• One Evil Beast at Rest

    Christianity went through a period a few hundred years ago during which thousands died and thousands more suffered injustice. The murder, mayhem, and destruction occurred because one belief system rose to power and could do as it pleased. Over the many centuries since, due to education as well as improvements in the quality of life, the power of Christianity to carry out its edicts waned.
    Thankfully many Cherry picking ChristianChristians cherry pick the passages they wish to obey today, with those who retain full faith among the minority. Even though many a right wing conservative Christian politician would like to see a return of their faith to power, and work to enact laws to that end, those that see the value in a separation of church and state have so far prevailed.

     

    The Open Door of Tolerance, or Who Let That In?

    The other evil, that of Islam, has found a flaw, perhaps a fatal one, in our Democratic Republic. They point at our constitution in America and note the hands-off religion declarations. The open door invites them in with the promise of tolerance. Then the people, those of Islam, do what they do in every country they have been invited in: Islam will dominate the worldThey multiply with rapidity.

    Politicians exclaim that Islam is a peaceful religion. These claims are made despite the truth that the faith exhorts its followers to crush all non-believers. Will the United States soon suffer the fate of Britain where the Islamic population has grown to such proportions that demands have been made to install Sharia law?

    Monsters All

    There are those that claim that since America is so thoroughly Christian that such a fate would not befall it. Many promote the cooperation of Christianity and those who do not believe at all in an effort to deter Islam. Yet Christianity can be as demanding as Islam. All religions propose what they believe is the proper way to live, some,this-is-a-kindness-doctor-who-robot-plunger_design like Christianity and Islam, claim their god tells them they must spread their faith. They are told by doing so they are helping those they appropriate avoid some horrible end. They actually believe they are performing a kindness.

    The Bitter Solution 

    In the aftermath of September 11, 2001, the citizens of the United States were told that to protect them, the government would have to limit or curtail some freedoms. No one could imagine the steps that would be put in place before this tragedy.

    ripped_constitutionNow it seems the only solution to the problems of Islam is for America to make an exception. Freedom of Religion for all, except the followers of Islam. Toleration must take a blow.

    What else is there to do about a belief system that has as one unshakable tenet, the conquest of the entire planet?

  • The alpha male or female rules. Since time began there have been those who were “born” to lead. shouting-closeup-on-mouth-165x300 Whether for good or ill these individuals have directed the course of their social groups. Be it wolves or elephants or any social animal, including humans, there have always been those who were in charge, those who took or are given special privilege.

    In every field of endeavor there are those whose word is taken as gold, the final pronouncement, carrying more weight than a subordinate regardless of correctness. To challenge that word at best meant humiliation, at worst the end of life or career.

    In science, on occasion, a subordinate is credited with a discovery years or decades after the fact. At the time they made the discovery their position conflicted with an alpha and they were shouted down. Usually this occurs when the discovery they made is rediscovered.

    Testosterone, the louder one can shout, the more fierce the display, usually wins the day. Though it may win the argument, sometimes the path it forces others to follow is fatally wrong. Such decisions, unable to stand alone, made only on force of personality can lead to a civilization’s ruin.

    Over the years in the present atheist movement I have noticed that many non-believers assume submissive blithe acceptance of pronouncements from the prominent leaderssam harris free will of the movement. Sam Harris’s stance on free will is accepted by many without any argument. The recent debacle over the addition of plus to atheist, led to divisiveness. Prominent atheists are flawed human beings after all and should be questioned as roundly as any one.

    In Christianity one or more individuals who think they have all the right ideas put themselves in charge. It too, is all about the alpha status. Even though it is obviously apparent that it is their own goals they wish to enact, backed by scripture frequently out of context, their voice being the loudest, theiralpha male angry assertiveness the most bold, they usually succeed in placing themselves at the top of a group or movement. The submissive, who think the individuals at the top have their best interests at heart, fall into line.

    What we as a people need to realize is that our leaders are just as flawed as all other human beings. They need to be questioned. Rational thought demands they be questioned. If their ideas are found to be sound, accept them. If their ideas are found to be flawed, they must be rejected.

