Horror in Newtown and the Realities of Life

Just to echo one point of many in the article, let's leave God out of the equation, because the sooner Americans face up to reality, the more chance they will have of addressing the countless ills that ail that unenviable country.

And a very good place to start is at the beginning. The country was not founded on Christian Judeo principals, it was founded on dispossession and genocide of the native population. Slavery and Robber Barons et al, can wait until another day.

God doesn't bless America, if there were a God, America would be the last country on earth that he would bless.

And another thing, the "let's take America back" (to the good old days!)  brigade. Irrespective of whatever that is supposed to mean, it's not coming back. Nothing is coming back for any of us, Google the 'Arrow of Time' that, unlike your God, is the reality of this world. Update: See videos below.   
 

Horror in Newtown

The editorial board
17 December 2012

The horrific massacre at a school in the small town of Newtown, Connecticut has sickened the entire country. Twenty-eight people lie dead, including twenty children between the ages of six and seven, who were shot multiple times. Six adults were also killed in Friday’s shooting spree before the gunman, Adam Lanza, took his own life. Earlier that morning, he shot and killed his mother.

The inhumanity of the crime is deeply unsettling. Beyond the individual motivations of the killer, the shooting at Newtown lays bare a brutality that pervades American society.

Friday’s mass killing is the latest in a long series of such incidents. The United States has historically seen repeated outbursts of violence. Yet the past two decades have been unusual, even by American standards. The frequency and scale of mass killings point to an underlying cause.

Among the most significant events have been the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 (168 killed, including 19 children); the Columbine, Colorado massacre in 1999 (14 dead); and the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007 (34 dead). This year alone has seen massacres at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado (12 dead and 58 injured); a Sikh Temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin (6 dead); a sign business in Minneapolis, Minnesota (6 dead); a spa in Brookfield, Wisconsin (3 dead); and a mall six days ago in Portland, Oregon (3 dead).

The response of the American media and the political establishment to the latest shooting traces a well-worn path. There are the banal declarations of the incomprehensibility and senselessness of “evil.” To the extent any broader response is offered, it is focused on the need for a “national conversation” on gun control and empty promises to do more to address mental health (made by politicians doing their best to slash health care programs to the bone).

The American ruling class has lost the capacity for self-examination. It knows that any serious analysis of the roots of this and other tragedies points back to itself and the society it dominates.

The speech by President Obama at a memorial service in Newtown Sunday night was typical—a combination of stock phrases, play acting and invocations of religion. It would have been better if he said nothing, as he had nothing intelligent to say.

The ceremony was an exercise in religious obscurantism, in which the parents of the murdered children were told not to grieve or lose heart, for their sons and daughters were in heaven.

“God has called them all home,” Obama declared in concluding his speech. Such statements are not only insensitive to the families of those killed, they are insulting to the intelligence of the American people. One can understand a turn to religion as a source of solace by those who experience such unspeakable tragedy. In the hands of the state, however, it is a means of obfuscation to cover up the social and political roots of such events.

If the politicians insist on invoking religion, they would do better to ask themselves how Lincoln might have responded. In describing the carnage of the revolutionary war he led, the sixteenth president said that if God willed that “every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword,” then “the judgments of the Lord are righteous altogether.”

The tragedies of this world (the Civil War), Lincoln insisted, are products of worldly crimes (slavery).

For what deeds are tragedies such as Newtown the reckoning? Far from being incomprehensible, the crime is all too comprehensible. The roots are not hard to trace: a society of unprecedented inequality, a thoroughly backward official political ideology without an ounce of progressive content, and, above all, an incredible level of violence perpetrated by the state, accompanied by the brutalization of society as a whole.

The character of the mass killings bears witness to this connection. Certain features appear with regularity: the use of military-style weapons, assailants (such as Lanza) dressed in combat fatigues, the frequent involvement of former soldiers.

The past two decades have been years of unending war. Born in 1992, the 20-year old Lanza spent most of his life during the “war on terror”—one neocolonial occupation after another, drone attacks, torture, rendition, a relentless assault on democratic rights. He could not have been unaffected by the constant efforts to promote fear and paranoia—the sense that the “enemy” is just around the corner.

