A while back the T.E.A. party started, and the rank and file were an amazingly representative slice of the US. Many of the members of that party even proudly proclaimed that they did indeed represent Americans. And perhaps they did. However, it is now another election season, and let's look at the teabaggers now? In 2008 there started to be some ugly groundswells in that movement that were basically ignored. Now, I don't think you can ignore it. Instead of being representative, they have turned into the actual caricature that some started to make of them. Now they really are a bunch of redneck, theitard, racist, wackjobs... (and yes, I realize theitard and wackjob is redundant!) Not that this hasn't been mentioned before.
For a short but accurate take on “tea party” and religion, just see:
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/08/the-tea-party-as-a-christianist-force.html
And for both the far-right and religious aspects, just see:
http://digitaljournal.com/article/289821
Sullivan quoting the NYT:
“Next to being a Republican, the strongest predictor of being a Tea Party supporter today was a desire, back in 2006, to see religion play a prominent role in politics. And Tea Partiers continue to hold these views: they seek “deeply religious” elected officials, approve of religious leaders’ engaging in politics and want religion brought into political debates. The Tea Party’s generals may say their overriding concern is a smaller government, but not their rank and file, who are more concerned about putting God in government.”
But there’s no lack of details – data, facts, in fact, but also explanations, even hypotheses – that further support the characterization as both “far right” and “mired in a radical religious agenda”, of which these links are just smatterings:
http://www.npr.org/2010/11/22/131512631/culture-war-brewing-within-tea-party
http://colorado.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/12/the-fourth-tea-party/
http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/149572/new_study:_tea_partiers_three_times_more_likely_to_say_violence_is_warranted._exhibit_a:_glenn_beck
http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2011/01/the-tea-party-more-anti-gay-than-all-seniors/177062/
http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2011/01/the-tea-party-on-prohibition-lovin-it/177056/
http://www.alternet.org/economy/150097/tea_partiers_have_a_very_mixed-up_notion_of_what_the_american_revolution_was_about
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0324/Planned-Parenthood-showdown-could-reveal-true-nature-of-tea-party
http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2011/03/race-the-tea-party-and-conservatism/173650/
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/04/ygl.html
Showing posts with label theitards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label theitards. Show all posts
16 November 2011
18 August 2011
Can we laugh at the Theitards again?
So back in April, the loony that runs Texas this time had a 3 day prayer vigil for rain in Texas. Seriously!
And worst of all, Parry and his ilk are ignoring their very own teachings. I just wish they would shut up, but then, seeing how loony they are is probably a great weapon against them; if it wasn't for all the other stark raving mad loonies that are here in the US...
With Texas in the midst of an historic drought and battling thousands of wildfires, Gov. Rick Perry has decided to ask for some divine intervention. The governor issued a proclamation yesterday officially declaring April 22-24 “Days of Prayer for Rain in the State of Texas.” (You can see the proclamation here.) “I urge Texans of all faiths and traditions to offer prayers on that day for the healing of our land,” Perry wrote.Well, it is now August, and loony Parry (I mean Perry, damn that Colbert) has precious little to show for it. It seems it only gets drier and hotter. And this guy thinks that he's somehow a viable candidate for President? Even if we ignore the fact that his beliefs are barely past the stage of Bronze Age myths, how about the state of Texas in things that would indicate how he runs things? Just check out their record on deficits, education, employment (especially under-employment), and the list goes on. This guy is dumb as a box of rocks, and that's probably insulting to rocks.
And worst of all, Parry and his ilk are ignoring their very own teachings. I just wish they would shut up, but then, seeing how loony they are is probably a great weapon against them; if it wasn't for all the other stark raving mad loonies that are here in the US...
25 January 2011
More Catholic Protection of Pedophiles (No Surprise)
Well, who would have thunk that the catholic church went out of their way to hide pedophile priests? Colour me (NOT AT ALL) shocked... I have never made any beefs about my dislike for the catholic church, but this is just totally despicable. Of course, apologists and deluded sycophants will defend this despicable institution that would rather have people die from AIDS, or live in abject poverty and ignorance, or basically make them the subjects of a dictatorship run by a douchebag in a funny hat... What the fuck does it take for people to see this so called religion for the total sham that it is? Or as George Carlin said, BULLSHIT.
