Cindy, Oh Cindy: Gimme That Old Time Religion!

We’re aware that God is interested in saving souls, I just wasn’t aware that the souls in question were on a pair of Cindy Jacobs shoes!

On a TV program called “God Knows” (as related on the website Right Wing Watch, 9 January 2013), a woman, Cindy Jacobs, made some totally outlandish claims along the lines of the Biblical God provides – those multiplying loaves and fishes scenario. She claimed that when cooking for her children and the multitudes of young friends they brought along, her spaghetti dinners just kept on keeping on, no matter how many showed up to be fed, the spaghetti pot was always full, the food just multiplied supernaturally; oil in bottles kept being supernaturally topped up a cup at a time; the tires on her car lasted way, way, way longer than anyone could possibly explain naturally; ditto a pair of her shoes refused to wear out. Praise God!

So if I got this right, there are millions starving in the world, but God gives her His preference by keeping her spaghetti pot full; millions around the world can’t afford basic necessities, yet God sees to it she gets life-everlasting shoes. If this is supposed to be proof of God’s reality, what does this say about God’s priorities? All this would be hilarious were it not for the fact that the woman was totally articulate and absolutely sincerely believed all the bullshit she was spouting off about.

In another post (20 December 2012), she also relates how an angel (apparently without wings) rendered assistance to her when things went to hell in a hand-basket at a Venezuelan airport.

Perhaps the women is in some serious need of psychiatric help (you can judge that for yourself if you view her videos), help that God fails to provide her since her shoes and spaghetti have a higher priority for God than her sanity! By the way, I’m not making any of this up. This woman has just got to be seen to be believed! You’ll find lots of her loony religious right videos, videos by apparently Doctor Cindy Jacobs on YouTube or the Right Wing Watch website. You don’t have to watch daytime TV or see blockbuster films to be entertained. She’ll keep you totally enthralled for hours and hours with her Christian looniness.

By the way, the one issue I have, that one bone to pick with these private cable-only TV Right Wing Christian Networks, which I assume “God Knows” is an example, be it Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association or Pat Robertson of the CBN (Christian Broadcasting Network): The 700 Club, or many others, is that it’s a closed shop; it’s all in-house. They spout off their extreme right wing religious messages safe in the knowledge, totally aware in the knowledge, that they cannot be cross-examined in real time, on the spot, by those experts, journalists or interviewers whose job it is, is to be sceptically aggressive. It’s like POTUS having to ‘Meet the Press’ where the only ‘investigative journalist’ or interviewer present is his wife!

Here are just a few selected headlines from Right Wing Watch website regarding Cindy Jacobs, the TV show “God Knows” and her organization Generals International.

“God miraculously made a pair of Cindy Jacobs’ shoes last for years.”

“Cindy Jacobs remembers the time God sent an angel to help her make travel arrangements.”

“Jacobs claims to have thwarted numerous terrorist attacks.”

“Jacobs warns Obama’s ‘anti-Biblical’ policies have led to ‘floods and fires and more’.”

“How Cindy Jacobs prevented two African coups.”

“Bakker and Jacobs claim to have prophesied September 11^th attacks.”

“Jacobs: Our prayers stop terrorism.”

“Jacobs: Prayer led to the capture of Manuel Noriega.”

“Cindy Jacobs: I have the power to revive dead children.”

“Jacobs: Satan seeks to destroy God’s model for the family and install tyranny.”

“Jacobs: People will be required to get a RFID [radio-frequency identification] implant to receive health care.”

“Cindy Jacobs claims American schools had no problems before 1962.”

“Jacobs: Prophets warned Jews of the Holocaust.”

“Jacobs: Elect Right-Wing politicians…Or else.”

“Cindy Jacobs prophesies Obama ‘cover-up,’ prays for religious right leaders.”  

“FRC [Family Research Council] teams with Cindy Jacobs to target 2012 elections’.  

“Cindy Jacobs unveils election initiative to ‘remove the lie of separation of church and state’.” 

“How Cindy Jacobs reversed a hysterectomy.”

“Cindy Jacobs warns of Satan’s grip in ‘ungodly’ education system.”

“Jacobs: OWS [Occupy Wall Street] protests driven by “a power of darkness’.”

“Jacobs’ prayer warriors mobilize against Occupy Wall Street.”

“Jacobs: ‘The Response’ broke the curse of Native American cannibals.”

“[Jacobs]: We are seeing natural disasters ‘because sin has reached Biblical proportions.”

“Jacobs: Ban abortion because it curses the land.”

“Jacobs: ‘Sexual immorality’ is like putting the wrong fuel into your car.”

“Jacobs: The DC earthquake is a sign from God to share the gospel.”

“Jacobs, Benefiel to spend 40 days laying spiritual ‘siege’ to Washington DC”

“Jacobs: ‘It’s time for many Jewish people to turn to the Lord’.”

“Jacobs: ‘Everything that I said has happened’.”

“Jacobs in Alaska, announces mobilization of a half million intercessors to swing 2012 election’.”

“Jacobs: America will erect a memorial on National Mall to the ‘holocaust of the unborn’.”

“Jacobs: God is using earthquake to break Japan’s pagan idolatry.”  

“Jacobs: Birds are dying because of DADT [Don’t Ask Don’t Tell] repeal.”

“Jacobs and Pierce issue warning that CA [California] will be destroyed by earthquake if Prop 8 is struck down.”

“Cindy Jacobs: The Lord is targeting elections.”

“Cindy Jacobs prophesies a third party led by Marco Rubio.”

“[Jacobs]: ‘God is going to do something supernatural in these elections’.”

