Tuesday, December 28, 2010

America Isn't A Secular Nation, Unless You Believe In Facts

I wish this article were true. I think the country would be better off if the president was actively pushing for a secular nation. However, anything posted on NewsMax should be treated as if it were a truck load of bullshit, even if it were true. I am, of course, talking about the article titled “Historian Kidd: Obama Pushes US to Secularism.” If only I could dream of such a president.

The article is a stream of consciousness from Thomas Kidd, who is a crazy Christian historian at Baylor University. I am just surprised this guy isn’t at Bob Jones University, as if Baylor is any better. (Note: a quote from Thomas Kidd from the Baylor University website - "I came to Baylor because of the balance the university offered me between teaching and research, and because of the appeal of working at a university with a Christian commitment.") The article amounts to a lot of half-truths or outright falsehoods. What I was most interested in was this niblet:
“This has fueled a concern that many people have that President Obama is at least quietly trying to construe America as a secular nation instead of a nation based on important religious principles like the idea that all men are created equal,” Kidd said. “That principle is, I think, the most important idea that comes out of the American Revolution, and it is an explicitly religious principle, even though it’s a very general religious principle, and I don’t think it’s something that we should give up intentionally or unintentionally.”
Trying to construe America as a secular nation? Oh, the horror! I fail to see how any principle from this guys beloved Christianity, or any religion for that matter, puts forth the idea that all men are created equally. As I recall, in the Bible all men were created equally, unless they weren’t Jews. Women and non-Jews need not apply. What about the explicit endorsement of slavery? It should also be added that this nation was founded on the institution of slavery and was endorsed for a very long time. Women and non-whites need not apply.

This article is also a little confusing. I thought Obama was a secret Muslim. I guess this proves that anyone can be a historian.

Richard Dawkins Has A Holiday Message For The Pope

I don't like to repost entire articles with no commentary, but when you come across something this good... well, see for yourself.
Was it for this that I broke the habit of years and accepted the Guardian's invitation to listen to Thought for the Day? Was it for this that the BBC, including the director general himself, no less, spent months negotiating with the Vatican? What on earth were they negotiating about, if all that emerged was the damp, faltering squib we have just strained our ears to hear?
'A giant of the mind and model of courage'

We've already had what little apology we are going to get (none in most cases) for the raped children, the Aids-sufferers in Africa, the centuries spent attacking Jews, science, women and "heretics", the indulgences and more modern (and tax-deductible) methods of fleecing the gullible to build the Vatican's vast fortune. So, no surprise that these weren't mentioned. But there's something else for which the pope should go to confession, and it's arguably the nastiest of all. I refer to the main doctrine of Christian theology itself, which was the centrepiece of what Ratzinger actually did say in his Thought for the Day.

"Christ destroyed death forever and restored life by means of his shameful death on the Cross."

More shameful than the death itself is the Christian theory that it was necessary. It was necessary because all humans are born in sin. Every tiny baby, too young to have a deed or a thought, is riddled with sin: original sin. Here's Thomas Aquinas:

". . . the original sin of all men was in Adam indeed, as in its principal cause, according to the words of the Apostle (Romans 5:12): "In whom all have sinned": whereas it is in the bodily semen, as in its instrumental cause, since it is by the active power of the semen that original sin together with human nature is transmitted to the child."

Adam (who never existed) bequeathed his "sin" in his bodily semen (charming notion) to all of humanity. That sin, with which every newborn baby is hideously stained (another charming notion), was so terrible that it could be forgiven only through the blood sacrifice of a scapegoat. But no ordinary scapegoat would do. The sin of humanity was so great that the only adequate sacrificial victim was God himself.

That's right. The creator of the universe, sublime inventor of mathematics, of relativistic space-time, of quarks and quanta, of life itself, Almighty God, who reads our every thought and hears our every prayer, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent God couldn't think of a better way to forgive us than to have himself tortured and executed. For heaven's sake, if he wanted to forgive us, why didn't he just forgive us? Who, after all, needed to be impressed by the blood and the agony? Nobody but himself.