Anyway, on to the story that got me totally pissed off. And if you aren't pissed off by this sort of blatant violation of humanity (let alone the so called moral authority of the church), I think it's only right to dismiss you from humanity and catalog you as a sociopath and possibly an unintelligent drone...
AP – This image shows a copy of a newly revealed 1997 letter from the Vatican, obtained by Irish broadcasters …
When it comes to bullshit, big-time, major league bullshit, you have to stand in awe of the all-time champion of false promises and exaggerated claims, religion. No contest. No contest. Religion. Religion easily has the greatest bullshit story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!
But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He's all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can't handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!
[snip]
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed. Results like these do not belong on the résumé of a Supreme Being. This is the kind of shit you'd expect from an office temp with a bad attitude. And just between you and me, in any decently-run universe, this guy would've been out on his all-powerful ass a long time ago.
Anyway, on to the story that got me totally pissed off. And if you aren't pissed off by this sort of blatant violation of humanity (let alone the so called moral authority of the church), I think it's only right to dismiss you from humanity and catalog you as a sociopath and possibly an unintelligent drone...
Vatican warned Irish bishops not to report abuse
AP – This image shows a copy of a newly revealed 1997 letter from the Vatican, obtained by Irish broadcasters …DUBLIN – A 1997 letter from the Vatican warned Ireland's Catholic bishops not to report all suspected child-abuse cases to police — a disclosure that victims' groups described as "the smoking gun" needed to show that the church enforced a worldwide culture of covering up crimes by pedophile priests.
The newly revealed letter, obtained by Irish broadcasters RTE and provided to The Associated Press, documents the Vatican's rejection of a 1996 Irish church initiative to begin helping police identify pedophile priests following Ireland's first wave of publicly disclosed lawsuits.
The letter undermines persistent Vatican claims, particularly when seeking to defend itself in U.S. lawsuits, that Rome never instructed local bishops to withhold evidence or suspicion of crimes from police. It instead emphasizes the church's right to handle all child-abuse allegations and determine punishments in house rather than give that power to civil authorities.
Signed by the late Archbishop Luciano Storero, Pope John Paul II's diplomat to Ireland, the letter instructs Irish bishops that their new policy of making the reporting of suspected crimes mandatory "gives rise to serious reservations of both a moral and canonical nature."
Storero wrote that canon law, which required abuse allegations and punishments to be handled within the church, "must be meticulously followed." Any bishops who tried to impose punishments outside the confines of canon law would face the "highly embarrassing" position of having their actions overturned on appeal in Rome, he wrote.
Catholic officials in Ireland and the Vatican declined AP requests to comment on the letter, which RTE said it received from an Irish bishop.
Child-abuse activists in Ireland said the 1997 letter demonstrates that the protection of pedophile priests from criminal investigation was not only sanctioned by Vatican leaders but ordered by them.
"The letter is of huge international significance, because it shows that the Vatican's intention is to prevent reporting of abuse to criminal authorities. And if that instruction applied here, it applied everywhere," said Colm O'Gorman, director of the Irish chapter of human rights watchdog Amnesty International.
Joelle Casteix, a director of U.S. advocacy group Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, described the letter as "the smoking gun we've been looking for."
Casteix said it was certain to be cited by victims' lawyers seeking to pin responsibility directly on the Vatican rather than local dioceses. She said investigators long have sought such a document showing Vatican pressure on a group of bishops "thwarting any kind of justice for victims."
"We now have evidence that the Vatican deliberately intervened to order bishops not to turn pedophile priests over to law enforcement," she said. "And for civil lawsuits, this letter shows what victims have been saying for dozens and dozens of years: What happened to them involved a concerted cover-up that went all the way to the top."