Obama himself is the first US president to openly assert the right to assassinate anyone, anywhere, including US citizens. He devotes a significant portion of his time to selecting the targets of drone killings, with the full knowledge that civilians—including women and children—will be killed as a result. By conservative estimates, 3,365 people have been killed by drone strikes in Pakistan alone, including 176 children.

The government and the media praise the killings perpetrated by the US military, and soldiers sent to invade and occupy nations are venerated as “heroes.” The Navy Seals and Special Ops forces who do the murderous dirty work of the US military are glorified.

Can one seriously believe this country can inflict violence all over the world and not suffer deadly consequences at home?

In the coming days, more information will emerge shedding light on the specific motives behind this latest mass killing. By all accounts, Lanza was a deeply troubled young man. It would be impossible to commit such a crime otherwise. Yet the individual psychosis and its particular expression is, ultimately, the product of a profound social disease. wsws.org

You may think it odd that I have added these two clips to a post of this nature, but I can think of no better way of highlighting the structure of the world and the fallibilities of man.

Until we can recognise true reality, the reality devoid of gods, superstition and self interest; self interest being equally harmful as any belief in the supernatural, we will never solve the problems that face us all as a species.

And one of those first realities is, that no person in any civilised society has the need to posses assault weapons of any description for any reason.

The Arrow of Time - Wonders of the Universe

Events always happen in the same order, they never go backwards. We are compelled to travel into the future, and that's because the arrow of time dictates that as each moment passes things change, and once these changes happen, they are never undone.

How a sandcastle reveals the end of all things - Wonders of the Universe

"The second law of Thermodynamics is able to explain why time only runs in one direction." - Brian Cox

Update: Nothing better could endorse my point, said he with a monumental groan.

'Affront to Almighty God' Right Wing Watch

The Intelligence Squared Debate: "The Catholic Church is a force for good"

I have upped two segments, those featuring Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens, plus the complete 2009 debate.

If you watch nothing else, do watch Stephen Fry, I thought he came across particularly well.

This post debate report from the Telegraph.

Intelligence Squared debate: Catholics humiliated by Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry 

By Andrew M Brown
October 19th, 2009 

I have just witnessed a rout – tonight’s Intelligence Squared debate. It considered the motion “The Catholic Church is a force for good in the world”. Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry, opposing the motion, comprehensively trounced Archbishop Onaiyekan (of Abuja, Nigeria) and Ann Widdecombe, who spoke for it. The archbishop in particular was hopeless. 

The voting gives a good idea of how it went. Before the debate, for the motion: 678. Against: 1102. Don’t know: 346. This is how it changed after the debate. For: 268. Against: 1876. Don’t know: 34. In other words, after hearing the speakers, the number of people in the audience who opposed the motion increased by 774. My friend Simon, who's a season ticket holder, said it was the most decisive swing against a motion that he could remember. 

The problem (from the Catholic point of view) was that the speakers arguing for the Church as a force for good were hopelessly outclassed by two hugely popular, professional performers. The archbishop had obviously decided that it would work best if he stuck to facts and figures and presented the Church as a sort of vast charitable or “social welfare” organisation. He emphasised how many Catholics there were in the world, and that even included “heads of state”, he said, as if that was a clincher. But he said virtually nothing of a religious or spiritual nature as far as I could tell, and non-Catholics would have been none the wiser about what you might call the transcendent aspects of the Church. Then later when challenged he became painfully hesitant. In the end he mumbled and spluttered and retreated into embarrassing excuses and evasions. He repeatedly got Ann Widdecombe’s name wrong. The hostility of both the audience and his opponents seemed to have discomfited him. 

So it was left to Ann Widdecombe to defend the Church single-handedly. She did well, showed a light touch and took Hitchens to task for exaggerations and so on. But in the end Hitchens and Fry were able to persuade decisively by simply listing one after another the wicked things that have been done in the Church’s name over the centuries. More than anything they focused on the “institutionalisation of the rape and torture and maltreatment of children”. That’s what Hitchens called it – that's pretty much what it was – and Fry returned to it. I don't blame them for harping on about these unspeakable crimes, because there is no answer to them. Then they talked about the Church’s teaching on homosexuality. When Zeinab Badawi in the chair asked the archbishop whether Christ himself ever actually said anything about homosexuality, he replied by saying "that's not the point" or words to that effect, and sounded slippery. Blah blah

Stephen Fry dismantles the Roman Catholic Church, from the Intelligence Squared debate.