“Jacobs: ‘Filling the arsenals of God’s media army’ to stop the Islamification of Fox News.”

“Jacobs calls the ‘blood-covered justice and judgments of God’ down upon her enemies.”

“How Cindy Jacobs shut down Craigslist.”

“Cindy Jacobs repents for lesbianism, ‘girl-on-girl kissing’ and ‘gender mainstreaming’.”

“Cindy Jacobs: God’s mercy depends on how we vote in 2010.”

“Cindy Jacobs issues ‘a serious warning and a call for urgent prayer’.”

“Cindy Jacobs’ prayer warriors target Prop 8 case.”

“Jacobs: May Day 2010 saved Times Square.”

“When Cindy Jacobs caused Washington DC to flood.”

“Jacobs: ‘The Bible is the government of the people, by the people and for the people’.”

“Jacobs: If you care about the environment, you’re Dominionist.”

Zeus the Almighty!

Within all human cultures over all of recorded history, there have been literally multi-thousands and thousands of supernatural deities that have formed the heart and soul of the world’s religions. Today, most educated people can name say a dozen or so of the better known. First and foremost would be the monotheistic deity, God, Allah and related names. Within the remaining polytheistic deities, most would have heard of Thor, Apollo, Quetzalcoatl, Atlas, Gaia, Poseidon, and related. One such related is the Greek King of the [Olympian] Gods – Zeus (Jupiter to the Romans). The heavyweight champion believability fight – God vs. Zeus – is the match-up of the millennia.  

God vs. Zeus: Let’s start with a thought experiment or hypothetical question. What’s more believable, monotheism or polytheism? Well, ask yourself this, if you see a bird (singular) fly overhead, do you assume that’s a one-off mono-bird or a part of a poly-bird set? Even if you just see the one, you no doubt assume the latter. A bird does not exist in isolation. Why should deities be any different? You cannot have a species of one and only one individual. The species called ‘deity’, ditto. The species God cannot exist in isolation. Monotheism is nonsense. The species of Zeus is part of polytheism – there are many Zeus-like deities. Zeus does not exist in isolation.

God’s empire vs. the domain of Zeus is cheek-by-jowl, though the contrast couldn’t be more different. You must have some general idea what life must have been like under Zeus in the days of Homer, Plato, Socrates, Aristotle right through to Alexander the Great. Equally, you must have some notion of life under the rule of the God of Israel in Old Testament times, from Moses to Abraham to Joshua and Solomon (assuming these ‘historical’ figures were actually historical. So, given a choice, which society would you opt to live in – Ancient Greece or the lands of the Bible, the so-called Holy Lands. For me it is a no-brainer. Zeus could hurl around the lightning bolts with the best of the Sky Gods, but compared to God, God’s wrath and God’s laws, Zeus is my kind of deity – if deities there must be.

Both Zeus, king of the Greek pantheon, and God (of Israel) have human qualities, but of the two, Zeus is way more credible as something humans can identify with – if you’ve got to believe in any deity that is. God’s just plain nasty, wrathful, vain and jealous. Zeus at least has some other qualities that we can admire, like bedding down the ladies, goddesses, demigoddesses and mortals alike.

Put it this way, God is prohibition, the Salem Witch trials, the Inquisition, hellfire and brimstone and the Taliban rolled into one. God’s idea of a fun afternoon is having sinners stoned to death or burned at the stake. Zeus on the other hand is a Hugh Heffner type; Zeus is a party animal. Mount Olympus is the Playboy Mansion of Ancient Greece. Zeus too has a fun afternoon of, well, never mind. This is a family-friendly essay and displayed on a family-friendly website. 

Most people in most societies have to earn or work their way up to whatever level in whatever occupation they aspire to. And so it was with Zeus. No one handed him the Olympian throne on a silver platter. He fought like the dickens for that position. God, on the other hand, we assume always had that silver spoon in His mouth and occupied that top penthouse in Heaven from Day One.

Mount Olympus vs. Heaven (somewhere over the rainbow in Never-Never Land). Zeus and company chose to live in a readily identifiable geographic location – Mount Olympus. Any mortal tourist or worshiper could venture there and pay homage. God’s abode, on the other hand, isn’t on the map. In fact it’s totally invisible geography that’s never been verified.

We know what Zeus looked like. One of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World was a super-statue of Zeus at Olympia inside a super-temple, by the Greek sculptor Phidias. Zeus, at 42 feet high, is depicted sitting on an elaborate cedar-wood throne ornamented with ebony, ivory, gold, and precious stones - and that’s just one of many statues that existed or still exist to this day. Although the Olympia super-statue is no more, we know what it, and Zeus, looked like – records survive. No Wonder of the Ancient World is dedicated to the God of Israel – nobody has the foggiest idea what God looks like even though images of God are modelled after Zeus by those who artists who have to work with something, anything. It’s not east imaging the invisible.

Zeus is clearly supernatural – he can and does shape-shift for example into both organic and inorganic forms, usually for randy purposes. But, as you’d expect, the species or clan to which Zeus belongs also are supernatural, or at least exhibit some supernatural abilities. For example, Prometheus created humans from the ground up (without need of any rib structures for the female of the species). Poseidon can ‘wave’ his magic trident and cause the seas to boil with tempest. Hermes had his magic helmet and winged sandals. And if the Gorgon Medusa could turn someone to stone just by looking at them (the evil eye?), well that’s got to be the equal of that Pillar of Salt episode. 