To this day, the Vatican has not endorsed any of the Irish church's three major policy documents since 1996 on safeguarding children from clerical abuse. Irish taxpayers, rather than the church, have paid most of the euro1.5 billion ($2 billion) to more than 14,000 abuse claimants dating back to the 1940s.
In his 2010 pastoral letter to Ireland's Catholics condemning pedophiles in the ranks, Pope Benedict XVI faulted bishops for failing to follow canon law and offered no explicit endorsement of Irish child-protection efforts by the Irish church or state. Benedict was widely criticized in Ireland for failing to admit any Vatican role in covering up the truth.
O'Gorman — who was raped repeatedly by an Irish priest in the 1980s when he was an altar boy and was among the first victims to speak out in the mid-1990s — said evidence is growing that some Irish bishops continued to follow the 1997 Vatican instructions and withheld reports of crimes against children as recently as 2008.
Two state-commissioned reports published in 2009 — into the Dublin Archdiocese and workhouse-style Catholic institutions for children — unveiled decades of cover-ups of abuse involving tens of thousands of Irish children since the 1930s.
A third major state-ordered investigation into Catholic abuse cover-ups, concerning the southwest Irish Diocese of Cloyne, is expected to be published in the next few months documenting the concealment of crimes as recently as 2008.
Irish church leaders didn't begin telling police about suspected pedophile priests until the mid-1990s after the first major scandal — involving the Rev. Brendan Smyth, who had raped dozens of children while the church transferred him to parishes in Dublin, Belfast, Rhode Island and North Dakota — triggered the collapse of the Irish government. That national shock, in turn, inspired the first victims to begin suing the church publicly.
In January 1996, Irish bishops published a groundbreaking policy document spelling out their newfound determination to report all suspected abuse cases to police.
But in his January 1997 letter seen Tuesday by the AP, Storero told the bishops that a senior church panel in Rome, the Congregation for the Clergy, had decided that the Irish church's policy of "mandatory" reporting of abuse claims conflicted with canon law.
Storero emphasized in the letter that the Irish church's policy was not recognized by the Vatican and was "merely a study document."
Storero warned that bishops who followed the Irish child-protection policy and reported a priest's suspected crimes to police risked having their in-house punishments of the priest overturned by the Congregation for the Clergy.
The 2009 Dublin Archdiocese report found that this actually happened in the case of Tony Walsh, one of Dublin's most notorious pedophiles, who used his role as an Elvis impersonator in a popular "All Priests Show" to get closer to kids.
Walsh was kicked out of the priesthood by a secret Dublin church court in 1993 but successfully appealed the punishment to a Vatican court, which reinstated him to the priesthood in 1994. He raped a boy in a pub restroom at his grandfather's wake that year. Walsh since has received a series of prison sentences, most recently a 12-year term imposed last month. Investigators estimate he raped or molested more than 100 children.
Storero's 1997 letter — originally obtained by the RTE religious affairs program "Would You Believe?" — said the Congregation for the Clergy was pursuing "a global study" of sexual-abuse policies and would establish worldwide child-protection policies "at the appropriate time."
Today, the Vatican's child-protection policies remain in legal limbo.
The Vatican does advise bishops worldwide to report crimes to police — in a legally nonbinding guide on its website. This recourse is omitted from the official legal advice provided by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and updated last summer. That powerful policymaking body continues to stress the secrecy of canon law.
The central message of Storero's letter was reported secondhand in the 2009 Dublin Archdiocese report. The letter itself, marked "strictly confidential," has never been published before.
The newly revealed letter, obtained by Irish broadcasters RTE and provided to The Associated Press, documents the Vatican's rejection of a 1996 Irish church initiative to begin helping police identify pedophile priests following Ireland's first wave of publicly disclosed lawsuits.
The letter undermines persistent Vatican claims, particularly when seeking to defend itself in U.S. lawsuits, that Rome never instructed local bishops to withhold evidence or suspicion of crimes from police. It instead emphasizes the church's right to handle all child-abuse allegations and determine punishments in house rather than give that power to civil authorities.
