looking for a new word

Les suggests we find a new word to clearly identify and denigrate all the religious slimeballs such as the Comforts, AIG’s, Farwells and Robertsons.

Here is what Les had to say (please ignore the dig at the current state of cricket in Australia) :

I am writing from South Africa – where the cricketers come from. This email is not in response to any particular issue but a general point that you may wish to invite comment upon.

The more I read atheist blogs, xian and muslim hate mail, fundie statements on fstdt or the idiocy of attempts to promote creationism over science the more certain I have become that many of the loudest and stupidest statements are made not by credulous victims of religion but by some very smart operators who not only exploit religion for financial gain but who themselves do not believe any of [the] crap they sprout. To my knowledge we do not have a short descriptive term to identify the Roy Comforts, AIG’s, Farwells and Robertsons. Words like poe and xian (xtian) have wide currency and understanding. I suggest that we need an additional term in the atheist armoury to clearly identify and denigrate these slimeballs – a term which even the religious will come to recognise.

Here are some initial suggestions.


I am sure your contributors can do better.

Well contributors, can you?

I’d also like to see a list of people/organisations that deserve this new moniker.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


Filed under atheism, atheist, dictionary, word

24 responses to “looking for a new word

  1. how about:

    Children of God
    Followers of Christ

    That should be a good start….

    (let the irrational ridicule begin from all the Darwinist God deniers)

  2. I like ‘theotard’. It rhymes with leotard. It is short. It is abusive but in a goodnatured and humourous way.

  3. @ dave, welcome.
    Now I have strange visions of fundies in fluorescent lycra knocking on my door, handing me leaflets.

  4. [A] new word to clearly identify and denigrate all the religious slimeballs such as the Comforts, AIG’s, Farwells and Robertsons



  5. DB

    I agree with Mcoville actually. “Christian” is a sufficient enough term for me to use in a derogatory manner. I mean, you can’t be more of a douchebag than one of them, right?

    Example: “That little boy raping Pastor is a Christian.”

    It has a nice ring to it. I’ll continue to use it.

  6. tithegobbler works for me, but TB is right, Christian is sufficiently derogatory.

  7. thsutton

    I agree with both (genuine, non-defective) suggestions so far: Christian (or Muslim, or Buddhist, or Scientologist, or Super-Secret-Sky-Fairy Friend) says everything that needs saying, but theotard is part of a pattern just begging to be carried on (republitard, etc.) and is also very nearly impossible to misinterpret.

    Even the child-molesting pastor in the example above can’t possible think that we’re being complimentary. No-one’s self-delusion stretches that far.

  8. In the past, I have identified certain individuals to be “fundigelicals”. I like “theotard”, though. When I use “Christian” derisively, I get “Atheist” thrown back at me, equally as derisively. In these moments, I’ve been known to revert to the use of “God-nuggets”, “Cross-lickers”, and “Jeezwhizzers”, but I’m exceptionally mean online sometimes, because I spend so much time being incredibly nice and respectful, living in what until recently was becoming a theist state.

  9. Doulos

    The gulag was a result of athiests.

    Yeah, it does have a nice ring.

  10. Pingback: Are Atheists Afraid of Criticizing Islam? « The Sisyphus Fragment

  11. Thanks ozatheist for making me picture fundies in lycra. Yikes!

    And seriously, mcoville, could you stop using my blogroll as a list of potential converts? It’s obnoxious! How many more people will I have to apologize to for letting the unhousebroken theotard into the house?

  12. Chook

    Christian says it all. Hypocrite, liar, hater, intollerant, stupid, fundamental, stubborn, unrealistic, family-breaker, time-waster, tax-evading, mind-controller, self-centred, money-loving and most of all – full of shite. There needs no other word to describe them. Let christians call athiests what to because now days they are on the back foot and have no where else to turn. In the end, science and rational thinking will always win any argument against them and o so easily.

  13. Alice

    Be fair, chook. Some of those christians you are insulting could be nice people who just happen to be wrong. They might even be a few good books (or blogs) away from an epiphany.

    Who are “Comforts, AIG’s, Farwells and Robertsons” anyway? The most obnoxious religious folk I know about are the Pope, Tony Abbott, and G W Bush.

  14. Personal Failure: Don’t flatter yourself, I am using that great little tool called Tag Surfing.

    Alice: Thank you for being an example of maturity in a list of childish comments, but from the topic of the post I expected nothing different.

    I would like to think everyone for encouraging me in that you are showing me that my work is far from over and if I were getting paid to do this I would have better job security that an unemployment office worker in a democratic presidentancy.