  • Faith accepts that the heavens and the earth were created by a being of immense power which they call god. The fact that the source of this belief, the bible, contradicts within its own pages the order in which creation proceeded is ignored. Was the light first, or the sun? The suggestion that the bible was written by men who could not possibly know they things of which theybible wrote is objected to vehemently, their knowledge, the believers claim, was the inspired knowledge of god relayed to them, by god. Faith accepts that all the answers are contained with the bible’s pages. Believers believe they have all the answers, and that to question their beliefs is an affront to god.

    Science seeks the answers it strives for through logic and scientific method 2reason, trial and error, conjecture and thought. The present thought is that the universe sprang from a minute dot, expanded and cooled. Natural laws outlined by physics are used to explain the formation of the stars and planets. Abiogenesis, it is suggested, is the method by which life arose. Evolution, it is explained, proceeded then to produce the plethora of life now present. Science does not claim to know all the answers. Science does not accept that some supernatural force is at work when it cannot readily provide the answers. Science always produces more questions in its search for answers. Science seeks to know, it does not accept blindly answers that have no foundation.

    Faith is not without its science. Some answers are accepted asreligious science long as they do not contradict but instead support scripture. It is the answers from science that do not support their beliefs that is in error, they assert. When believers use science they start with a conclusion, and then work to support that conclusion. Facts and theories that do not support the conclusion are assumed to be errors in the science, not the holy bible.

    Science, properly done, does not start with the conclusion. A hypothesis may be put forth, suggesting a possible answer. Through the trial and error of the scientific method this hypothesis is put to the test. If through observation the outcome of the methods  does support the conjectured hypothesis the hypothesis may become a theory. If subsequently, through more tests and observations, the theory proves in error, it is abandoned and another hypothesis emerges. If the answers do not immediatelyhands up present themselves scientists do not ‘throw up their hands’ and conclude that some supernatural entity is involved. Instead, it continues to seek.

    Imagine a world guided solely by the bible and the misery that would surely ensue. From its pages it will be gleaned that the earth is flat. That sky above is merely a tapestry created by the lord for human amusement, supported by the four corners of the earth. Space exploration would never be considered, for all that would happen is that you would smash against the tapestry above. Medicine would be a waste of energy as prayer would be the remedy for all ailments. Finding a cure through earthly means would be considered an biblical timesaffront to god. Education beyond the means to receive the wisdom of the bible would be non-existent. The world would never advance beyond that world humankind experienced during what are considered biblical times. Christians might rejoice at such a thought until they realized the reality of the misery of such times.

    Science continues to search for the answers today. Its successes are however always in danger. The blind ignorance presented by those who insist that the bible has all the good_news_club2knowledge mankind needs still exists. Through subterfuge and usurpation of the young the threat to actual knowledge in favor of delusional knowledge continues. The rich and obstinate conservative right must be opposed lest we be forced to return to the “good ole days”. 

  • A recent presentation by Bill Maher asked the question: “If there was one turd in theTHE-SWIMMING-POOL-MONSTER swimming pool, would you jump in?” This question was made in reference to the Bible. Taking this further, what if the swimming pool had many turds, so many that you had to wait for an area to clear, just to jump in?

    Maher’s guest was an evangelical minister who insisted on seeing only the cherries. Whenever Maher asked about the negative, the bad ideas, the ‘dirt’ in the Bible, the minister either changed the subject or answered with a question.

    Many Christians do this. They refuse to see the bad parts and use the good parts, only the good parts they want, to create a religious view unique to themselves and havingcherry nothing to do with the Christianity presented by the Bible. They do this by ignoring the obvious immoral things while choosing the good.  Many a sect of Christianity has developed by embracing certain ideas in the Bible and rejecting others.

    In the past the analogy I was given was that it was not proper to reject a whole book or body of work simply because you disagreed with one page. However, there are so many objectionable pages contained in the Bible that a very large portion of the book would have to be rejected. In the end you end up with moral concepts which existed long before the Bible came to be. If you can obtain these morals without the use of a book that also contains the immoral, why taint the goal.