Signed by the late Archbishop Luciano Storero, Pope John Paul II's diplomat to Ireland, the letter instructs Irish bishops that their new policy of making the reporting of suspected crimes mandatory "gives rise to serious reservations of both a moral and canonical nature."
Storero wrote that canon law, which required abuse allegations and punishments to be handled within the church, "must be meticulously followed." Any bishops who tried to impose punishments outside the confines of canon law would face the "highly embarrassing" position of having their actions overturned on appeal in Rome, he wrote.
Catholic officials in Ireland and the Vatican declined AP requests to comment on the letter, which RTE said it received from an Irish bishop.
Child-abuse activists in Ireland said the 1997 letter demonstrates that the protection of pedophile priests from criminal investigation was not only sanctioned by Vatican leaders but ordered by them.
"The letter is of huge international significance, because it shows that the Vatican's intention is to prevent reporting of abuse to criminal authorities. And if that instruction applied here, it applied everywhere," said Colm O'Gorman, director of the Irish chapter of human rights watchdog Amnesty International.
Joelle Casteix, a director of U.S. advocacy group Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, described the letter as "the smoking gun we've been looking for."
Casteix said it was certain to be cited by victims' lawyers seeking to pin responsibility directly on the Vatican rather than local dioceses. She said investigators long have sought such a document showing Vatican pressure on a group of bishops "thwarting any kind of justice for victims."
"We now have evidence that the Vatican deliberately intervened to order bishops not to turn pedophile priests over to law enforcement," she said. "And for civil lawsuits, this letter shows what victims have been saying for dozens and dozens of years: What happened to them involved a concerted cover-up that went all the way to the top."
To this day, the Vatican has not endorsed any of the Irish church's three major policy documents since 1996 on safeguarding children from clerical abuse. Irish taxpayers, rather than the church, have paid most of the euro1.5 billion ($2 billion) to more than 14,000 abuse claimants dating back to the 1940s.
In his 2010 pastoral letter to Ireland's Catholics condemning pedophiles in the ranks, Pope Benedict XVI faulted bishops for failing to follow canon law and offered no explicit endorsement of Irish child-protection efforts by the Irish church or state. Benedict was widely criticized in Ireland for failing to admit any Vatican role in covering up the truth.
O'Gorman — who was raped repeatedly by an Irish priest in the 1980s when he was an altar boy and was among the first victims to speak out in the mid-1990s — said evidence is growing that some Irish bishops continued to follow the 1997 Vatican instructions and withheld reports of crimes against children as recently as 2008.
Two state-commissioned reports published in 2009 — into the Dublin Archdiocese and workhouse-style Catholic institutions for children — unveiled decades of cover-ups of abuse involving tens of thousands of Irish children since the 1930s.
A third major state-ordered investigation into Catholic abuse cover-ups, concerning the southwest Irish Diocese of Cloyne, is expected to be published in the next few months documenting the concealment of crimes as recently as 2008.
Irish church leaders didn't begin telling police about suspected pedophile priests until the mid-1990s after the first major scandal — involving the Rev. Brendan Smyth, who had raped dozens of children while the church transferred him to parishes in Dublin, Belfast, Rhode Island and North Dakota — triggered the collapse of the Irish government. That national shock, in turn, inspired the first victims to begin suing the church publicly.
In January 1996, Irish bishops published a groundbreaking policy document spelling out their newfound determination to report all suspected abuse cases to police.
But in his January 1997 letter seen Tuesday by the AP, Storero told the bishops that a senior church panel in Rome, the Congregation for the Clergy, had decided that the Irish church's policy of "mandatory" reporting of abuse claims conflicted with canon law.
Storero emphasized in the letter that the Irish church's policy was not recognized by the Vatican and was "merely a study document."
Storero warned that bishops who followed the Irish child-protection policy and reported a priest's suspected crimes to police risked having their in-house punishments of the priest overturned by the Congregation for the Clergy.