Christopher Hitchens about the Catholic Church from the Intelligence debate.

Filmed 19 Oct 2009, this is a segment of the intelligence² debate. Title of the debate: "The Catholic Church is a force for good in the world".

Immortality! No Thank You

No matter what life offers you, and I know for millions, if not billions of people, that might mean a quality of life we would not envy, nor wish on them. But for us more fortunates who live in some degree of comfort, who have time enough on our hands to philosophise, not of our existence, but that we have existed.

That we were even born, that we, our conciousness, has had the opportunity to revel in the wonders of this remarkable Cosmos, our own pale blue dot, and our unique place in it, is a gift beyond all other gifts.

That we are the only species that is conscious of our own mortality, is not something we should fear. Nor is it any reason to embrace superstition in the hope of some ridiculous afterlife. Paradise, Heaven, Valhalla or wherever, we already have, it is us in the here and now.

I offer up, two short video clips, both dealing in their own way with the question of immortality. The first, courtesy of, The Thinking Atheist, is a slick well produced ten minute clip. The second, and produced by a favourite of this blog, the remarkable Phil Hellenes, is a production of an entirely different stripe, just one of Phil's little chats as it were, but both clips, in their different ways, ending up at the same place.

That is not to say by the way, that Phil Hellenes doesn't produce some very professional short videos. If Phil is a stranger to you, might I suggest, before paying his YouTube channel a visit, you might avail yourself of my selection of Phil's work under the sidebar tag.






Paradise is like Iceland, where there is a blonde haired, blue eyed virgin tied to every tree.

There Shall Be No Religious Test For Public Office Unles . . .

Unless you harbour freethought, then in that case, you're out!

7 States That Ban Atheists From Holding Public Office

States with laws on the books barring atheists from holding public office: Arkansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas.

Surprised or no? AlterNet

The first two comments at the time of reading.

GrandmaR

Atheists holding office

No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards
and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this
State.

TENNESSEE CONSTITUTION


dcordell

Wow. Not only do you have to agree there is a god, you've got to believe in "rewards and punishments" in some undefined "future." Of course, it doesn't meant you have to believe that the GOOD get rewarded or the EVIL are punished, presumably because that has so rarely happened in Tennessee...

My Fellow Meerkats: Phil Hellenes - Speculum

http://www.youtube.com/user/philhellenes Catch up with Phill's latest, Oh, Really? A compilation of all that's holy.

Christian Death Threats For Atheist Student

How easily could I have made use of a previous header: 'Your religious values are not superior to the laws of the republic.' Only on that occasion it was addressing the extremes of Islam, as opposed to the extremes of American Christianity.

Aren't they lovely, these Christians? And before anybody starts with the, ''but that's not Christianity'' well it fucking well is. Just the same as, ''but that's not Islam.'' And that fucking well is too.

Why Is an Atheist High School Student Getting Vicious Death Threats?

Her state representative has called the student "evil" and she has been threatened with violence, rape and death. What gives?
By Greta Christina
January 18, 2012


If you take away just two things from the story about atheist high school student Jessica Ahlquist, and the court case she won last week to have a prayer banner taken out of her public school, let it be these:

The ruling in this case was entirely unsurprising. It is 100 percent in line with unambiguous legal precedent, established and re-established over many decades, exemplifying a basic principle of constitutional law.
As a result of this lawsuit, Jessica Ahlquist is now being bullied, ostracized and threatened with violence in her community. She has been called "evil" in public by her state representative, and is being targeted with multiple threats of violence, rape and death.

Which leads one to wonder: What the hell is going on here?




Let's get #1 out of the way first. This court decision -- that as a public school in the United States, Cranston High School West cannot promote religion, either any particular religion or the idea of religion in general -- is, in any legal sense, entirely non-controversial. In ruling after ruling, for decades now, this principle has been made eminently clear. There have, of course, been some genuinely controversial court cases recently about separation of church and state, which examined previously untested questions and established new legal precedent.