    Despite the admonition by theists that God is the same, never changing, it is clear that at least in the eyes of some that this is not true. Christianity has changed to reflect the morals of society as they change over time. It has morphed into something that has very little in common with the Bible as well as ancient Christianity. The ideal concept ofbible not so holy a Christian held by many, unique in every instance, does not in reality find its reflection in the Bible. If anyone holds that the Bible is the inspired and perfect word of God then they do not realize that when they condemn others for not following its teachings, they are condemning themselves as well. In other words, they are as damned as everyone they condemn.

    In many ways the changes Christianity has undergone to reflect the morals of the time is a good thing. If they followed the teachings as originally taught there would be even greater numbers of Christians in prison today. The asylums would be full of them as well. Education of the masses is the key to this rejection of ignorance represented by biblical scripture.

     

  • The year was 2024 and by proclamation it was publicly declared that free will did not exist. Legislatures everywhere had been convinced by numerous well-meaning but ultimately ignorant philosophers and others that no one could be held responsible for any act they did as they were pre-destined to behave so.

    It all began in 2025 with one test case brought before the supreme court. A homicidal maniac who had lured in a dozen victims, tortured, and then killed them, claimed innocence due to the fact that he was pre-destined to commit these atrocities and could not resist them. He cited the 2024 public proclamation as his basis and appealed to the court to obey it. Although seeing the madness of agreement with this man, logically they could do no less. He was released. It was all downhill from there. The logic continued that the prisons made no sense. None of those held within the walls of these institutions were culpable for their behavior. Prisons were discontinued. The insane were destined to be so, asylums everywhere were ordered closed. Police forces were then declared obsolete and useless, they too were disbanded. Anarchy soon ensued. Those that had declared free will did not exist protested, they did not mean, they said, that people were no longer responsible for their actions. However, the ball was rolling and could not be stopped, for on average the public were dullards. 

    It was now the responsibility of the individual to provide their own security. Gun sells reached a new and dangerous level. Battles raged between gangs of thieves and murderers. No one was safe as organized bands took out the most well guarded fortresses.

    Banks and other businesses failed as no one could be held responsible for their debts. Civilization was on the brink. With schools and other public entities gone the masses became less and less educated. The only things that did well were those that fed on the conditions that prevailed. Religions began to prosper, gain authority, enforcing their edicts with newly formed militias. They declared free will was available and that all the masses had to do was accept freely the offer of salvation. Small pockets of various cults fought for dominance. Kingdoms were once again in vogue.

    So many kingdoms developed, each with separate doctrine, each kingdom fought tooth and nail for its small patch of existence. Within each kingdom strict laws were enforced and those that resisted simply disappeared. If you disagreed with the ideals in fashion you either kept quiet or ended up in some dungeon. Remaining technology and expertise was directed into the construction of ornate and monolithic structures to house the religion of each region. From these palaces the reigning doctrine governed. The constructions were refined and the palaces made indestructible as many were burned when one kingdom fought and destroyed another. No particular kingdom, it seemed, was able to develop to such a point as to remain in power in excess of a few years.

    With all organization gone, medical systems floundered, disease spread quickly from kingdom to kingdom. Sewage departments long since abandoned, filth built quickly and plagues scourged many communities. Soon there were some kingdoms without a population. Where once the earth held nine billion, the numbers began to decline with acceleration. The people who survived no longer congregated in kingdoms. Kingdoms were avoided as unclean places and the people scattered. Family groups living in isolation became the norm. Chance meetings between families always ended in bloodshed.

    The ability to construct family dwellings declined as education became non-existent. Natural caves became the home to many families. These structures were fiercely defended because of their scarcity. The land, unable to support more than a few humans that had assumed foraging habits, necessitated fewer foraging humans. The population downward spiral accelerated even faster.  It wasn’t more than a few years passing that human population had declined to just a few million. With isolation communication between groups became impossible for each group’s language soon altered and was unintelligible to another. Through generations language was found unnecessary and soon grunts and pointing sufficed. For foraging now all the people had were those implements they could fashion from rock and wood. Inbreeding within each group led shortly to unfavorable genetic developments. The brain case of the once proud human lineage began to decrease in size. Survival became more based on brawn than brain. Large lumbering bodies meant more to survival than how one could think.

