Rarely do I see a story that makes me simply throw up my hands and say “What the fuck?” out loud. But Random Nuclear Strikes pointed to just such a story. The story (I refuse to call it an article as that would imply some anchoring in reality) more or less explains how science fiction authors are the anti-Christs:
Science fiction takes the reader into a strange world without God. Oh, there might be “a god,” a “force,” but it is definitely not the God of the Bible, and the prominent names in this field are at
That’s the opening to the article and it only becomes a hit piece from there. For example:
Consider ROBERT HEINLEIN, called “the dean of science fiction writers.” He rejected the Bible and promoted “free sex.” His book “Stranger in a Strange Land” is considered “the unofficial bible of the hippie movement.” Heinlein was a nudist and practiced “polyamory.” He promoted agnosticism in his sci-fi books.
GASP! A science fiction author uses his books to explore new ideas outside of those generally accepted. Oh wait that’s EXACTLY what science fiction is about. The
dip shit author of this story seems to lack the concept of fiction. That’s an important word. Fiction implies a story not based on truth. Don’t imply I’m claiming Christianity is truth here, I don’t talk religion on my site for a reason (Theology does not a good argument make). But I mean truth in the sense of the author’s point of view.
I read and watch a ton of science fiction. I love the genre because it can create a credible setting and explore new topics. I’ll use an example everybody pretty much has some knowledge in (Although I’m not really a fan of the series) Star Trek. In this series everybody lives in a utopia where everything is provided to for them. The people only work because they want to and are not required to in order to survive. It’s pretty much the communist ideal. Of course in the series they also have infinite resources but that’s getting off topic. The bottom line is the series came out during the Cold War where such ideas were not well thought of. Thankfully when you package an idea up in the world of science fiction there are enough laser, faster than light travel, and aliens to distract the zealots enough where they don’t see the actual ideas being explored.
The author need to pull his head out of his ass and realize that he can’t bitch because the stories don’t agree with his reality. The stories don’t involve reality at all. They involve ideas about how society would or could be if certain criteria were met.
Of course the author also decides to do a hit against one of my favorite late authors:
Consider ARTHUR CLARKE, author of many sci-fi works, including 2001: A Space Odyssey. Clarke, who was probably a homosexual, promoted evolutionary pantheism. He told a Sri Lankan newspaper, “I don’t believe in God or an afterlife” (“Life Beyond 2001: Exclusive Interview with Arthur C. Clarke,” The Island, Dec. 20, 2000). In the instructions he left for his funeral in March 2008 he said, “Absolutely no religious rites of any kind, relating to any religious faith, should be associated with my funeral.”
Oh my God Arthur C. Clarke was an atheist? Oh wait never mind everybody already knew that. The man was a scientist and is often the case only believed in what he could observe and measure. But there isn’t a single time I can remember where Sir Arthur (He was almost knighted and only failed to be because his health was too poor for the journey to England, the title doesn’t mean shit to me but alas it’ll probably annoy the story’s author so I’m using it) made an active campaign against religion. He didn’t believe in it and was fine with that. The author on the the other hand appears to have so little to do that he actively attacks those who disagree with him.
What Sir Arthur did was advance human society. You know that fancy geosynchronous orbit? It’s also called the Clarke orbit for a reason, Sir Arthur did the calculations and “discovered it.” He was also one of the pioneers of the idea to use orbiting satellites for communication purposes. He also fleshed out the idea and possibility of a space elevator to move objects from a planet’s surface to orbit with much less hassle than rockets. Sure he might not have believe in any form of deity but he did contribute to the advancement of the human race. Has the author done that? Didn’t think so.
And you just have to love the jab that Sir Arthur was “probably a homosexual.” What the Hell does that have to do with anything? Oh yeah, sorry, religious zealots find a person’s sexual preference a measure of that person’s worth. My bad.
Remember my previous mentioning of Star Trek:
Consider GENE RODDENBERRY, creator of Star Trek. He was an agnostic and humanist who envisioned a world in which “everyone is an atheist and better for it” (Brannon Braga, “Every Religion Has a Mythology,” International Atheist Conference, June 24, 2006).
I just wanted to drop that one because I mentioned his series earlier. I’ve already stated why the author is a moron and don’t need to reiterate here.
Anyways these religious zealots are, how to put this nicely, fucking morons. And when I say that I’m also including atheists and agnostics. Zealotry is bad in general but when that zealotry involves attacks against people (Be if physical or verbal) it crosses the line.
Christianity has the saying of, “Judge not unless ye be judged.” And of course there is the whole concept of turning a blind eye on those whom attack you. Maybe the author should study his own religion and follow the pacifist nature of his savior. I was raised Catholic and I’m pretty sure the right to judge another was reserved for God alone.