|
Blog
|
|
July 22 I've been practicing this deal called "intuitive eating," trying to help myself stop chocolate pig-outs. And as with virtually any new pursuit, I joined an email list. In the rules, there's something about religion saying that some people will talk about religion and if you don't like it, just ignore it. And it was true. Some people offered bits of what they called "inspiration" that had a religious tone and people often talked about praying, mentioned God, and signed off with a "God Bless." The list was, basically, a typical public list. When someone posted an excerpt from something Marianne Williamson wrote, I ignored it right away. Williamson is a spiritual guru who turns even menstruation into a gift from God. No thanks. But a new person to the list said she was uncomfortable with the religion in the post and asked if the list was "religious," and was she on the wrong list. At first, people like me spoke up and agreed we didn't like religious stuff, but that we just ignore it. Then, there began a wave of posts from religious people. One actually used the P word (persecution). The poster was called "ridiculous," compared to a spoiled brat, labeled "intolerant," and "disrespectful." I did my best to defend the poster. I didn't agree with her that people should put a warning in their posts that they contained religious content, but I certainly didn't find her to be persecuting anyone. The moderators and owner of the group did not defend her and only asked that we get back on topic. But by then, I was pretty steamed. Christians have it all. They have groups that are specifically Christian on which people like me are either not welcome at all, or are only welcome if we don't say anything to set off their touchy offense buttons. And they frequent open lists, where all are welcome, but cry persecution and intolerance when anyone dares to say they are uncomfortable with their blathering on about their God and his impact on their lives. Christians are hypocrites. You know that if I sent in inspiration from Wicca or Satanism, they'd be extremely offended and say so. But no one is allowed to question their posting of Christian nonsense. And now they're in martyr mode. Now they feel "unsafe" on the list after all that persecution and intolerance thrown at them. And the other people on the list are babying them and telling them it will be all right. It's disgusting. And I think I'm going to quit. July 10 Jesus H. Christ, is it still 2008? I thought I was taking a vacation...a really long respite, you know? Kick your feet up and forget the world for a while. I come back only to find I've been gone only 3 months. What kind of respite is that? Ah, well. It's not like all hell broke loose while I was gone. More like nothing has changed. Look at the Catholics! My, what touchiness. If the link doesn't work anymore, let me sum up. College dude goes to an on-campus (fee supported, no less) mass and takes the cracker. Lady tries to take it away from him (apparently you're supposed to eat God right there at the altar). He takes it home and puts it in a baggie and gets death threats. The Catholics are crying "hate crime!" He gives the cracker back. (HE GIVES THE CRACKER BACK!!!! ROFLMAO) Oh-My-GAWD people! Don't mess with the Catholics' crackers for Pete's sake. They're SAYCRED! You can eat God, but you can't take him home in your pocket. Now, for some real religious news, here's a story about a minister who posed as a homeless drunk at his church and not one of his parishioners even offered him a coffee! Can you blame them? It's coffee one morning, doughnuts the next, and then two months later the tramp's playing the church organ and dating the minister's wife. Better safe than sorry I always say. Everybody (well, the American Christians, anyway) knows that Jesus wants us to be prosperous. If you're not trailing a boat to your summer home on the lake, you're not doing it right. The Secret tells us, after all, to shun the hopeless, or it'll rub off! March 15 Christianity has really gotten cheesy, hasn't it? My son and I were shopping for Easter candy and he really wanted to get a chocolate cross. I could see the appeal--I mean, what could be more fun for a little atheist than biting into a chocolate cross. After discussing it however, the cost, and the fact that the chocolate was not good chocolate, he decided against it. Christianity has been trying to play catch up since its inception. It's tried hard to take over Saturnalia and spring celebrations by joining them, basically. And in so doing it has lost itself. On the one hand, that's great. The religion is watered down into a facade. But on the other hand, it's just so silly, I have to wonder why more people don't reject it as obviously a farce. Take Christvertising. Watching this dorky guy try to sell Christians on his "unique isosceles approach to marketing" which is nothing more than a prayer channel, gives me the creeps. Is this guy for real? Isn't he just duping people? I mean....come on... But don't television preachers come off even more phony? I just have to wonder how much this guy charges to tell stupid Christians whether or not their brand is in God's good book. March 9 Well, it's the 30-year anniversary of Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy radio debut. In an article for the BBC, Mark Vernon asks, "What on Earth is 42?" I agree with one commenter who lamented that Adams himself would be rather disgusted by the religious overtone of the article. It's all good