    Then the climate changed, the earth cooled, a new ice age began. As the world became cold and harsh the population of humankind declined once more. It declined, in fact, to only several tens of thousands. As the habitat that could support humanity shrank, once again groups met and fought for space. Viable populations of human beings were reduced; it seemed as if extinction were imminent. Although it was around year 2250, humanity returned to year zero, and lacked the means to move it forward.

    This was to be expected. After all, it was pre-destined. No one was responsible for mankind’s fall, no one at all. No one had the will to change it.

    Around what could have been 2373 an alien craft lands. The ships inhabitants explore the remaining areas of the world which are not covered by ice. Vegetation, thick and encompassing, shrouds structures which the explorers find. Ornate palaces still exist, with high spires. It is obvious to these newcomers that they will find no one at home, the decay is evident. Cataloguing their finds they soon reenter their craft disappointed to find yet another civilization gone. They leave wondering what kind of civilization existed and why it so recently ended. Carrying only a few misshapen bones, the only traces left of humanity, the ship rises and returns to the search for a people who might have had more success.

  • Perspectives are generated by one’s own mental faculties. They are formed and come into being as a product of past observations and derivations based on even older observations and derivations. That is the way the brain works when encountering new objects or concepts, it compares to past observations and conclusions.

    Mental faculties are shaped by one’s environment. This is inclusive of one’s parents, siblings, and surroundings. When ideas and concepts are imprinted upon an individual’s memory, especially from a very young age, these ideas and concepts are difficult to change.

    When your parents are bigots, and racists, and homophobes, you are likely to grow up thinking such behavior is normal and correct. Evolution insured our survival by this means. A child naturally trusts and learns from his/her parents. If your parents are religious you grow up thinking this is the only way you can be as well. Once you are grown you will likely be just like your parents.

    As some people reach an adult age they become enlightened to ideals which conflict with perspectives held since childhood. While the majority continue on, dismissing conflicts with tightly held ideals, some see the reasoning, the logic, of new concepts, new ways of thinking, and begin a difficult journey down the road of self-change.

    Like some newborn creature they begin to walk down a new path. Like many newborns, missteps naturally occur. Old ways still prevail despite resistance causing some social  faux pas. Change is difficult in a brain wired in old ways. It is found that conscious thought must be maintained to prevent the emergence of communication based on old ways of thinking. Thinking before speaking, before voicing that question or that remark, becomes a necessary rule. Though with time this habit may become second nature, when first embarking on personal change, missteps must be expected.

    There is another social faux pas, committed not by the person attempting to change, but by those around that person. Assumptions made about an individuals point in their journey, assuming that their thinking has reached the pinnacle of their goals, assuming that they have corrected all the errors programmed from youth, should not be made. Taking offense at some remark made by those undergoing change assumes two things. One, that the person making the remark has reached the final goal of personal change desired. The other, that your own point in your journey is your final goal, the perfect goal from which to measure the other person’s remark. The final goal, I should think, would include an admonishment that others may not have yet completed their journey and that some measure of tolerance is in order. Knee-jerk reactions and assumptions are not helpful in the creation of social harmony. Quiet discussion and airing of grievances teach a better lesson than hasty judgment. Education should be a life-long endeavor. If there should be even one assumption let it be that no one has reached their pinnacle, everyone must continue to learn, and strive to reach their ultimate goals despite the fact that by that assumption those goals are always just out of reach.

