Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

Patrick H


Gospel According to



















No copyright, distribute it as you will




Marriage is deceit. It is wrong and demeaning because when we only do what we want we cannot really mean to be with or at least tied to a person forever no matter what. There is no marriage for the vows are insincere. You cannot say you want to be with somebody for your whole life for you do not know what changes will come upon the other person.

Marital union is not even necessary to our welfare so it is unjustifiable. There is nothing that marriage can do that some other arrangement can't do just as well. Love is just a euphemism for lust, the selfish desire to gratify yourself with another person. If it were not then we would be falling for people no matter what they looked like and love is triggered by the qualities in a person secondarily after physical appearance so it is just these you are after and not the person. Marriage, one person giving themselves to another forever, has to be exposed because this giving is not genuine for it is dependent on a changeable feeling.

Marriage vows don't bind until the couple have sex. So they are tied together because of one sex act. That clearly proves what a humiliating superstition marriage is. The wife is sold to the husband by sex. She is his because she gave him her body once. That is prostitution and to use women that way is appalling.

Marriage implies that divorce and even a legal separation is wrong for it says that even a wife who leaves a violent husband to avoid being beaten to death still has no right to have sex with anyone except her husband. To say otherwise would be saying the marriage was no more. When the husband has the right to her body which is the most important thing she has, she cannot have the right to divorce him because her right to be happy with another man is less important than the right of the husband over her body. To ban divorce and separation would be the utmost assault on her dignity and assuring her subjection to patriarchy. Marriage then is worrying and is not about two equals sharing their lives together but is meant to be about the one half deceiving and exploiting the other half.

Marriage is not for making sure a man and woman stay together because marriage is still encouraged in cultures that make it easy to get out of via divorce. The idea that it is the intention that counts is silly for intentions change and you can't make a man and woman behave like husband and wife because they had the intention to be together forever at a special moment in time namely during a wedding ceremony.

Marriage is getting the permission of society and the Church to have sex and they need only have it once for one sex act consumes the marriage and makes it valid and official. The bride and groom only debase themselves by getting married. It is superstition and not an act of love and it is none of society's business about the sex. They are bound together by a sex act and not their commitment. People may say they got married because they wanted to and seeking permission from society to have sex and nothing to do with it. Then they donít understand marriage Ė they think itís a romantic day out for it means nothing without the laws and permissions of the Church or society or both. Marriage involves authorised people telling you that you have given yourself to your spouse and now belong to her or him so it is about permission to have sex for you already belong in love and it implies that sex without this permission is evil.

Marriage implies that you should only sleep with your wife or husband for life for why have marriage and not an alternative if you may sleep around? Marriage is based on jealousy and lies. If you really wanted your partner to be happy you would not mind them leaving you and then meeting somebody else that makes them happier than you can. People's needs change. Jealousy is about trying to stop your partner being happier. Marriage is about power not love. Humanism will not drive people out for getting married. But marriage is dehumanisation and implies that unmarried people have no right to have safe sex together ever so it only supports the regime that teaches such bigoted nonsense.

The only sexual acts that are wrong are the ones that hurt or exploit another person without his or her agreeing to it in a mature way and ones which are used as a substitute for developing real self-esteem and independence.
There is nothing wrong with a woman having a baby and having no intention of having a man around as long as she has plenty of male relations and friends to befriend her baby.

It is not true that contraception makes the man see the woman as a sex object for all agree that sex when conception is eliminated or very unlikely is loving and moral. Women must have the same freedom as men to explore their sexuality. It is not true that the contracepting person sees the baby as a burden for anti-contracepting people see the baby as something to be avoided when they try to reduce the chances of conception for nobody thinks sex is more about babies than anything else.
It is thought that having sex is promising to care for and be with the person you have it with forever for it is giving yourself to another. To have sex with somebody you do not care for is to give your body but not yourself for you are holding back your heart and that is contradictory and obviously abnormal and demeaning. It is obvious that it is better for sex to express love of some kind. When you give a person yourself you are certainly promising to be there for them forever. However, you do not have to be their friend forever but you do have to be there if they have nobody in an emergency.

Nobody must feel pressured into having casual sex. It is a sign of strength and wisdom to say no when one isn't interested. Those who think otherwise don't matter. The fewer sex partners anyone has the better for it is healthier. Sex can become a substitute for love and all deserve better.

Only bigots condemn homosexuality. It is condemned on the grounds that it is unnatural. That is based on the lie that what is natural is necessarily good and what is unnatural is bad. It is a lie for everybody can see that nature is cruel and we all can and should defy it when we have operations. Nature has strange ways so it could be natural for persons to be attracted to the same sex for many heterosexual men do not like full intercourse as much as they like other acts. Laying down laws like such and such a sex act being unnatural is foolish and narrow and conceited for everybody's tastes differ. When nature makes it possible to be gay and for it to do no harm then how can it be unnatural? Even if many homosexuals abuse their sexuality that does not make homosexuality itself bad for it is the abuse that is bad.

It is wrong to sexually molest children and the immature even if they consent for they are not meant for such activity and if they were loved for themselves and not for the kind of bodies they have the person who desires them would wait. Sex abuse is not wrong just because it may have bad results but because the person should not be treated like a thing. We do have to treat persons as things to avoid treating far more that way. But this condition does not occur in sex-abuse. We should let our wrath burn fierce against child-abuse.


Erotica is written or auricular or visual celebration of human sexual enjoyment. Anything that involves force is pornographic and should be prohibited. Erotica should arouse sexually but in a way that wants to bring happiness to yourself and others. It needs to involve some kind of love or goodness. Erotica will not corrupt a person unless that person is already corrupt in which case erotica is a good thing that is abused. You canít condemn what can be abused for anything can be abused.
Is it wrong and unhealthy to savour erotica? Everything sexual is wrong and should be made illegal if it is for it fills the mind with erotic fantasies. Erotica does no harm for unlike pornography there is no degradation or turning people into depraved monsters as violent television programmes do. Those who blame it for turning them into practicing perverts have heard of masturbation. They are kidding themselves.
Religion says, "Appearing in erotica is being treated as a body for the titillation of others not as a being to be valued for being a person." It doesn't have to be as long as it is about the beauty of the body and sexuality. And if that is demeaning so is liking a person for being friendly for you like them not for their qualities but for YOUR perception of their qualities and not just because they are persons for if they were nasty you would not like them. You can gain pleasure from a person without desecrating the dignity of that person. When you like another person it is only yourself you like for you invent your perception of them that you like. If you think of the person in the naughty pictures as a mere object the only evil involved is in your attitude which you need to change not in looking at the pictures.

We have to permit degradation to check more serious degradation or the degradation of a bigger number. If we ban "dirty" pictures and if it is true that they are always degrading then we will be degrading far more by taking away their fun and degrading the models by putting them out of work. They say it is not unbecoming for a husband to make love to his wife when he does not like her - you cannot like everybody all the time - which shows the hypocrisy of their carpings.

Humanism will use erotica to attract people to our beautiful purified Atheism and get the precious message of godless redemption across to the world.