Poor God of Israel, He has no parents or grandparents; no brothers of sisters; He had no childhood, no playmates; He has no wife, no lovers or a mistress; He has no children. In fact, no other of His species exists. He can’t even celebrate His birthday since He has no actual birth (not having a Mum and all). How sad. I wonder what Sigmund Freud or Carl Gustav Jung would make of that? I’m no psychoanalyst or psychiatrist, but with an upbringing (or rather lack thereof), God’s got to be a few coins short of a dollar.

Zeus on the other hand had parents (Cronus and Rhea) and grandparents (Gaia and Uranus); lots of brothers (Hades and Poseidon) and sisters (Hestia, Demeter & Hera); Zeus had a childhood spend on Crete; Zeus has a sister-wife (Hera – the last of several) and many lovers/mistresses; Zeus begat lots of brats, both legit and illegit (Hercules and Helen of Troy and a whole lot more besides), and many other species of his kind – the Olympians – exist.

One quality often quoted about as a generality has something to do with absolute power and corruption. God wields absolute power, and not always for the betterment of the human race as the Old Testament verifies in graphic and gory detail. Zeus on the other hand, while king of the gods, didn’t hold absolute power. It was shared with the other Olympians. Zeus is also way more modest, making no grandiose claims about creating life, the universe and everything. Further, Zeus doesn’t refer to himself in capital letters, unlike the LORD God. It’s hard to read the Old Testament and not come to the conclusion that God is an egomaniac.

It’s rather unlikely that Zeus would have had any bone to pick with God’s realm to the east. God, on the other hand, if He be consistent, would have had two bones to chew over with His neighbour to the west. Firstly, there be gods over there, and that’s a Big No-No to the Lord God of Israel who refers to Himself as the One-and-only-God (reference the first of the Ten Commandments).  Secondly, the realm of Zeus condoned homosexuality. Zeus himself apparently had a close encounter of the gay kind with a strapping handsome young lad by the name of Ganymede. However, God apparently adopted a live-and-let-live policy. That’s just as well since, as the Titans and the Giants found out to their cost, you don’t mess with the Olympians.

Zeus and company, as well as God share one thing in common. None have been seen or heard from in thousands of years. They’ve all vanished into thin air, or maybe into the Bermuda Triangle – who knows. Perhaps that says a lot about their reality in the first place.

Philosophies of the Religious Right: Part Two

The majority of churches, religious institutions and prominent religious individuals, though deluded IMHO, are for the most part, most of the time, middle-of-the-road and live-and-let-live. But as any probability statistician can relate to, there will be minorities on either side of that road. One side of that religious road, the Right side, are not only in your face but hold opinions (usually stated as facts) and philosophies that are anything but the normal mainstream. In fact they are extreme.

The Religious Right aren’t going to pay any attention to this, but no matter, here goes.

What are some more issues the extreme Religious Right are frothing at the mouth about and is it cosmically significant?

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

A Woman’s Place

Their Point of View: In the Bible, men and women are not created equal. Therefore, marriage between a man and a woman is not an equal partnership. Women just gotta know their place, which is in the home, barefoot and pregnant, cooking and sewing and providing sex on demand! That’s obvious since in some churches or religious institutions equal opportunity/affirmative action is denied the female of the species. Last I heard the position of Pope was open to men only!

My Point of View: I have no trouble with the concept of the ‘house husband’ or the wife being the ‘breadwinner’. Hubby can cook and wash the dishes; the wife can instigate or demand sex on even days of the month; vice versa on odd days. Further, a woman should be given every opportunity to prove that she’s as dumb as the male of the species. Let’s hear it for Pope Mavis the First.

Church and State

Their Point of View: Church and State should be one and the same, with of course Christianity being the sum total of both and the be-all-and-end-all of all things.

My Point of View: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, and IMHO, the current American separation of Church and State ain’t broke.

War on Christmas

Their Point of View: Christ is the spirit, meaning and embodiment of Christmas and therefore the two cannot be separated.

My Point of View: The Religious Right object here since in their POV the War on Christmas is the removing of Christ from Christmas. Well, so it should be too, for two reasons – there’s in all probability no connection between the birth of Jesus and the 25^th of December; there is no reason to believe that Christ actually ever existed. You cannot have a Christ in Christmas if Christ does not exist and nobody has ever proved that Christ ever existed, in the same way as say Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Cleopatra, Joan of Arc or Henry the Eighth have been proved to have existed. Further, there are many with worldviews that exclude Christ (real or otherwise) from their belief systems and who resent having a Christ in Christmas shoved down their throats. And besides, anybody who is anybody and who lives in the real world is fully aware (thanks to January bills) that the spirit, meaning and embodiment of all things Christmas is consumerism and the more of that the better.

Cause and Effect

Their Point of View: The Religious Right Wing tends to make a lot of cause-and-effect assertions which they could never ever in a month-of-Sundays (and then some) prove in any court of law, yet they go on and on and on making these assertions as if these statements were absolute fact. For example:

* Disasters like Hurricane Sandy, Hurricane Katrina, a massive killer tornado outbreak, or any other ‘natural’ act causing death and/or destruction are the direct result of God’s wrath because America (or any other Christian nation) is wicked and has turned her back on the Almighty.

* American soldiers and police officers killed in the line of duty died because God hates fags and America is a fag-loving society, or at least accepts them into society, into the police force and into the military.

* Mass shootings in schools are the direct result of prayer that has been banned from these public institutions.  

My Point of View: As I said above, none of this can be proved and ultimately has as much substance and significance to the population as any other fantasy statement presented as fact.

Some Other Looney Points of View

I picked up most of these one-off Religious Right Wing bits throughout 2012.

Their Point of View:

* Church attendance should be as close to compulsory as makes no odds and an atheist tax imposed on those not attending church.

