Why I am an antitheist
Can there be any doubt at all of the harm which religion causes, when it nurtures and protects assholes like this:
http://www.michaelcrook.org/2011/11/15/ashley-billasano-did-not-defend-her-virtue/
In case that link is taken down, it’s a post by Michael Crook regarding the sad case of Ashley Billasano, who by her own account put up with years of sexual abuse from her stepfather and another close family member, from the age of 7. When she reported these crimes, the apparent lack of responsiveness of law enforcement and lack of community support caused her to take her own life in despair.
This led Michael Crook, Moron Mormon, to comment that he doesn’t believe rape exists, and clearly the girl wasn’t a victim and it wasn’t even abuse because she didn’t die to “defend her virtue”. Michael Crook uses both his Mormon holy book and the writing of former Mormon President Spencer W Kimball to justify his abhorrent notions.
Some quotes from the linked post:
I don’t care what did or did not happen to her. First and foremost, I don’t believe rape exists.
But if, in fact, she was being molested or forced into prostitution as the media outlets say her tweets claimed, then it was her fault that it happened, and continued to happen.
Elder Richard G. Scott, of The Quorum of The Twelve Apostles, has said, “the victim must do all in his or her power to stop the abuse.”
[...]
By all accounts, this “abuse” supposedly went on since she was 14. Given that she was 18 when she committed suicide, she “cooperated and contributed” by allowing it to go on this long, assuming it wasn’t consensual to begin with.
[...]
She didn’t die defending her virtue. She died a coward, not enduring to the end, as we’re all commanded to do. Indeed, we must endure to the end, all of us.
There are numerous scriptural references that command us to endure to the end. Perhaps the most compelling is, “If they endure unto the end they shall be lifted up at the last day,” which we read in 1 Nephi 13:37.
Scripture can be used to justify the most abhorrent attitudes – and usually is.
| Print article | This entry was posted by nickandrew on November 16, 2011 at 12:23 pm, and is filed under Uncategorized. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed. |

about 6 months ago
Michael Crook is an online troll whose hobby is writing “outrageous” blog posts to get a rise out of people. Google his name and see his sordid history for yourself. Linking to his idiotic blog is exactly what he wants, he craves attention. Mike is a total fraud and a despicable human being, do not feed.
about 6 months ago
So I should just shut up about this kind of hateful nonsense and it will go away? I don’t think so. Even if he is a troll, ignoring him won’t make him go away, and it may well encourage him to post even more disgusting things if he fails to get a rise out of people or realizes that he can post whatever with impunity.
Furthermore, pages like his shift the Overton window toward rape culture. If that extreme viewpoint is acceptable in society, what’s the harm in being just a little misogynistic, victim-blaming and slut-shaming? After all, it’s not as bad as Crook’s page.
Next, look at Crook’s justification for being a contemptible asshole: Mormon religious doctrine and the authority of a dead Mormon leader. The lesson to be learned is that Mormonism (among other religions) can be used to justify abhorrent anti-social and repellent attitudes. That once you begin to take your morals from ancient books and so-called divine authority, you can be easily led to approve of or commit atrocities.
Good morals are derived from principles of empathy with fellow human beings, minimization of harm and maximization of well-being, and logical consistency. You don’t need a God to do that; in fact a God halts the process by telling you an answer; typically an answer from the ancient past where humanity was considerably more barbaric, on average, than now.
Finally, what are the implications for the rest of us of Crook’s denial of the existence of rape, his insistence that “she is to blame” unless there’s a fight to the death? Is it possible that Crook himself has committed rape, and his online outburst is a post-hoc rationalization of his deed?
In October 2001, W.L. Marshall and Heather Moulden published “Hostility Toward Woman and Victim Empathy in Rapists” where they found:
Correlation is not causation, so we can’t infer from this study a higher probability that Crook is a rapist. However, it is a red flag to all women with whom he may have any contact – he could rape, and he would not be troubled by his conscience afterward, for he has already justified it in his own mind.