  • The horrors of female circumcision are well-known. Why it is performed is usually due to cultural and religious reasons:
    • Hygienic and aesthetic. The external female genitalia are considered dirty and “unsightly” and should be flat, rigid and dry;
    • Sociological. Identification with the cultural traditions, as a rite of passage of girls into womanhood, and for the maintenance of social cohesion;
    • Psychological. Reduction of sensitive tissue and thus to curb sexual pleasure in order to maintain chastity and virginity, to guarantee women’s fidelity, and even to increase male sexual pleasure;
    • Myths and false beliefs. To enhance fertility and promote child survival; and
    • Religious. FGM/C has been practiced in a range of communities with different religions: Christian, Muslim and animist. Muslim communities often have the false belief that FGM/C is related to teachings of the Islamic law

    The article first referenced above(The horrors of) estimates that about four girls a minute are mutilated worldwide. One reason for it is to reduce or eliminate the feelings of sexual arousal so as to avoid the possibility of premarital sexual activity. In this way the girl is kept “pure” until after marriage. Other reasons given for this practice can be found here.

    Male genital mutilation has been a common practice even among the nonreligious growing to around ninety percent in the United States by the 1970s. (For the history of this practice go here) Since it is thought by many that the removal of the foreskin does little to lessen the sensitivity and arousal capability of the male it has been labeled exclusively as circumcision rather than the genital mutilation that it is.

    Many reasons are given in support of circumcision. It is, however, medically, a totally unnecessary procedure. There are many risks involved in having the procedure done as well.

    circumcision botchedPrompting this post is a story from the New York Times: “City Questions Circumcision Ritual After Baby Dies”. The Mohel, a circumciser utilized by some Jewish Orthodox groups, performs the delicate and dangerous procedure. As reported in the 2005 article out of the three cases seen, one infant died. Yet, even so, the practice continued and in 2012 we have a report of 11  herpes infected infants reported between 2000 and 2011.  This includes the one fatality. There have also been cases where a Mohel practitioner has caused in serious damage.   The possibility of serious injury can also occur in hospitals.

    Do the benefits outweigh the risks? Most doctors say yes. Some doctors say the foreskin is a necessary organ. It developed as a result of the natural course of evolution. It performs necessary functions. Circumcision began as a religious practice and has been adopted as a matter of course by the general public. It’s time people realized that the foreskin developed as a natural part of evolution and that circumcision is an unnecessary practice that in fact carries risks. In any case the procedure should be carried out by a surgeon, not by religious sects, or Mohels, in barbaric ceremonies. Would you want Uncle Joe to remove your appendix, or a surgeon?

  • People say things and do things that hurt worse than any knife. Incidents happen that embarrass to such a degree that you wish you could crawl away and hide. Small things occur in life that are magnified by careless words, sharp criticism, from blunt unthinking people.

    Then there are people, people like me, perhaps like you, who never forget. Each insult, each thoughtless act of which you are the target, accumulates over time. With this passage of time the memory of these things becomes clearer instead of fading as most memories do. They play themselves again and again, over and over, if not in conscious memory, then in nightmares. The anguish each time is nearly duplicate, if not greater, than when the offense was received. The embarrassments express themselves too, repetitively.

    Sometimes I wonder if these miscreants that commit such social blunders, insults, barbaric actions, suffer from some genetic malady. It has been revealed by science that some people lack or have diminished numbers of what are called mirror neurons in their brains. They are incapable of putting themselves in the shoes of others. They can not seem to be able to feel what it is like to be in the other man’s shoes. They seem to lack the capacity for empathy. Many these days are diagnosed with autism to one degree or another. Perhaps autism has always been with us but identifying it has been the problem. It just could be that almost everyone suffers from it to some degree, perhaps depending on the development of these ‘mirror’ neurons in their brain. In any case, empathy seems something in short supply within the human race.

    Maybe feelings are the problem. Maybe some are born who have too sensitive a setting and take offense too easily. Perhaps this is what is meant when someone says you are too highly strung, or tightly wound. Should instead people be capable of withstanding the barrage of barbs coming their way daily, impervious to the sting? Should they laugh off the actions of those they find contemptible? Would it be better to be done with emotions? Is there a way to desensitize the overly sensitive?

    When your brother tells you that they wish you had been born ten years earlier so that you would have turned out differently and therefore would have been closer, should you take offense? Should you take offense if he insults your wife, telling her she’s fat, to her face, in front of everyone,  and that she should lose weight to please her hubby? Is it too sensitive, for this, to take offense?