* Belief in manmade global warming/climate change is an insult to God because He provided us with the gifts of fossil fuels which He intended for us to use.

* Gays, atheists, Muslims, and other undesirables shouldn’t be allowed to hold any positions of authority.

* All undesirables should be deported.

* Gays should be put to death; in fact any punishments for any Biblical sins should be carried out in the ways the Bible dictates, like executions that require stoning to death.

* Religious instruction and prayer should be made mandatory in all public schools, as well as the Ten Commandments displayed prominently.

* All elected officials must take an oath affirming their belief in God and the literal Bible.

My Point of View: Very loud raspberries for each and every dot point. Actually I think the extreme Religious Right Wing should be deported as undesirables, starting with the membership of the Westboro Baptist Church. 

Conclusions

Their Point of View: The extreme Religious Right Wing are not happy campers and they keep threatening all and sundry that we’re a collective Sodom, Gomorrah and Babylon all rolled into one wicked society; God is pissed; God’s wrath is upon us; God’s gonna kick our ass sooner rather than later; and in fact it’s just gloom and doom times ahead. The end is nigh. Hell is gonna become very crowded very quickly unless we repent, Repent and REPENT!

My Point of View: We’ve been hearing that sad and sorry tale for generations, and then some. It is high time for the Religious Right Wing to put up or shut up. Prove God exists and has all those wrathful traits you assign Him. A Sherlock Holmes story reads as being perfectly plausible, but you cannot use that story and therefore conclude that Sherlock Holmes exists or existed. And so by the way, you cannot use the Bible to prove the Bible, anymore than you can use a textbook that says it is true as proof that it is true. You need independent verification, for the existence of Sherlock Holmes or the truth of the Bible. And that’s where the Religious Right collapses in a heap of rubble. There is no independent source. Maybe the Religious Right can make God show His face for the first time in way over 2000 years, but if they can’t back up all their huffing and puffing then they should just exit, stage left, from society, for good. Never have so few spouted off so much hellfire and brimstone hot air over so long a time frame and have so little to show for it. And here you probably thought just politicians were the real huff-and-puffers. Not even close, unless of course they are associated with the Right Wing of the GOP/Tea Party!

Philosophies of the Religious Right: Part One

The majority of churches, religious institutions and prominent religious individuals, though deluded IMHO, are for the most part, most of the time, middle-of-the-road and live-and-let-live. But as any probability statistician can relate to, there will be minorities on either side of that road. One side of that religious road, the Right side, are not only in your face but hold opinions (usually stated as facts) and philosophies that are anything but the normal mainstream. In fact they are extreme.

During the recent (2012) American election campaign, several Republican (GOP)/Tea Party candidates got some (probably) unwanted publicity by making out-of-the-box and extreme comments with Religious Right Wing overtones on topics such as church and state; legitimate rape; rape and God’s plan; same-sex marriage; the literal creation-in-six-days Bible, and so on. Not that extreme out-of-the-box worldviews were confined to politicians and wannabe politicians. There are a whole potful of organisations and individuals from shock-jock media personalities, news commentators, televangelists, and lots more who routinely come out with outrageous foot-in-mouth and extreme Right Wing points of view, nearly always with a Christian religious slant. I learned a lot about the extreme Right Wing by following the US election campaign unfolding. Here’s my summation based on what exposure I had over those many, many, many endless months while the campaign coverage was in full swing.

The Religious Right aren’t going to pay any attention to this, but no matter, here goes.

What are the issues the extreme Religious Right are frothing at the mouth about and is it cosmically significant?

The Literal Bible:

Their Point of View: Since the Bible is the infallible God’s Holy Word, all Biblical Books, Chapters and Verses; all versions of the Bible; all translations of the Bible; were under His Almighty editorship, and therefore, how can you not take the Bible literally. If God says that life, the universe and everything were created in six days, then that’s absolute fact. If God says that the first man was made from dust and the first woman from that man’s rib, you’d better believe it. If Genesis relates that Lot’s wife was turned into a pillar of salt, it was so (and if the Bible says it was so, it was so and you could sprinkle her onto your fish-and-chips). If the Bible acknowledges the existence of unicorns, then unicorns exist (or existed). And so on and so forth from Genesis to Revelation.

My Point of View: All you need to do is find one logical contradiction, one fallacy, one bit that goes so against the grain; that being the case, the entire Biblical house of cards has to come tumbling down. Let’s just say that entire books have been written pointing out in exquisite detail Biblical contradictions, fallacies, and untruths that only Blind Freddy with an absolutely closed mind (my mind is made up, don’t confuse me with facts) can fail to acknowledge what to everyone else is the bleeding obvious. If, and that’s a big if, God exists, He is not infallible, His memory is faulty, or He didn’t bother to oversee the master editing of His Holy Word. If He couldn’t or wouldn’t ensure Biblical accuracy, well what does that tell you about the bona fides of the Almighty?

Evolution

Their Point of View: Since God created life, the universe and everything in roughly the year 4004 BCE, and since God created all life forms in the form to which we see them today, then the entire concept of natural selection and biological evolution is nonsense. There’s not enough time for evolution to have happened. There is no need to evolve a giraffe since God created the giraffe. Since God created Homo sapiens there is no need to postulate that human beings evolved from apes. Evolution is all absolute rubbish.