to tolerable until the end. While I would agree that things like love and goodness must be experienced, rather than parsed through reason, to be enjoyed, or perhaps even understood, invoking faith, and mentioning God, put a religious spin on something that doesn't require it. This is the problem I have with the word "spiritual." Goodness and loveliness are not "spiritual" qualities. They are human opinions, ways in which we distinguish people and actions. They can be thought about rationally; they can be "accessed" rationally. But they are experienced emotionally. As to 42, I believe Adams hinted well enough that he chose the number at random, which does, in fact, perfectly fit with his life, and the meaning of his books. March 2 I have no one to vote for, for president. It was tough in the last two elections too. But this time, it's worse. I have no idea what I will do. It just doesn't seem like there are any real patriotic, freedom loving, devoted people running for office anymore. But, I'm not entirely sure that there ever were. I mean, maybe I'm naive and doe-eyed or something, right? But, I want someone to stand up and stop all of this nonsense. I want someone to say this country is for everyone, not just Christians. And I want someone to say that faith-based organizations should get their hands out of the tax-payers pot. I want someone who will proudly affirm that evolutionary theories are based on factual evidence. I want someone to say that his/her religion is nobody's business and has nothing to do with how well they can do the job. But no one is saying anything like that. And even if they were, they might be strongly against other things I believe in. But at least it would be a step in the right direction. I have voted in every election since I was eligible. I don't know what will happen if I can't vote. I guess I'll get over it. I mean, it won't be like I'll be alone or even in the minority, right? I just hate to join the stupid people. But then, at least I'll have a reason for not voting. I mean, a real reason--not because I forgot or I didn't have time, or I was too stupid to care. Some people are saying that McCain is moderate. But the picture of him hugging John Hagee is disgusting. What happened to the Republicans anyway? They're just Democrats with a strong dose of religious bigotry now. February 16 Funny article in the Christian Post this week. "Apologists ask churches to step up response to militant atheism." The title of the article is enough, isn't it? Why is speaking about atheism, and about the evils of religion, and about the invalidity of belief militant? Isn't militant really just a word the religious use against atheists to make us sound warlike? To make us into aggressive animals? They must be running very scared. Here's the funny part: Lee Strobel, author of the best-selling The Case for Christ, agreed with Mittelberg that many Christians are raised to believe in doctrine but are not adequately taught on why their faith is true or how to support their faith with evidence. Okay, if they have to be raised to believe in it, clearly there is not enough evidence to support it. If there is enough evidence to support it, it wouldn't be called faith, it would be called fact. What you have faith in may or may not be true. But you can't teach someone why their faith is true. It's faith. You either indoctrinate them with it so they believe in it, or you let them figure out the world on their own by looking for fact. If you have facts, you don't need faith. Silly Christians. Silly scared Christians.
February 10 I happened upon a website that I thought I'd been to before; it's called CARM, Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry. (Check out that big, thick, he-man, muscle-y arm in the stud t-shirt holding the Bible. Christianity is for real men, no?) I was sure I'd been there and it was just ridiculously stupid and irrational. And now it seems to have changed into something with a lot more credibility. So, either I am just not remembering where I've been, or someone there has had a revelation. He, he, he. (Don't bitch at me for that, you readers of other blogs.) Their discussion of atheism and atheists is pretty clear and objective, something you hardly ever see on a Christian website. They do make at least one mistake, however. They discuss the various types of atheists (silly nonsense, if you ask me, but even atheists buy into it): strong and weak. They are unfortunately a tad confused about strong atheism, but probably no more so than a lot of atheists. They claim that some strong atheists believe there is no god. (That's their problem then, isn't it?) But the mistake is in the idea that strong atheists are aggressive. Well, I guess I might agree that strong atheists would have more of a tendency to be aggressive than weak atheists (those who just claim a lack of belief), but it would just be a tendency. To say that strong atheists are aggressive and weak atheists are not is just not true. Then they claim there is a group of atheists they call "militant." And boy, they do not like them. Here's how they describe the "militant atheist." Finally, there is a group of atheists that I call militant atheists. They are, fortunately, few in number. They are usually highly insulting and profoundly terse in their comments to theists, particularly Christians. I’ve encountered a few of them and they are vile, rude, and highly condescending. Their language is full of insults, profanity, and blasphemies. Basically, no meaningful