The 2009 Dublin Archdiocese report found that this actually happened in the case of Tony Walsh, one of Dublin's most notorious pedophiles, who used his role as an Elvis impersonator in a popular "All Priests Show" to get closer to kids.
Walsh was kicked out of the priesthood by a secret Dublin church court in 1993 but successfully appealed the punishment to a Vatican court, which reinstated him to the priesthood in 1994. He raped a boy in a pub restroom at his grandfather's wake that year. Walsh since has received a series of prison sentences, most recently a 12-year term imposed last month. Investigators estimate he raped or molested more than 100 children.
Storero's 1997 letter — originally obtained by the RTE religious affairs program "Would You Believe?" — said the Congregation for the Clergy was pursuing "a global study" of sexual-abuse policies and would establish worldwide child-protection policies "at the appropriate time."
Today, the Vatican's child-protection policies remain in legal limbo.
The Vatican does advise bishops worldwide to report crimes to police — in a legally nonbinding guide on its website. This recourse is omitted from the official legal advice provided by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and updated last summer. That powerful policymaking body continues to stress the secrecy of canon law.
The central message of Storero's letter was reported secondhand in the 2009 Dublin Archdiocese report. The letter itself, marked "strictly confidential," has never been published before.
16 January 2011
Theitards that want the end times are bad guys!
So I keep seeing all these theitards out there proclaiming the end of the world is near. Birds falling out of the sky (or could that be because of the repeal of DADT?), floods in Australia, or even just disagreeing with anything Israel or other theitards do. Of course, that gets to the root of WHY a Christian has so much trouble with governments or individuals not providing enough support for Israel - they need Jews in Jerusalem to fulfill Biblical prophecy and bring about the end of the world. I've heard there are even some fundamentalists attempting to breed some magic red heifer. These people actually want the world to end. They think that's a good thing. And they're deluded enough not to realize that the end times prophesies have already failed, since it was all supposed to happen while some contemporaries of Jebus were still alive. But really, they're immanentizing the eschaton. According to many doctrines, that's how you could tell who the bad guy was. So Christians (and other religionists) of the world take note, if you're religion actually desires the end of the world, that makes them bad guys.
What do you think?
What do you think?
06 January 2011
Theitard Debate Flow Chart
Just a humerous little flow chart I found at a blog called a blog called Atheist Movies. Granted, they don't have only atheist movies there, but it's a fun collection site for a bunch of other stuff as well. I must say that if one were to strictly apply this to most theitards, you couldn't get past the first block on this flow chart... And the chances of them getting to blocks two and three are incredibly slim... I think that there are some things in the flowchart that the creator of it missed, but since they are further down on any list of actually having an intelligent discussion, I can see why he would leave them off. It's not like you would ever get there.
27 June 2010
Ironic Coincidence?
So, it's no surprise that the downright dumbest state in the nation would do the most useless and dumb thing in the world, and declare a day of prayer, because they think their imaginary friend can do something about the spill. Now I understand that they may be getting a sense of hopelessness about the situation because it's heartbreaking. But really... prayer? That's less than useful folks. Instead, declare a statewide day of service, where people can go to the shores and help in whatever manner with the cleanup.
So in a bit of cosmic irony, a strange coincidence happened. It seems one of the remote control robots they have down there bumped the cap, and it had to come off; THEREBY MAKING THE SPILL WORSE!!! Now if this wasn't such a giant clusterfuck, I would almost laugh at the Louisiana legislators. And this is just a coincidence, so it has no bearing on their prayer efforts, but apparently these mental midgets believe that by mumbling to yourself you can change reality... So how do they reconcile that the exact opposite of what they wanted basically ended up happening? Or is this the department of all bad stuff is the fault of the other imaginary guy, and all good stuff is of course the responsibility of the imaginary guy they like(fear?).
Really, can't people see how incredibly juvenile and downright silly it is turning to a supernatural solution when in all of (actual) history NOTHING supernatural has ever happened. Not even once!