My Point of View: I fail to see what is so hard for anyone to comprehend here. Evolutionary theory should be obvious to even blind Freddy (a synonym for the Religious Right). The logic is ironclad. Parents (of any species) give rise to offspring that are NOT identical to themselves. That in itself is evolution – a change. Some of those offspring may be better adapted to survive long enough to reproduce more offspring in turn vis-à-vis some of their brothers and sisters. Those ever so slightly better able to reproduce will pass on more likely as not some of those positive features to more offspring than their less adapted siblings. Over time, those better adapted leave behind more descendants than those less well adapted who leave behind fewer offspring. That sort of feedback mechanism ensures evolution, which is just change over time. Evolutionary theory is however backed up by physical evidence; fossil evidence for starters, not to mention firsthand eyeball observations of evolutionary change happening in the here and now.

Intelligent Design

Their Point of View: Life, the universe and everything is so perfectly constructed and interrelated like some fitted together zillion piece jigsaw puzzle that only a Supreme Deity could have pulled it off and put it together. A clock requires a clockmaker; or as Fred Hoyle put it, a tornado doesn’t rip through a junkyard and assembles a Boeing 747. 

My Point of View: The fallacy here is the assumption that there was total chaos (an unassembled jigsaw puzzle; clock parts lying on a bench; a junkyard that had all the bits and pieces necessary for a Boeing 747) and then a snap of the intelligent design fingers and low and behold a zillion piece jigsaw puzzle is assembled; a clock starts ticking away; a Boeing 747 is all fuelled up and ready for takeoff. Forgotten in this equation is is time, and lots of it and probability theory. If you sit down at the poker table, you’re not likely to be dealt a Royal Flush, but by manipulation of what you throw away and what you gain, you increase the odds of ending up with one. That’s evolution, from chaos to finished product. Then too, over the course of a lifetime and thousands of games and hundreds of thousands of hands, the odds of you getting dealt a Royal Flush right off the bat increase. It will probably happen, if not to you then to someone else, like your opponent. Time and probability help turn chaos into complexity. There’s a long, long, long chain of events twixt chaos and a Boeing 747, and a lot of time required, like 13.7 billion years worth. That’s hardly a quick snap of the intelligent design fingers. In any case, any scientist can easily point out that that zillion piece jigsaw puzzle not only has a few pieces missing but some pieces haven’t been assembled intelligently at all. If a perfect God created a perfect human being (intelligent design), how come many of us acquire back troubles? 

Homosexuality

Their Point of View: Same-sex relations of a sexual nature are unnatural and God doesn’t like it (probably because you can’t do your ‘be fruitful and multiple’ thingy bit).

My Point of View: My position is that what two (or more) consenting adults do behind closed doors is none of my business. It has no bearing on my life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. What two married adults, same sex or opposite sexes, do behind closed doors is none of my business. Ditto that life, liberty and happiness bit. The only issue I haven’t quite come to terms with is whether same-sex couples should raise children. In theory it shouldn’t matter; in actual practice, given the realities of human culture and society and worldviews, all else being equal, it might be better if children weren’t raised in a same-sex atmosphere, but I’m still fence-sitting on that.

Equality in Marriage

Their Point of View: Marriage is between one man and one woman – full stop. All else is an abomination in the eyes of God.

My Point of View: If two men, or two women, wish to marry, it’s no skin off my back. Different strokes for different folks, that’s my motto.

Contraception

Their Point of View: Contraception/Birth Control is an attempt to thwart God’s ‘be fruitful and multiply’ commandment and therefore it is a no-no.

My Point of View: Some couples don’t want kids (shock, horror, blasphemy). Some couples cannot afford kids. Some couples have jobs and lifestyles not suited to parenthood or raising a family. Which is the better option, no conception in the first place and an unwanted child in poverty that’s ignored, or conception in the first place with no grief on down the line? Besides, if you’re not bringing a new life into the world, at least you’re not condemning that non-life to an eventual death.

Abortion

Their Point of View: A human life starts at the moment of conception. Therefore, abortion, a post-conception act, must be murder, which God forbids (though God kills Himself, but that’s another topic).

My Point of View: Until such time as a foetus has a reasonable chance of surviving outside of the womb, the foetus is part of the anatomy of the mother. The mother has the right to decide about what happens to her own anatomy. Abortion is okay. Once that foetus crosses the threshold, then, unless the life of the women is endangered, no abortion. If the pregnancy isn’t by consent, say via rape, inside or outside of marriage; same distinction. But since the rape induced pregnancy will be known about quite some time before the foetus can survive outside of the womb, the mother can make an informed decision to abort or not abort as she sees fit. 

To be continued…

People Kill: God Doesn’t Care: Part Two

Following yet another mass shooting in the US of A, with all the predictable and understandable gut reactions that pour forth, my gut feeling is that nothing of substance will be done since American history, culture and the Constitution rule; gun control isn’t the real issue; things will get worse; people kill (it’s in our genes – deal with it); and it provides another reason why God is an increasing irrelevance in society.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

The Religious Element

I personally find it amazing, even astounding that in the aftermath of a mass murder episode, people flock to churches and pray and hold candlelight prayer vigils, and express total faith in the Almighty the He will look after the slain innocents. I’d of thought people, especially religious people, should be taking to the streets with raised fists screaming in pure rage and outrage against the alleged loving, compassionate, merciful, all-knowing, all-powerful God for standing by on the sidelines and not lifting a godly digit to prevent the tragedy in the first place.

Of course the obvious answer is that God gave us free will, and a person who slaughters the innocent is just exercising God’s free will gift and therefore God is not going to interfere. God does not want to get involved in the petty daily affairs of humankind.

Or, some might suggest that God works in mysterious ways and that the slaughter of the innocents is part of God’s plan, part of the Almighty’s Big Picture which us mortals can’t comprehend. Well, if mass murder is part of God’s plan, do we really want any part of God?