conversation can be had with them. Okay, I'll grant that there are such atheists. And I suppose if you want to separate them from the rest and say, these are the militant atheists, I won't argue too much. Just let it be known that militant Christians, therefore, also exist. They're the ones who write me emails telling me they are praying to God to take away my children. Their discussion on mistakes Christians make when talking to atheists is fairly good. I would have to say, however, that to say that "in general, atheists are not stupid," is not quite accurate. In general, atheists are not only not stupid, they are more intelligent than religious people. Argue all you want. Throw things if you have to. It's true. Their bias shows very well in their mistakes atheists make when talking to Christians essay. They say: Though an atheist may not accept biblical evidence at support for God's existence, it does not negate the fact that the Bible is evidence. Whether or not the atheist wants to accept it, is another matter. Uh, no, I don't think they've got that quite right. The Bible is evidence only that people of long ago wrote stories. That's all. To say that it is absolutely evidence supporting the existence of a god and that atheists simply reject it, is some kind of logical fallacy, the name of which I do not care to look up right now. Christians, at some point, will have to understand what evidence is before they can really talk to nonbelievers. But, I think there is a block there, a line over which they will not, or can not cross, without having to give up their beliefs. But there are Christians out there who understand that they have no evidence and willingly admit it. They have faith and they are fine with that. Those types of Christians tend to be the kindest and most accepting of others. Well, I'm glad to see that more Christians are trying to be logical and objective and fair. I think it shows that we, as a society, are making some headway. The religious, in general, are becoming more willing to admit they could be wrong about some things. And at least they're talking about science and evidence. Too few of them have grasped exactly what those words mean. But things are looking better. Of course, tomorrow I could web surf and find that we are sinking into a stinking pit of Christian extremism and that freedom is hopeless. That's the way it usually goes.
February 2 Groundhogs unite! So, the Pope had some things to say about science this week. Silly Pope. According to an article posted on Reuters El Popo said that some of the stuff scientists are getting into had "shattered human dignity." He said that stem-cell research and freezing embryos and such had "shattered the barriers meant to protect human dignity." Well, see that's his problem right there. He believes first, that there is something called "human dignity" and second that barriers were purposefully set up to maintain said dignity. "When human beings
in the weakest and most defenseless state of their existence are selected,
abandoned, killed or used as pure 'biological material,' how can one deny that
they are being treated not as 'someone' but as 'something,'" he said. Yes! Yes, see, he's almost there. Let us question the concept of human dignity. I am a big supporter of human dignity, and human freedom, and human compassion, and human potential. But I do not believe that any sort of barrier was purposefully drawn. Naturally the Pope believes that a barrier was put in place by his god and therefore he can speak for said god and let us know exactly that. That there! It's a barrier. You weren't supposed to cross it! Hmm. Remember the color barrier? There was this barrier between darker skinned people and lighter skinned people and we were certain of it because of where the people "came" from. You know, the continent. We were not supposed to cross that barrier. Blacks and whites, Latinos, Asians, kissing and holding hands and Oh-My-Gawd! procreating. Yeah, so I'm not real big on the whole barrier thing. I believe that there is a very fine line somewhere after procreation before which the thing is a thing and after which it is more human. And it becomes more human the more it matures. But I do not believe that the clump of embryonic cells is a human being any more than a sperm is half a human. And, let's say, even if I did see the embryo and the fetus as potentially human, or human even, there's still that tiny little problem of its parasitic nature. As long as it is dependent upon its host for its survival, I have to say, it does not have the right to life that its host has. The host, the pregnant woman, has the right to determine what she will do with her body. She can not be forced to carry a clump of cells to term. That is why it is fine with me if people don't want to have abortions. Don't have them. It's fine with me if people don't want to have babies through some cool process involving frozen embryos, don't do it. And it's fine with me if some people don't want to take advantage of medical research involving discarded clumps of cells. Don't survive. I don't care. But stop trying to decide for other people. It's too fine a line between cells and human. And it's too intrusive into a woman's life and body for you to be putting your nose there. Stay out of other people's wombs. Take your fear somewhere else. Let the rest of the world get on with discussing the question of human dignity. You stay put, right where you are in your little world. We'll get along fine without you.
|