A Religion of Peace and Love?

Love thy neighbor? Not exactly.
Love thy enemy? Not exactly.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you? Not exactly.

If you haven’t heard, Jessica Ahlquist, a 16 year old girl in Cranston, RI objected to a prayer banner in a public school. The courts agreed that it was unconstitutional and ordered it taken down. Listen to this woman read the messages of love from her religious schoolmates posted on twitter and facebook.

Science Flies You to the Moon

Courtesy Richard Dawkins: http://richarddawkins.net

To Breed Or Not To Breed, That Is The Question

When Population Connection posted this on their official Facebook page, they warned of strong language. If 4 shits and a fuck are too much for you, you’ve come to the wrong blog. The cursing is neither particularly offensive nor in high enough quantity to detract from the content, IMNSHO.

We Have Enough Humans, Thanks.

Republicans: Is It Time to Stage a Violent Coup Yet?

Why do repugnicans still bother to pretend that they want to live in a democracy? Why not just violently overthrow the government and make Jesus the king? At least it would be less hypocritical. Of course, Jesus who said “love thy neighbor” and gave health care to the sick without checking for either citizenship or insurance would never have wanted such a thing. And, of course, there would have to be some raving lunatic at the helm claiming to be receiving Jesus’ instructions directly. (Didn’t we have that already for eight years?) But, let’s not quibble about how badly the extremist rethugnicans misinterpret the Bible that they believe to be infallible but have never read.

Let’s just look at the way the party gets whatever they want whether they are in power or not and how they get into power at all.

First take a look at this unconscionable and despicable strategy to take the 2012 presidential election by redistricting a key state. Shockingly, this is actually perfectly legal and constitutional.

The GOP’s Genius Plan to Beat Obama in 2012

Why You, Yes You, Should Oppose the WTC Cross

Here’s an excellent post explaining the problems of the World Trade Center Girder Cross, why there is a lawsuit to stop it, and why you should be opposed to this monument even if you’re Christian. The first paragraph is a quote from President James Madison that is so perfectly apt even to this day that I will post it in its entirety here in addition to a link to the rest of the explanation about this cross in particular.

It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of Citizens, and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The free men of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle. We revere this lesson too much soon to forget it. Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?

– President James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments (1785)

Billionaire Funds Faux-Libertarian Island Creation

Correct me where I’m wrong, but isn’t funding the actual creation of the land on which the country is to start the very definition of big government? And, since the type of government is pre-determined rather than being voted into existence, isn’t it a totalitarian large government? I fail to see how these islands could in any way be considered libertarian.

Silicon Valley billionaire funding creation of artificial libertarian islands

Just goes to show that most of today’s self-proclaimed libertarians are most definitely not libertarians.

Holy F-Day: World’s Christians Unanimous – Life Begins At Birth (not before)

This post is not safe for work due to strong language and deliberately offensive content. Click to see more only if you have thick skin or are an antitheist. Note however, that though I originally intended this to be a fun, humorous, deliberately offensive, anti-religious post, as I typed it, I found that I had made at least one very serious point.

Your Preacher is Lying to You About the Wall of Separation

You’ve probably heard of Jefferson’s letter where he speaks of a wall of separation between church and state. You probably know that these words are not in the constitution of the United States or its amendments or in any other official document. That is true. You may not even concern yourselves over much with the fact that these words from the author of the first amendment were used by the supreme court until the McCarthyism of the 1950s as evidence of the intent of the first amendment and thus as an aid in interpreting it. However, here is the great lie, a huge and deliberate sin of omission of which you may be unaware.

A Real Threat to Marriage

Here’s a bit of humorous irony. With all of the religious folks who want to legislate their Bible morality on the LBGT community and deny them the same rights to marriage that the rest of us have, it seems they’ve missed the real threat to marriage. Remember these folks are claiming that somehow if a homosexual couple marries, my own 23 year and counting marriage will be weakened. Huh? Well, they are saying that gay marriage will weaken the institution of marriage. I don’t claim to understand this argument at all.

However, the real threat to marriage seems to be the civil unions they dreamed up in response to the perfectly reasonable request that homosexuals be allowed to marry.

Straight Couples in France Are Choosing Civil Unions Meant for Gays

In France, where they have now had civil unions for a decade, what has really happened is that heterosexuals have said enough of the death-do-us-part tradition of marriage. Overwhelming numbers of heterosexual couples are choosing the far easier to break contract of a civil union.

Oh horrors!! This could put divorce lawyers out of business.