So in a bit of cosmic irony, a strange coincidence happened. It seems one of the remote control robots they have down there bumped the cap, and it had to come off; THEREBY MAKING THE SPILL WORSE!!! Now if this wasn't such a giant clusterfuck, I would almost laugh at the Louisiana legislators. And this is just a coincidence, so it has no bearing on their prayer efforts, but apparently these mental midgets believe that by mumbling to yourself you can change reality... So how do they reconcile that the exact opposite of what they wanted basically ended up happening? Or is this the department of all bad stuff is the fault of the other imaginary guy, and all good stuff is of course the responsibility of the imaginary guy they like(fear?).
Really, can't people see how incredibly juvenile and downright silly it is turning to a supernatural solution when in all of (actual) history NOTHING supernatural has ever happened. Not even once!
04 June 2010
Zombie Apocalypse
Let's look at the dictionary defenition of a Zombie:
zombie, zombi [ˈzɒmbɪ]n pl -bies, -bis
Now let's think a little bit about devoutly religious folks. While I would argue that they aren't lifeless or apathetic, they sure as hell fit the "totally lacking in independent judgment; automaton" part of the definition. And of course, the "reanimated dead" popular definition applies to the christian sect of religious thought as well. The cosmic jewish zombie joke that people are on about.
I contend that the Zombie Apocalypse has already happened, and it came in carrying bibles! So while you all were looking for shambling corpses muttering "brains" you missed the brainless infestation that has taken over the US (and a good part of the world). You fail at surviving the zombie apocalypse!
DISCLAIMER: This does not mean that I condone shooting xtians and other theitards in the head. I mean, all it can really do is annoy them after all since you wouldn't hit any vital organs...
zombie, zombi [ˈzɒmbɪ]n pl -bies, -bis
1. a person who is or appears to be lifeless, apathetic, or totally lacking in independent judgment; automaton
Now let's think a little bit about devoutly religious folks. While I would argue that they aren't lifeless or apathetic, they sure as hell fit the "totally lacking in independent judgment; automaton" part of the definition. And of course, the "reanimated dead" popular definition applies to the christian sect of religious thought as well. The cosmic jewish zombie joke that people are on about.
I contend that the Zombie Apocalypse has already happened, and it came in carrying bibles! So while you all were looking for shambling corpses muttering "brains" you missed the brainless infestation that has taken over the US (and a good part of the world). You fail at surviving the zombie apocalypse!
DISCLAIMER: This does not mean that I condone shooting xtians and other theitards in the head. I mean, all it can really do is annoy them after all since you wouldn't hit any vital organs...
29 May 2010
Are you a Theitard?
I tend to use the term "theitard" quite a bit. It's a derisive term (and it's meant to be!), but how do you know if you are a theitard? Hopefully this entry will clear it up.
First to the easy ones. If you are a Young Earth Creationist, and accept every word of the bible as the literal truth, then you are a theitard. No bones about it. Your adherence to Bronze Age myths is so far removed form reality that I really can't say anything kind about your mental ability. You have compartmentalized reality so much that you are in strict denial of nearly every scientific advance since the Renaissance! You are mentally castrated, and for all intents a brainless zombie.
If you are a deist, that thinks that a "god" set the whole universe off 13.4 billion years ago, and has just let it go from that point, totally removed from our universe, then you are probably NOT a theitard. I really can't say much about that point of view aside from a critique that your first cause argument seems rather complex compared to what we know about physics, and surely a much simpler explanation exists.
It's all the stuff in between that is harder to label. I figured I'd go a little Jeff Foxworthy on you, and just list all the things that will make you a theitard (and add an accompanying list of things that pull you away from being a theitard).
You just might be a theitard if:
- You think the US is a christian nation (instead of a nation of christians, all despite Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797)
- You think the US is founded on christian principles (hint: It's not, and even violates biblical dictates)
- You think (or know) that the founding fathers were devout christians (you probably wouldn't be able to recognize their beliefs in today's context)
- You cannot understand why people would get upset at a prayer, but you become apoplectic should anyone suggest you adhere to a muslim tradition.