Some suggest that God doesn’t work in mysterious ways and this is just pure and simple another example of God’s wrath. While that would be keeping within God’s actions and reactions in the Old Testament, I somehow find it hard to believe that God would need to employ a middleman. Further, by employing a middleman, God would lose the benefit of letting all and sundry know that He was pissed off and this was an example of His wrath. So, sorry ‘bout that Westboro Baptist Church but God did not ‘send the shooter’ as per one of your favourite phrases – this time or ever. We do not need God’s help to kill.

Some, especially the extreme Right Wing Fundamentalists, suggest that humans have turned their back on God and therefore God has turned His back on us. That sort of spitting the dummy doesn’t quite ring true with those godly attributes of compassion, etc. I mean a child might in a hissy fit turn their back on Mum & Dad, but Mum & Dad aren’t as likely to reciprocate.

Of course the final answer as to why God ignores us, and allows extreme evil, is that there is no God in the first damn place, and this (mass murder of the innocents) is just part of that evidence.

In conclusion, in one sense, such mass murder episodes are in a strange way ‘good news’ stories for they should re-re-re-reinforce the concept that, sorry Virginia, there is no God, or if there is He does not give a DAMN about the sorry affairs of mankind. He does not want to get His godly hands dirty. So all the vigils, and all the prayers, and all the church attendances, all of which may be psychological comforting responses, in the long and short term, well these actions are absolutely meaningless and a waste of time, effort, energy and tears. Ultimately, it amounts to another nail in God’s coffin. 

P.S. - In a Darwinian sense, when you have a global population of over seven billion and increasing, well, life is cheap. The mass shooting of millions in one day would be of no lasting consequence to the human species; just the opposite, it might improve things – slightly.

People Kill: God Doesn’t Care: Part One

Following yet another mass shooting in the US of A, with all the predictable and understandable gut reactions that pour forth, my gut feeling is that nothing of substance will be done since American history, culture and the Constitution rule; gun control isn’t the real issue; things will get worse; people kill (it’s in our genes – deal with it); and it provides another reason why God is an increasing irrelevance in society.

One undesirable cultural phenomena, often witnessed in the United States, though hardly the exclusive property of the US of A, is the fairly indiscriminate and outright random killings of innocents that the killer has some apparent, albeit impersonal, grudge against. The most recent in a long line of case histories involved the Sandy Hook Elementary School at Newtown, Connecticut (December 2012). However, I don’t want to get into specific cases, nor dwell on the human element as experienced by those most intimately involved, friends, family, and authority figures like the police who have to deal with the situation. Rather, I’m going to focus on the broader issues, two of which are always present in the aftermath. There’s the human element, and often the related gun control issues, and there’s the religious element, an often focus being why does God allow evil and why do people seemingly ignore this facet?

The Human Element

People kill. We’re very good at it. That we are killing machines seems to be hardwired into our neural networks. Why is probably irrelevant, but no doubt can be traced back to our early hominid ancestors and the days of nature red in tooth and claw and that famous summation of biological evolution – survival of the fittest – kill or be killed - or in more modern phraseology, shoot first and ask questions later. Is there any human on this planet over the age of five who hasn’t secretly wished to bash somebody’s head in to a brain dead pulp? If so, the numbers are probably so low as to be statistically meaningless.

People kill. Again, we’re very good at it. And so now and again someone with a gun(s) goes off the deep end and lots of innocents die (or are seriously wounded but pull through even though the intention was for them to snuff it). Whenever one of these mass killing events ensues, especially in the US of A, there will be the inevitable outcry for tougher gun control measures. There will also be the inevitable outcome of keeping the status quo. It’s not easy to change the American Constitution which gives Americans the right to bear arms! American history and culture reinforce that right. Gun control isn’t the issue though that’s the gut reaction, but gun control just ain’t going to happen. But even if it does, even if not one private citizen in the US of A had a gun, so what? If I wish to kill someone indiscriminately or at random, I’m not going to be stopped just because I don’t have a gun. It’s a trite but accurate phrase that “guns don’t kill, people kill”.

How can I kill thee, let me count the ways. Well there are still knives, bows and arrows, swords, and spears. Eliminate those, well I can throw rocks or bang you over the head with a brick. No rocks, no bricks; well I can choke you to death. Maybe I have access to hand grenades, sticks of dynamite, Molotov cocktails, or have the know-how to make homemade bombs or make nerve gas or otherwise employ poisons effectively. Clubs, like baseball bats, are pretty effective too since they can clobber more than just a baseball. I can always drive my car into a crowd at high speed, and cars are unlikely to be banned just because their drivers can employ them to kill. If you really want to go out with a bang rent a fully fuelled plane and crash it into a crowded sports stadium. Then there’s arson via the humble match. No, eliminating guns is not going to end the slaughter of the innocents. Where there’s a will, there’s a way.

People kill. We love it. You’d probably be hard pressed to pick up any general history text of any nation and not find, somewhere between the covers, at least one killing contained therein, and truth be known, probably lots of them. Recall all those human sacrifices made to the Aztec gods – slicing open the chest and ripping the heart out kills just as effectively as a gun. Closer to American hearts and minds, once upon a time it was peachy keen to slaughter the Native Americans including women, children and infants, as in “the only good Indian is a dead Indian”. Afro-Americans fared only slightly better. 

We almost tend to make cultural ‘heroes’ of those who kill, from Billy the Kid to Captain Kidd, Jesse James to Ned Kelly (Australian), Doc Holiday to Bonnie & Clyde, even villains like John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, and Jack the Ripper have acquired a certain mythological aura that surrounds them. The passing of time has a way of softening their impact. If you source though the histories of all nations that list could be extended a thousand-fold.