Traditional Marriage Perverts the Tradition of Marriage

Here’s an interesting post containing a whole bunch of information about traditional marriage, meaning real traditional marriage, not what is being touted today. I had known, of course, that polygyny (polygamy is multiple spouses [spice?] without specifying which sex; polyandry is multiple husbands; polygyny is multiple wives) was common in biblical times. And, of course, I had known that for much of history, especially since agrarian times, that marriage was a business deal. However, there is much about the marriage ceremony and about today’s ceremony and its origins that did surprise me. Anyway, if your idea of traditional marriage as one man marrying one woman in a house of worship, this may surprise you.

Traditional Marriage Perverts the Tradition of Marriage

Perhaps this will give you something to consider the next time someone suggests that we need a constitutional amendment defining marriage. In my not so humble opinion, any couple or group of people who want to legally declare themselves life partners should be allowed to do so. The only issues are figuring out the tax code and ensuring that the law does not discriminate. If we choose to allow polygamy, the law must truly allow any number of partners of either sex. I, for one, wouldn’t want a law that specified polygyny or polyandry, but left out the other.

The World of Religion

Even the Dalai Lama Hates Atheists??!!?

In a shocking op-ed piece entitled Many Faiths, One Truth, the 14th Dalai Lama, thankfully writing as Tenzin Gyatso rather than under the title of Dalai Lama, the only mention of people of no faith is:

Radical atheists issue blanket condemnations of those who hold to religious beliefs.

The Last Taboo

The old elephant is still hanging around the room … has been getting bigger … and is getting seriously pissed off. But, can we mention the elephant yet? For most of us, the answer is no. As usual, Mother Jones created a great cover for this one.

Population: The Last Taboo

Let’s Talk About Population

This is the elephant in the room. This is the taboo subject that even most environmentalists won’t discuss. And yet, all of the other severe problems facing humanity stem from this one issue. We may discuss carbon footprint, but not the number of feet. We may discuss the risk of thermonuclear war but not the population pressure that increases both the size and severity of warfaring. We may discuss poverty and starvation but not the fact that reducing population automatically reduces poverty.

Please join in the Global Population Speak Out.

Why is it that we can discuss all of the symptoms of severe human overpopulation but not the root cause?

Genesis Explained Scientifically

The fallacy of climate activism

This may appear to undermine a number of my earlier posts. However, in this case, I think the point is extremely important. We must begin to recognize and tell the truth of the true nature of our problems. That said, we must also use every weapon in our arsenal to fight for the preservation of the environment to the best of our ability. Most likely the only tool that will actually be worth a damn will be birth control. Yet, we must still do all we can to reduce our ecological (including carbon) footprints while at the same time taking action to reduce the number of feet. The regulars on this blog will remember that I have already argued that the planet cannot support even 300 million of us, let alone 6.7, 8, or 9 billion. So, in that sense, this article is still somewhat consistent with my prior posts. However, I cannot recall previously gotting to the point of wording the issue such that climate change is a mere symptom of a much larger problem, one that involves not only too many people, but people with a completely failed view of the finite planet on which we depend for our very lives every single day.

The fallacy of climate activism

Randroids

Should that be Randroids or Randorrhoids? Either way, here’s a very good write-up about the Objectivist cult, only slightly mentioned by name, and the fact that these people are still of the belief that Objectivism can get us out of the mess it got us into.

I’ve plugged this blog here before when giving credit for things he’s found and have this on my blog roll as well. But, this post is so terrific I just had to share it. Don’t cheat and only watch the Colbert video at the end though. The post is way too good and well worth reading in its entirety. So, I won’t embed the video here.

Pay special attention to the chef metaphor. It’s brilliant.

When Atlas Shrugs, People Listen… But Why?

Republican Arguments Against National Health Care

Something happened today. The same repugnicans who were swearing up and down that nationalized health care would rob the U.S. of its wonderful health care (the worst among the developed democratic nations of the world) are now arguing that nationalized health care will be so good that our existing denial of health care industry will not be able to compete.

HUH??!!?

Here’s the article from the times.

Obama Vows to End Stalemate on Health Care

Why Blog

This is a very well-thought out article about blogging as a form of writing, why it doesn’t replace full-length articles and written works in actual printed media, and just what it’s real advantages are. I found it quite interesting.

For me though, my only purpose in blogging is actually the hope of improving the memepool, even just a little bit. Consider it armchair activism, a.k.a. blowing it out my ass if I may be simultaneously a tad self-honest and self-deprecating.

Why I Blog — Andrew Sullivan, of The Atlantic

Thanks for the find Jan.

Deteriorata

This just might be my new theme song. It’s old, but was new to me. The song is from 1972. The imagery is obviously newer. Enjoy.