  15. Not all these guys are christstains, we also have people like Harun Yahya. I like the term ‘religiots’

  16. seantheblogonaut

    Did I hear some one ask me to bring my Mankini?

  17. seantheblogonaut

    Jeez, I thought mcoville was a poe eek!

  18. mcovile

    I’m a child of an imaginary sky daddy and I follow a dead guy who probably didn’t exist, who wants me to drink his blood and eat his flesh. nom nom nom. Pass the salt, please… unless you Sodomites and Gomorrahites have turned into a pillar of the stuff, of course.

    I’m right, you’re wrong, GOD told me so. neener, neener, neener, so there!

    Women are evil and they just LOVE having abortions- I MUST STOP THEM!! So, I’m off to harass a few baby murderers.

  19. Chook

    Alice, maybe I was being a bit harsh and straight to the point. My parents are still fundies and it is so frustrating correcting them week after week that real family is much more important than a pretend family. I was a member once until I did my university science degree. I started to question both sides and found it easy to see what was truth. I was snubbed by the church after I started to question the bible’s ‘science’ and also why the preachers didn’t pay their taxes and was able to live a nice lifestyle because of it. My brothers and sister followed suit because of what they told them about me. I agree that many christians may be nice but what will happen when they are tested and influenced. I certainly lost alot of friends who I grew up with and was really upset how overnight they could suddenly hate me. So as for my previous reply – it was done with a bit of frustration. ALWAYS question everything and even try to see it from another point of view. I have certainly been enlightened and now I am happier than ever. The slogan on the London buses is very true…

  20. Alice

    Hey Chook, I think I understand. Although I have no problems within my family, I met a lot of unpleasant christians during my school years. Suspicion is now my automatic reaction when I learn that someone is a christian. I think “How can they reconcile the deeply embedded misogyny of christian culture with a respectful attitude towards me? Can I really trust someone who says they get their guidance from that grimoire of depravity, the bible?”

    But on the other hand, I know that everyone wants to be assessed on their individual merits, not just as an instantiation of a type. And as well as that, I am a little disappointed that truly logical, philosophical conversation is rarely available even from atheists o.O

    Criticising fundies is like shooting fish in a barrel – I would like to see us using our unique skills and worldviews to discuss tough questions in ethics, science, and metaphysics… why should Dawkins have all the fun?

  21. Alice

    Hey ozatheist, how does one go about making a new blog – like yours? Is it free? It would be nice to create a blog where people can discuss philosophical stuff from a non-theistic point of view.

  22. les wood

    Hello Oz

    I would like to try again f I may?

    I am rather disappointed with the responses so far. I am not suggesting a new word to be used to describe Christians or Muslims. I am suggesting that a new term is needed to describe ‘those that preach crap to the credible which the preacher does not in fact believe himself.

    Example 1 A report by Reuters

    MAPUTO, Sept 26 (Reuters) – The head of the Catholic church in Mozambique said on Wednesday he believed some European-made condoms were deliberately tainted with the HIV/AIDS virus to kill African people.

    “I know of two countries in Europe who are making condoms with (the) virus on purpose, they want to finish with African people as part of their programme to colonise the continent,” Archbishop Francisco Chimoio told Reuters.

    “If we are not careful we will finish in one century.

    “I also know some companies who are manufacturing anti-retroviral drugs already infected with the virus, also in order to finish quickly the African people”, Chimoio said.

    Example 2 the infamous creation museum

    America’s finest creation museum which claims humans and dinosaurs co-existed. I know that Ken Ham is a nut case but even he cannot believe that humans rode around on dinosaurs fitted with saddles.

    Example 3 Answere In Genesis

    A collection of deliberate lies and misrepresentation ‘designed’ to mislead gullible xians to believe the bible must be interpreted literally.

    …… the secular world is “scared” to carbon date dinosaur bones or, for that matter, any other bone they suspect is millions of years old. Creationists would love for the soft dinosaur tissue that was discovered by Dr. Mary Schweitzer to have been carbon dated. But as far as I know, such has never been done.

    Outright lie Mr Ham. To quote Wikipedia

    Schweitzer, however, who describes herself as a “complete and total Christian”, has nonetheless condemned this interpretation of her work because given the established paradigm there can be no question that the geologic age of the formation containing the bones is 68 million years old

    Ham and the Catholic Archbishop of Mozambique are what I call quacksaviours – I just wish someone would create a better term to describe them.

    I trust I got the formatting right. I see the poms got a hiding in the WI yesterday.

  23. les wood

    word in third line should be ‘credulous’

  24. Hey Alice,
    if you want to start a blog, just go to blogger and follow the directions. It takes just a couple of minutes. Of course, then you have to keep posting stuff on it…..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s