Ratzinger has much to confess in his own conduct, as cardinal and pope. But he is also guilty of promoting one of the most repugnant ideas ever to occur to a human mind: "Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Hebrews 9:22)
Thank you, Dr. Dawkins.

From: The Guardian

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Criticize Israel? Jew Hater!

Since when is criticizing the policies of a nation tantamount to antisemitism? When you criticize anything Israel does, of course. A recent bus ad campaign in Seattle has drawn the attention of people from as far away as, you guessed it, Israel.

This past week, a group called the Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign was moving forward with plans to put up ads on area buses that said "Israeli war crimes: Your tax dollars at work" and showed a picture of some Palestinian kids standing next to a pile of rubble. Sounds reasonable to me, especially when you look at the fact that the United States has given Israel over $107 billion since the 1940's and signed a deal to give Israel $30 billion over the next 10 years. I hope no one is deluded enough to think that none of that money is being used to push the Palestinians out of their homes and squeeze the Gaza Strip until the people have no other recourse but to turn to violence.

I guess pointing out that fact makes me a Jew hater, though. Pointing out the fact that the state of Israel is currently stealing property from Palestinians by going in and putting up new settlements makes me as antisemitic as Hitler. But I digress.

The group in Seattle was previously given permission to put up then bus ads, then permission was rescinded when a couple of war-crimes apologist groups like "Stop Islamization of America" and the disgustingly-named "David Horowitz Freedom Center" sent in letters of protest to King County officials. Both groups have since attempted (but were turned down) to buy ad space on the buses to put up parody ads; you know, because nothing says "we are a legitimate group" like satirizing the suffering of an entire group of people. I could only imagine the fallout from a campaign that poked fun of the people that died during the holocaust.

So there it is, people. You have a group that is trying to bring to light the amount of money that the US gives to Israel and what Israel does with that money. Then you have other groups shut down any conversation by calling them "Jew-haters." Forget the facts, forget the news, just follow Israel blindly and allow them to continue displacing and murdering thousands of Palestinians.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

BoA Stops Payments To Wikileaks. So?

Bank of America decided to take action against Wikileaks this week allowing them join the ranks of such moral internal policy upholding companies such as Mastercard and Paypal.
In a statement, the North Carolina-based Bank of America said it would "not process transactions of any type that we have reason to believe are intended for Wikileaks"
 What are they going to do add a check box to withdrawal slips “Will you be using your funds to support Wikileaks?”

Well I must say I’m impressed. Now people will have to go buy a money order, iTunes gift card, or worse yet use actual cash (how out dated) in order to help support their beloved leak source. Seriously what is it these companies feel they have accomplished? They may have been able to slow down the support process, but they are far from stopping it, and why are they hiding behind ethical policy upholding? Just admit you're mad you may fall victim to bad publicity. A little honesty would be appreciated. If people want to donate money you won’t be able to stop them.

The way I see it if you don’t want your dirty laundry hung out for all to see, find a better hiding place. Even the US government, the most powerful force in the modern world with every resource at it’s helm, can’t fend off a guy with Ass in his last name, Really?

"We ask that all people who love freedom close out their accounts at Bank of America," WikiLeaks said on its Twitter page. "Does your business do business with Bank of America? Our advice is to place your funds somewhere safer."
This is a piece of advice I personally agree with. If everyone their money in local banks or credit unions there would be a lot more money pumped into their communities in the form of small business loans for local business and patrons. That's only one of the benefits of moving your money local. Big banks use risky finical practices and that alone should be enough. This does bring up another interesting point. 

