Every year
New Humanist magazine opens the polls to decide who will receive the prestigious
Bad Faith Award. Each year, the person deemed by the voters to have made the most outstanding contribution to the cause of
unreason.
2008's winner who, with 33% of the vote, was the hands-down victor in a field of nine contestants, was Alaska governor and vice-presidential nominee, Sarah Palin. Here's what
New Humanist had to say about her qualifications:
The charges: Being an election and a heart attack away from controlling the world’s largest thermonuclear arsenal while simultaneously believing that the End Times may arrive during her lifetime.
What they (she) said: “You’ve heard about some of these pet projects. They really don’t make a whole lot of sense and sometimes these dollars go to projects that have little or nothing to do with the public good. Things like fruit fly research in Paris, France. I kid you not.”
What we say: “In dismissing fruit fly research to the great delight of her audience Palin was actually belittling basic science, something that has actually advanced our understanding of autism, and at the same time throwing in this nationalistic jingoism. She deserves the Bad Faith Award, she’s an awful person.” (PZ Myers, biologist)
This year's ten nominees (suggested by New Humanist's readers) are:
- Adnan Oktar, aka Harun Yahya
- British Chiropractic Association
- Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor
- Terry Eagleton & Karen Armstrong
- Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair
There's no need to despair if any of the names are unfamiliar. New Humanist provides convenient information on each enemy of reason. Here's a couple samples:
Adnan Oktar, aka Harun Yahya:
The Islamic world's leading creationist charlatan will be looking to go one better than last year's second place finish, when he polled a staggering 1,091 votes on the back of his attempt to have Richard Dawkins' website banned in Turkey. Oktar must fancy his chances this year though – back in 2008, we mostly knew him as the producer of slapdash creationist literature, but in 2009 the stakes have surely been raised by his exposure in our own pages as the leader of what essentially amounts to a creationist sex cult. If you're looking for a good reason to vote Oktar, look no further than the many comments left by his minions on this blog post.
Pope Benedict XVI: The Pope was up for the award in 2007, but failed to make the shortlist in 2008. Having stated in March that AIDS "is a tragedy that cannot be overcome by money alone, and that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems", could 2009 finally be his year?
Voting is open to anyone who visits the
New Humanist website and the current standings of the nominees can be viewed when a vote is cast. Interestingly enough,
New Humanist also provides bookmaker's odds on the chances of each candidate just as if they were horses! Better vote soon. The race has already begun and the polls close Dec. 5th!
Photo Credit:
1) Bad Faith Awards 2009 (provided by New Humanist)
If you enjoy my articles, you can click on "Subscribe by email" to receive notification when new ones are posted.
You might also enjoy these:
Comments
THAT quote is why you clowns condemn Sarah Palin?! Because she believes that a government trillions of dollars in debt and a country wrestling with a massive recession would be better off not spending its people's tax dollars on some esoteric study about flies????
If PZ Myers believes this asnine study is worth paying for, let HIM front the cash. Why do I have to pay for it when I struggle to make rent? Academics need to get their heads out of their rear ends. I have some candidates of my own:
John Allen Muhammad
Nidal Malik Hasan
Khaled Meshaal
Hugo Chavez
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
(I realize that liberals of delicate sensibility may not want to actually condemn a person whose unreason actually HARMS someone. Best to stick with safe targets like Bush, Palin and the Pope.)
My votes are for British Chiropractic and the Pope. It absolutely infuriates me that someone with that much power spreads lies about HIV. I hope the Catholic Church is one day a relic of times long past.
Right. Because misstating a fact about AIDS is SO MUCH WORSE than slaughtering innocent people.
Hello Eugene. If it was just misstating a fact, the Vatican would have corrected it. It's more than that though. It's the deliberate feeding of misinformation about AIDS prevention to people reinforced by the authority of God's Vicar on Earth and it IS slaughtering innocent people. That's not merely a contribution to the cause of unreason. It's a crime against humanity.
Please try to compare these facts objectively:
The Pope distorts facts about AIDS.
Anwar al-Awlaki actively encourages the gunman who kills 13 soldiers at Fort Hood.
Khaled Meshaal leads Hamas, a decades old terrorist organization, to new heights of bloodshed.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad actively developes nuclear weapons and declares Israel a "stinking corpse" to be pushed into the sea.
Of these four religious leaders, who is the worst?
I do try, Eugene. I research both my articles and my responses for accuracy. Besides, your comparisons are red herrings since, aside from the Pope, none of those other gentlemen were nominated and the contest is for who made this year's greatest contribution to the cause of unreason; not who is the worst religious leader (and, if you check, you'll find they're not all religious leaders either).
One more thing: I haven't been impressed with any version of the "two wrongs make a right" argument since I was 8 years old... and saying "yeah, but THESE guys are are worse than THAT guy" is definately a variant of that argument.
@Hugh: Let me just make my main point then: I have never been able to take the atheists, secular humanists, "freethinkers" etc. etc. seriously because they are not serious about their own beliefs. Condemn (supposedly) Christian death-threats against atheist billboards? Sure! Condemn Nidal Malik Hasan for brutally murdering 13 people while shouting "Allah Ackbar!" Well...
The whole "secular movement" ignores the 800 pound gorilla in the room: Islamic extremism. The New Humanist magazine has only reaffirmed that the "secular movement" is politically motivated and anti-christian.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!