    What if your mother told you that you were a failure and that you would fail at the new endeavor you just told her about? Could your ego withstand such lack of confidence so expressed?

    There are those people in this world who simply are not human. They look human in the physical, they have human needs, they may even act human. Yet, when you explore them even in a shallow way you find they lack some of the things that, at least I think, make them human. Empathy is an important quality. In my opinion it is the quality that allowed us to consider the needs of others as humanity emerged. It is what holds society together, makes us human. Without it, it is everyone for themselves.

    As the numbers of humanity increase I note a decrease in empathy. People care less and less for their fellow human and more for what they can amass themselves. As the population increases more and more wars are fought over the dwindling land and resources. Somehow it has become okay for Tom and Jerry to be potential sacrifices as long as Larry remains behind to carry on the line. Are not Tom and Jerry of equal value? I suppose Tom could remain behind, but that lessens Larry’s worth and he must go if called. Suzy, Mary, and Joyce, though three, are considered equal value and are protected from harm even though humanity is so large that their absence from its genetic pool would not be missed. As humanity grows, even this is changing. Lives male and female are diminished in value. But I digress…

    The main point is that it seems empathy is in short supply. Social taboos are emerging and becoming common behavior. ‘Who cares if some are living in poverty as long as my wealth increases’ is becoming accepted thought.  ‘If you suffer offense, it’s because you’re too sensitive, not because I’m insensitive’ is the rule.

    • Hold your finger up to the wind and find which way it is blowing. Then, with a mighty heave, throw yourself in the same direction and drift with the current.
    • Find a group of people and over time observe and find out what they like and dislike. Determine their opinions on topics then write nice posts agreeing with them. One way to develop a following.
    • Listen to what the crowd says then stand up and shout the same things loudly as if you were the first. Suddenly they will start following you thinking, eventually, that you were the first.
    • Once you have them by the nose make small changes in the course, leading them any way you want.

    Those  that say and write the truth, meanwhile, find few followers. The truth must not be in vogue.

  • Do this or I keel you. Do this or you will suffer an ever-lastingDeath death. Obey or burn in hell. Believe this or die Peaceful religioninfidel, non-believer, heathen.

    I have heard it said that Christianity invented a disease, sin, in order to offer the cure, salvation. Put another way, God created humans that he knew would fail so that he could then offer to protect them from himself  by becoming his own son, suffering death, and then resurrecting himself (or variations thereof).

    Over time the cult of Christianity has morphed into many separate heads of the same beast. In all this time it has retained one concept: Believe or die.

    Morality has changed over the centuries becoming less and less barbaric. Even so, on occasion the barbarism that is religion raises its ugly head.

    Any religion…

    • … that teaches its followers to shoot, stab, bomb, decapitate or otherwise end the earthly lives of non-believers should notjihad be tolerated.
    • … that teaches that belief is required or you will end up in hell should not be tolerated.
    • … that tries to force respect and obedience of its edicts upon all others should not be tolerated.
    • … that offers the impossible or improvable as a reward should not be tolerated.

    Our Constitution in the United States guarantees that the government will not interfere with the myriad faiths that reside here.

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    If you examine the above statement you are forced to wonder if it is not contradictory in some fashion. -“or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”– Does this mean that the government should stand by while a religion that believes it should prevail everywhere proliferates to such a degree that even the Constitution itself is in danger? This particular phrase contained within the first amendment can be used to abridge the freedom of speech as well as freedom of the press.

    Many claim that only Islam threatens the world. The key word here is power. Whenever Islam has gained a numerous following it has threatened to impose its will upon the masses. Wherever Islam is in power, it oppresses everyone. At one time in history this described Christianity as well. As the number of Christians in government increase here in the United States we see them present oppressive bills. They mean to force their faith’s will upon all of the citizenry. “Biblical Law” would be no better than “Islamic Law”, and no one except the sheeple would want to live under them (or so the sheeple think).

    “I do not respect your religion, and I

    don’t have too!”

    Education is the answer 2