Who cares if wikileaks is shut down? I just demonstrated a much more effective way to stick a thorn in big business than reading. The problem is most of you would rather read about it in your version of a tabloid than sacrifice a lunch hour to actually do something that has an effect. Because that’s hard and it would take time and effort. You’re just a voyeur. Watching from the shadows doing nothing to actually help. Now to be clear I’m no freedom fighter, I’m not starting any revolutions myself. But at least I can admit it, I don’t consider myself noble or well informed because I read about something. Why I don’t care? Simple, I won’t be around to watch the bottom drop. So why worry about it.
"The revolution is just a marketing tool" - Gabriel Saporta
 I don’t think Assange deserves to face an legal action for his role with Wikileaks. I wont say what he has done is profound or a necessity but its certainly not illegal to expose people, companies, or a large organizations for what they are. So what do you think, Wikileaks hero or flavor of the week? Well I certainly hope I've got you thinking about small changes you can make to really have an effect rather that sit around and bitching about it.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Happy Holidays?

It's that time of year again. Christmas, Hannukah, Kwaanza and the New Year all come between the first of December and January. And sooner or later, you're going to face the decision as what to say when giving some kind of greeting that's seasonal. Many people are inclusive by saying "Happy Holidays." It seems harmless and about as innocuous as any greeting you can give. Yet there are some who will sneer and get upset because you didn't say the exclusive "Merry Christmas." A local car dealership will give you a plastic sign for your lawn that has that greeting on it, explaining that it's the "reason for the season."

To those holiday snobs, I say that you need to get over yourselves. Guess what? As much as you'd like it to be so, you're not the only people out there and you aren't alone in your celebrations. By insisting that everyone bow to your whims, you tell the world that nobody's feelings are as important as yours. You are showing an arrogance and pride that seem to run counter to the teachings of Christ.

There is also the problem of whether or not Christmas should be celebrated in December. All indications are that if Jesus existed at all, he wasn't born in December but more likely in the spring or early summer. The date of December 25 was chosen in the 5th century AD as a means of co-opting the Roman holiday Saturnalia, the celebration of the unconquered sun. It was a common practice in the early church to take the pagan holidays and make them their own.

Almost every society throughout history has had some kind of solstice celebration, generally related to making sure the sun started turning back north after descending to its lowest point in the sky. This time of year is all about celebration.

So don't be a holiday snob. When someone tells you "Happy Holidays," be gracious and greet the other person in kind.

Happy holidays.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

A Deceitful Preacher? Surely Not!

I find small stories to be the most hilarious sometimes, like this story in which a 'reverend' in Watertown, PA plead guilty to stealing from his church and tricking the congregation.
Court documents in Jefferson County accused Marr of soliciting money from dozens of parishioners and friends and turning it over — perhaps as much as $613,000 — to another parishioner, Arthur Eith, who claimed to be investing the money in Nigeria. Sometimes Marr told people he needed the money to help people down on their luck. Other times he said it was for a down payment on a house for himself and another priest.
$613,000?! That is amazing. What I found funny about this is that the aforementioned “tricking” was the lies that he told about where the money was going, not about him standing in the pulpit every Sunday and telling the greatest lie in history. You know, the one about there being a god.

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Atheist Don't Understand Religion?

What a boring piece of tripe I found on the National Post. Charles Lewis wrote a 'scathing' article against atheists, telling us the he doesn't care what we think. Then he goes on a bitching binge for a few paragraphs about how he is all mad and bothered that atheists criticize religion.
But the debate is useless for one simple reason: most atheists do not have a clue what religion is about. They see religious people as blind sheep following a series of incomprehensible rules and dogmas and then scoff at their lack of enlightenment. They find the flaw in the painting and say it is all now ruined. Atheists are utopians who believe a perfect society can be built if only religion was not in the way.
I skipped over quoting this highly quotable square of toilet paper to make one thing clear: most atheists have been religious and know exactly what it's all about. I am never left without wonder when I here the religious idiots say that 'atheists just don't understand because they don't believe in god.' Well, I don't believe in the tooth fairy or the easter bunny but I can come up with a list of logical reasons why they don't exist without still believing in them. I'm not even sure his statement makes any sense.

Are the religious 'blind sheep following a series of incomprehensible rules and dogmas'? They have had thousands of years to prove they are not and a mountain of evidence that says they are. I will stick with the evidence on this one.

By the way, the way to show that you don't care what someone thinks is not to write an article in the National Post.