The total number of biographies of the bad guys (and gals), killers and serial killers, the gangsters, the outlaws, the pirates, the assassins, even famous celebrities who were murdered, would fill up the entire shelf space of many a good sized public library. There’s just something about the cold blooded killer that appeals to our genetic makeup.

Our works of fiction are full of human slaughter and not just war novels and westerns. There’s that whole genre of slasher films aimed usually at the teenagers.  We love a whodunit murder mystery and those with a ‘license to kill’ like the ever popular 007. Cop and P.I. TV shows do well; even courtroom dramas which usually feature a murder trial. The Bible (another work of fiction) contains more blood and guts and gore and slaughter of the innocents per page than the most graphic of novels, and you’ll find murder ranging from Shakespeare, Homer and even unto operas – there’s a least one murder in each of Richard Wagner’s “Ring Cycle” quartet of ‘musical dramas’. 

                                                                                                            

And if we get tired of humans killing humans, there are always aliens and monsters on the rampage to satisfy the bloodlust.

I forget exactly the number now, but a study was made of the number of fictional murders shown on make-believe TV shows but the end result was alarming. We are graphically exposed day-in-and-day-out to humans killing humans, and not just on the evening TV news, though that too of course.

I fail to see why people get all worked up over the mass slaughter of, say, 30 innocents. What they are worked up about is the fact that one person killed 30 people, not that 30 people were killed. I’m sure that everyday, in everyway, in the US of A, even a lot more than 30 people are murdered, but hardly a headline, apart from the local murder mentioned in the local rag, gives note to the daily 30 killed by 30 others. But if one individual does murder 30 people at one go, then its global headlines and hundreds of human interest stories follow. In either case it’s the same number of innocent people dead, so why does one rate a massive outpouring of soul searching and the other rates barely a whimper of concern? Is there really anything different in principle between killing 30 or the one? Murder is murder; mass murder is still murder.

And what of that other mass slaughter? It’s what humans do best, not only killing other humans but innocent animals, especially animals, for no reason. A ‘sportsman’ hunter kills 30 deer; a ‘sportsman’ fisherman kills 30 fish. If anything, the ‘sportsman’ gets a pat on the back for his skill.

Speaking of skill, doesn’t the military award marksmanship medals for such gunmanship skills? What about sportsmen (and women) in competition up through and including the Olympic Games for their shooting skills in not only marksmanship with a gun, but say in archery. We reward those who can shoot, and in a manner of speaking, shoot to kill (by hitting the bullseye).

The bottom line is that while most of us are restrained most of the time from acting out our primeval instincts by the laws of the land, each and every one of us can snap; some more readily than others, but snap nonetheless. Perhaps the really amazing thing is that the slaughter of the innocents is as at a low a level as it is. And though this sounds cruel, in the time it takes one person to snuff out 30 lives, another 30 are born. In a nation of 300 million, if 30 are murdered, well that’s a drop in the ocean, but in the real world, the world of nature red in tooth and claw, that sort of ratio wouldn’t cause Mother Nature to bat a proverbial eyebrow, and aren’t humans part of that real world (although we’d probably deny it, since we think we’re something special, like something special in the eyes of God). In the cosmic scheme of things, an elephant stepping on an ant hill, while a tragedy for the ants concerned, is of no consequence for the overall survival of the ant species.

So what’s going to happen? Nothing is going to happen except things will get worse! With every passing day there are more and more people – more and more chances for a massacre of the innocent to come to pass. With every passing day, more and more instruments that have lethal powers are manufactured. Even if there come to pass legal ways of preventing the two trends from interacting, there are always the illegal ways and means, and if history is any guide, what Lola wants, Lola gets, even if Lola has to beg, borrow or steal.

To be continued…

Happy Holidays!

Should we all have a “Merry Christmas” or will just having a “Happy Holiday” suffice? Do we really all need to receive supersaturation exposure to all things Christmas for weeks on end? What is the point of the over-the-top commercialism of a religious celebration that firstly doesn’t apply to everyone and secondly is just a figment of the Christian imagination anyway? Why do we lie to our children about Santa? Is it any wonder that there’s now a “War on Christmas”?

For various reasons, religious, economic, personal, some people just do not do Christmas – shock, horror, absolute blasphemy!!! Not that the naysayer can escape from Christmas, the concept and associated musical and visual baggage being shoved down their throats whether people want it or not from pretty much the last week in November (immediately post Thanksgiving in the US of A) through Christmas Day. That’s roughly 1/12^th of your year when all things Christmas, Christmas and more Christmas is pounded into you. Christmas probably gets more exposure or saturation coverage than a lead-up to a federal election. At least department stores, shopping malls and supermarkets don’t broadcast political candidate’s speeches while they’re on their political hustings. No such respite do these retail establishments give you regarding Christmas. Music, displays, and zillions of ads suggesting this or that perfect gift is the order of the month, and of course all those retail store Santa’s are just egging on the kiddies to pester their all and sundry family and friends with “I want, I want, I want, gimme, gimme, gimme” with produce from their store of course. Maybe that’s why there’s finally an anti-Christmas backlash underway – enough is now enough! It’s called the “War on Christmas”.

There’s been a lot of huffing-and-puffing, especially in the US of A over a so-called “War on Christmas”, summed up I guess by replacing “Merry Christmas” with “Happy Holidays” and other wise downplaying the religious and traditional significance of the, ho, ho, ho, Christmas. For example, no Nativity displays in public areas. Actually that might be working since this year (2012) the annual Nativity display in my local shopping centre has been conspicuous by its absence. I miss it not one bit since it has all the same degree of historical reality of Santa himself. [Actually, the day after I wrote that bit of wishful thinking it showed up – curses, foiled again.]

