Can we have a show of hands, please?

How many of you have heard something like, “God can’t exist if little kids with leukemia exist!”

These people think they’re making a serious intellectual point but, in reality, they are only exposing their contempt for the world — especially its poor and suffering. They're sneering at the suffering of small children, using it as a weapon against those of faith and then glibly sitting down to eat bon-bons.

It’s a wonder why atheists insist that a being who has the ability to help the disadvantaged and suffering―but who intentionally refuses to do so―somehow is either evil or weak or inattentive or uncaring or nonexistent. By such ridiculous pseudologic, we can be assured that atheists also don’t exist because there has never been an atheist-led or atheist-inspired hospital for the very kids with leukemia of whom they pretend to be concerned anywhere, at any time, ever. Therefore, atheists are evil, worthless when it comes to assisting the disadvantaged and suffering, oblivious to their suffering, apathetic to their needs or simply don’t exist. Q.E.D.

Isn’t logic grand!

In actuality, the above statement is a classic example of atheist doublespeak or, in other words, atheists-talking-from-both-sides-of-their-mouths also known as the logical fallacy, “Lack of Falsifiability” also known as Argumentum ad auribus teneo lupum (Latin: Grabbing a wolf by the ears)

If a child with incurable leukemia suddenly and inexplicably recovers from her illness, Christians would claim this as a miracle from God. For the atheist, the child’s recovery is a stinging loss to their egos. If the death of a child “proves” God doesn’t exist, then, it follows that the child’s recovery “proves” God does exist. The atheist’s argument is predicated on the hope that the child doesn’t recover. Such an eventuality serves, so they insist, as “proof” God doesn’t exist. If the child recovers, then, by the very standards by which the atheist has clumsily cobbled together his ridiculous argument, God must therefore exist as children do recover miraculously.

Here are a few links:

Atheists can’t have it both ways.

Why doesn’t God heal every child with leukemia? I’m unsure, but I know for a fact that atheists have never built a hospital for even one poor child with that disease so, thus far, the score is Atheists 0, God ∞.

In other words, instead of asking why God doesn’t cure every child, atheists should be asking themselves why they aren’t helping any child. Technically, as they are all so very “fond” of science, any atheist who refuses to earn a doctorate in biology and work tirelessly in a medical research center carries an even greater weight of moral responsibility for the pain and suffering of small children everywhere.

The real answer to the above atheist myth is actually by far more stunning and is utter proof of the sheer worthlessness and lack of moral credibility of atheism and fundamentalist atheists.

Christians and Jews who are open to God’s love are overcome by Him and are filled with that love. This love is not just for ourselves but for all those around us especially the poor, disadvantaged, disenfranchised, the lonely, the desperate and the suffering.

Where’s my proof?

The very fact that atheists have closed themselves off to God’s love and are unwilling and/or incapable of accepting His love makes them unwilling and/or incapable of sharing it. Thus far, they have refused to build even a single hospital for poor kids anywhere or at any time. As St. Teresa of Ávila reminds us:

Christ has no body now but yours. No hands, no feet on earth but yours. Yours are the eyes through which He looks compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which He walks to do good. Yours are the hands through which He blesses all the world. Yours are the hands, yours are the feet, yours are the eyes, you are His body. Christ has no body now on earth but yours.

Apparently, St. Paul understood this when he wrote:

He helps us in all our troubles, so that we are able to help others who have all kinds of troubles, using the same help that we ourselves have received from God. Just as we have a share in Christ's many sufferings, so also through Christ we share in God's great help. If we suffer, it is for your help and salvation; if we are helped, then you too are helped and given the strength to endure with patience the same sufferings that we also endure. (2 Corinthians 1:4-6)

Such delicious irony!

Atheism has never motivated its practitioners to assist anyone, ever. Atheists simply don’t care about the poor enough to assist even one small child with leukemia. Otherwise we’d be up to our hips in atheist hospitals. And, just for the record, the Catholic Church operates 125,000 hospitals and clinics around the world.

As I mentioned earlier, logic is grand, is it not?

Fundamentalist atheists who are caught unawares on the horns of this dilemma will often fumble some silly “excuse” like, “Well… ah… we atheists prefer to finance hospitals which are already in existence.”

This is mathematically and logistically impossible.

It’s absolutely impossible for all atheists in the world to have met, discussed the issue of philanthropic response to the needy and then all come to a consensus as to how to deal with it. Even atheist Dick Dawkins in his The God Delusion admits that it’s “easier to herd cats than it is to get atheists to cooperate with each other.”

When atheists make silly claims like this, it’s merely a desperate―and useless―attempt for atheists to save face. But, if they insist they are correct, ask them for the canceled checks to prove their great charity. Chances are their atheistic dogs ate them.

I’m being facetious of course. All dogs are Catholic and they go to Heaven when they die.

Next time an atheist brings up the suffering of small children, ask him about all of the hospitals that he and other atheists have built. Catholics continue to build and finance hospitals around the world every time we drop a dollar in the weekly collection basket. But, alas―and to their chagrin―there are no atheist hospitals anywhere.