and it will get none from me.

I sincerely fucking hope that this shit provides you with some goddamn level of understanding of my conduct in future discussions.

Thank you for your time.