- You think that anyone who has the audacity to criticize your religion is hateful and intolerant, but your belief system condemns anyone who does not follow it to eternal torture.
- You strictly uphold one law in Leviticus, but ignore all the rest, just because gays are "icky" and you need someone to discriminate since the 13th Amendment.
- You go to Fundies Say The Darnedest Things, and can't understand the humour of the site.
- You actually think Conservipedia and Fox News are somehow mainstream and at all truthful.
- You think your opinion on something thereby makes it a fact.
- You think that belief in evolution led to the holocaust or that Hitler was an atheist.
- You think that religion is required for moral behaviour, despite the fact that more secular societies are better off overall.
Okay, my daughter wants to go out for some Ice Cream, so I will stop here for now. I will probably come back to this entry from time to time to add to it. And of course, I would love to hear your thoughts on it. I know I only spent a couple minutes on this, and it could go on forever.
- You think the US is a christian nation (instead of a nation of christians, all despite Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797)
- You think the US is founded on christian principles (hint: It's not, and even violates biblical dictates)
- You think (or know) that the founding fathers were devout christians (you probably wouldn't be able to recognize their beliefs in today's context)
- You cannot understand why people would get upset at a prayer, but you become apoplectic should anyone suggest you adhere to a muslim tradition.
- You think that anyone who has the audacity to criticize your religion is hateful and intolerant, but your belief system condemns anyone who does not follow it to eternal torture.
- You strictly uphold one law in Leviticus, but ignore all the rest, just because gays are "icky" and you need someone to discriminate since the 13th Amendment.
- You go to Fundies Say The Darnedest Things, and can't understand the humour of the site.
- You actually think Conservipedia and Fox News are somehow mainstream and at all truthful.
- You think your opinion on something thereby makes it a fact.
- You think that belief in evolution led to the holocaust or that Hitler was an atheist.
- You think that religion is required for moral behaviour, despite the fact that more secular societies are better off overall.
Okay, my daughter wants to go out for some Ice Cream, so I will stop here for now. I will probably come back to this entry from time to time to add to it. And of course, I would love to hear your thoughts on it. I know I only spent a couple minutes on this, and it could go on forever.
02 May 2010
Have you seen this man?
I recently became friends with an ape (or monkey, not really sure what he is). Anyway, he made a post about something that I have generally been ignoring because of its sheer stupidity. However, he did mention that there is a worldwide show of solidarity for this. And of course, as one of the more intelligent apes I know (and that counts the genus Homo in this case, because let's face it, what Charles writes is much more observant than what most H. Sapiens is aware of) I have to give him his due and post his whole thing. Eventually I may make my own stick figure, but this is just too brilliant not to share.
To make a long story short, the latest South Park episode featured Muhammed, the prophet of Islam. And some muslims aren't happy about this.
Islam forbids the representation of Muhammed, for some reason. That's fine, but the bit that isn't fine is that they expect and demand that everyone else also respect their religious commandments to not represent Muhammed. They go so far as to threaten those who don't obey this command with death. In this case, it's the creators of South Park.
A lot of people have rallied in support of South Park creators, Matt Stone and Trey Parker. I particularly liked the idea proposed by youtuber Gotthatfunk in his video, which I found through NonStampCollector.
The proposal was that everyone draw a stick figure and label it Muhammed. I can't get around to making a video, but I thought I'd offer my support.
Realising Muhammed might feel alone during his world media debut, I wondered, what would Jesus do? He would help Muhammed in his hour of need*. So here they are:Yours,
Charles
* The hippie, nice guy version of Jesus, anyway. The real Jesus might have had Muhammed killed, who knows.
01 November 2009
So fucking backwards (Insult post)
Okay, so there was a "big poll" on Facebook that asked if you trusted the bible or science more... I can't believe that the poll (last I checked) was at 50/50. Pathetic! And a common statement I saw: "Science is always changing, but the bible stays the same."