Personally, I’d be more than happy to have the entirety of Christmas and all of the associated baggage, mainly economic, tossed out the window, preferably a high-rise window. Since that’s not going to happen, I’ll settle for the downgrading. Of course the Christian Right Wing are spouting hellfire and brimstone over this trend, though that’s really irrelevant since Christmas has bugger-all to do with Christianity or anything related to monotheism - more on that shortly.

For better or worse, most of the advanced countries in the world today, especially those in North America (United States & Canada), Europe, and the Pacific region (Australia, New Zealand) are no longer WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) societies, but multicultural societies. That means, cultures that have significant populations that don’t share the WASP culture, including WASP religions and holidays. “Merry Christmas” has little if any significance; “Happy Holidays” probably has more significance to a broader audience than just WASPs.

One example of personal note, I don’t know about your neck of the woods, but where I live, it is near mandatory for supermarkets, department stores, shopping malls, etc. to pipe in and bombard customers with so-called Christmas music. Much of it is just Northern Hemisphere wintertime music like “Frosty the Snowman”, “Let It Snow, Let It Snow, Let it Snow”, and “Sleigh Ride” (vastly inappropriate in the Southern Hemisphere celebrating high summer where I am, but that’s another issue); some have no religious significance like “I’m Dreaming of a White Christmas” or “Santa Claus Is Coming to Town”. But you get the religiously themes songs too, like “The First Noel”, “Silent Night” or “Hark the Herald Angels Sing”. It’s with the latter I take objection.

The question is, is it the place of supermarkets, etc. to seemingly endorse a particular brand of [monotheistic Christian] religion by playing these religiously themed Christmas Carols? It’s perfectly legal of course, but is it ethical? I mean these stores don’t pipe in music appropriate to the beliefs of Hindus or those of the Buddhist faith. In a multicultural society, I would strongly suggest that department stores, etc. stick to subjecting their customers to non-religious Christmas, or even better winter holiday, songs, and not ram down a specific monotheistic religious point of view to anyone within earshot. I mean this is not voluntarily attending a concert. People have to shop for necessities, like food. Should part of that experience be the involuntary scenario or experience of listening to music you’d rather not be subjected to? Opting to shop elsewhere probably results in no letup since nearly 100% of stores participate in the unrelenting bombardment. Apart from the unwilling shoppers, pity the poor staffers who have to put up with it for eight hours straight, day-in and day-out for the roughly month long duration. As one such staffer told me, they just tune out as best they can and sort of go into zombie mode for the duration.

The other issue is does Christmas really have any religious connection worthy of its salt at all? The answer is clearly no. You will not find, in any religious text, including the Bible (any version of the Bible in any language) the date, month, or even season when an alleged entity we call Jesus, was born. In short, if you celebrate the 25^th of December as the birthday of Jesus, you have only a 1 in 365.25 chance of being correct. So, why was that date chosen?

Well once upon a time, in days of yore, when pagans ruled, it was usual for ancient and in the main rural societies dependent on farming to divide the year into twelve months of thirty days each. Of course that left a remainder of five days, which had to be used up or accounted for, or else the calendar would eventually get seriously out of sync. Now recall that all of this tradition started from and evolved in the Northern Hemisphere. Now what was THE most important thing to these agricultural communities? The Winter Solstice (the shortest daylight day of the year being 21 December) and confirmation that the day’s daylight started getting longer immediately afterwards (the gods were therefore pleased) and that meant that although it might be a while, spring was returning, with that a promise of planting and another harvest and therefore food on the table. And so you used up that surplus five days in a post 21 December celebration that winter would eventually wan and good times would return.

Enter Christianity and their hatred for all things pagan and polytheistic. The easiest way to deal with this annual pagan festive season was not to fight city hall but to assimilate it and use it for their own purposes. Easy, just give the masses another reason to celebrate roughly five days post Winter Solstice – the birth of Jesus was a convenient substitute since no one could prove any different. And slowly but surely as Christianity replaced paganism and rural communities morphed more into urban societies and one realised that lengthening daylight was the norm of nature and not subject to the whim of the gods, well, there you have it, the evolution of Christmas. But Christmas is celebrated under false pretences. It was equally false when the reason was the whim of the god’s bestowed favour and promised another spring, but then those ancient rural farmers didn’t know any better. We know better for both reasons – Mother Nature rules the hours of daylight and the odds are overwhelming that the birth of Jesus didn’t take place when the Christian Church says it did. But please don’t take my word for it, just ask your local religious clergy or priest or whoever to prove that Christmas Day has any Christian religious significance; they can’t, and it doesn’t.

Let’s be brutally honest about Christmas. It has nothing to do with monotheism, Christianity or Jesus, and everything to do with consumerism and the economy. All the month long hype, all the ads, all the displays, all the music, all the Santa’s, all the ho, ho, ho you receive, etc. are designed to get you, as one staffer put it to me, in the proper Christmas mood, which, basically means psychologically getting you to loosening the purse strings and maxing out your credit cards in keeping with all that Christmas spirit, and spirits. Fortunately, more and more people are waking up to this annual manipulation and perhaps are coming around to the point of view that they would just rather have a non-religious “Happy Holiday” without being made to feel guilty that they aren’t having a “Merry Christmas” a concept shoved down your throat by society at large. 

Conclusion: Christmas is as phoney as a $7 bill and therefore the “War on Christmas” is not only just and logical, but way, way, way overdue.

Happy holidays all!