How can one short sentence actually contain that many mistakes and misconceptions in so few words? Wow, this is total and epic failure of synaptic activity! Where do I start?
First of all, the bible fables most of you mentally castrated simpletons are reading in no way resembles the bible of a thousand years ago. Heck, even in the past 500 years it has had quite a a few edits. The KJV is even under attack by the fucktards at Consevipedia, and they want to take out all the "liberal bias" in the bible. WTF?!
And complaining that science changes? I suppose you were fine with barbers being surgeons then? Or would you prefer to go back to a goat herding lifestyle in the edges of the Mediterranean Sea? If anything, the constant changes of science is its greatest STRENGTH. it actually has the ability to correct for mistakes and get rid of ideas that don't quite fit. The bible has no such mechanism, so instead you get apologists that have to rationalize slavery, genocide, sexism, etc...
Man, I am so fucking disgusted with people adhering to bronze age mythologies in this day and age. I don't care if you think you are smart (and well, you may be), but you are foolish beyond measure. So please, if you cling to these childish and frankly dumb beliefs, don't expect me to respect you. I will deal with you on a rational level, and will treat you as a human being, but just know that in reality I feel sorry for you. Living in such a small mind and world when the universe is so much more spectacular than your petty little god or bible could ever imagine.
Personally, I think all the theitards out there are just pissed off that they can't go out and conquer some slaves, and can't publicly admit to their desire to subjugate their women. Fucking bronze age barbarians.
How can one short sentence actually contain that many mistakes and misconceptions in so few words? Wow, this is total and epic failure of synaptic activity! Where do I start?
First of all, the bible fables most of you mentally castrated simpletons are reading in no way resembles the bible of a thousand years ago. Heck, even in the past 500 years it has had quite a a few edits. The KJV is even under attack by the fucktards at Consevipedia, and they want to take out all the "liberal bias" in the bible. WTF?!
And complaining that science changes? I suppose you were fine with barbers being surgeons then? Or would you prefer to go back to a goat herding lifestyle in the edges of the Mediterranean Sea? If anything, the constant changes of science is its greatest STRENGTH. it actually has the ability to correct for mistakes and get rid of ideas that don't quite fit. The bible has no such mechanism, so instead you get apologists that have to rationalize slavery, genocide, sexism, etc...
Man, I am so fucking disgusted with people adhering to bronze age mythologies in this day and age. I don't care if you think you are smart (and well, you may be), but you are foolish beyond measure. So please, if you cling to these childish and frankly dumb beliefs, don't expect me to respect you. I will deal with you on a rational level, and will treat you as a human being, but just know that in reality I feel sorry for you. Living in such a small mind and world when the universe is so much more spectacular than your petty little god or bible could ever imagine.
Personally, I think all the theitards out there are just pissed off that they can't go out and conquer some slaves, and can't publicly admit to their desire to subjugate their women. Fucking bronze age barbarians.
20 September 2008
Florida Fucktardery (Politics)
Yeah, so I am stuck in the Panhandle of Florida, or lower Alabama as many call it. If it wasn't for the incredibly beautiful beaches, and a great job, I'd really want to move out of here. The theitardery that goes on here is simply amazing!
So, come november, Amendment 2 is up on the ballot. Basically this is the "Marriage Amendment" bull that the far right use to bring out the masses. Now the local pastors are reving up their intollerant masses:
http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/marriage_11209___article.html/amendment_church.html?orderby=TimeStampDescending&showRecommendedOnly=0&oncommentsPage=1#slComments
Not only that, but these gems of literature were published in the opinion section:
Called By god: http://www.nwfdailynews.com/opinion/sarah_11248___article.html/john_real.html
Palin: god's pick: http://www.nwfdailynews.com/opinion/presidential_11249___article.html/palin_vice.html
Needless to say, I dispair more and more being a rational thinker. And what gets me down more are the comments some folks make on these stories. It's simply amazing to read the vile filth they write in the name of their god(s).
So, what do you do if you live in an area like this to keep from going into a deep dispair (or on a homicidal ramapge)?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)