But Jessica Ahlquist's was not one of them. Not even in the slightest. This was a no-brainer. If the school district's lawyers didn't uncategorically advise the district that they didn't stand a snowball's chance in hell, and fervently plead with them to concede the case before trial, they should be disbarred. (A PDF of the full court ruling, including extensive citation of clear precedent, can be found on the Friendly Atheist blog.)

For anyone who doesn't understand this ruling or agree with it, let me take a moment to explain. First of all: No, the majority does not always rule. In a constitutional democracy, people with minority, dissenting, or unpopular opinions and identities have some basic rights, which the majority cannot take away. If the majority thought that everyone had to dye their hair brown, or that all witches should be burned at the stake, the majority would not rule. Redheads have the right not to dye their hair brown; witches have the right not to be burned at the stake. No matter how much in the minority they are.

And the right to not have your government impose a religious belief on you is one of these basic rights. The right to make your own private decisions about religion or the lack thereof, without your government enforcing or promoting a particular view on religion that may or may not be your own, is one of the most central rights that this country was founded on. In fact, it's the very first right established in the Bill of Rights: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." As U.S. District Court Judge Ronald R. Lagueux said in his ruling, "When focused on the Prayer Mural, the activities and agenda of the Cranston School Committee became excessively entangled with religion, exposing the Committee to a situation where a loud and passionate majority encouraged it to vote to override the constitutional rights of a minority."




Oh, and no, this case was not about "history" or "tradition." Many people opposed to this ruling are making a very disingenuous argument: saying that the prayer in question wasn't really a prayer, that the religious content wasn't really religious but was simply "history" and "tradition," and that it therefore shouldn't be a problem. Bull. When a public school has a banner in its auditorium beginning "Our Heavenly Father" and ending "Amen"... that's a prayer. The religious fervor with which the banner was defended attests to that. As Judge Lagueux pointed out in his ruling, "No amount of debate can make the School Prayer anything other than a prayer, and a Christian one at that." Furthermore: Go to page two.

Your God is My God: Sam Harris

Brilliant stuff.

Your God is My God

What Mitt Romney Could Say to Win the Republican Nomination
January 15, 2012

Governor Mitt Romney has yet to persuade the religious conservatives in his party that he is fit to be President of the United States. However, he could probably appease the Republican base and secure his party’s nomination if he made the following remarks prior to the South Carolina Primary:

My fellow Republicans,

I would like to address your lingering concerns about my candidacy. Some of you have expressed doubts about my commitment to a variety of social causes—and some have even questioned my religious faith. Tonight, I will speak from the heart, about the values that unite us.

First, on the subject of gay rights, let me make my position perfectly clear: I am as sickened by homosexuality as any man or woman in this country. It is true that I wrote a letter in 1994 where I said that “we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern,” and for this I have been mocked and pilloried, especially by Evangelicals. But ask yourselves, what did I mean by “equality”? I meant that all men and women must be given an equal chance to live a righteous life.

Yes, I once reached out to the Log Cabin Republicans—the gays in our party. Many people don’t know that there are gay Republicans, but it is true. Anyway, in a letter to this strange group, I pledged to do more for gay rights than Senator Edward Kennedy ever would.

Well, Senator Kennedy is now deceased—so I don’t have to do much to best him and keep my promise. But, more to the point, ask yourselves, what did I mean by “rights”? I meant that every man and woman has a right to discover the love of Jesus Christ and win life eternal. What else could I have meant? Seriously. What could be more important than eternal life? Jesus thought we all had a right to it. And I agree with him. And I think we should amend our Constitution to safeguard this right for everyone by protecting the sanctity of marriage.

I don’t have to tell you what is at stake. If gays are allowed to marry, it will debase the institution for the rest of us and perhaps loosen its bonds. Liberals scoff at this. They wonder how my feelings for my wife Ann could be diminished by the knowledge that a gay couple somewhere just got married. What an odd question.

On abortion—some say I have changed my views. It is true that I once described myself as “pro-choice.” But again, ask yourselves, what did I mean? I meant that every woman should be free to make the right choice. What is the right choice? To have as many children as God bestows. I once visited the great nation of Nigeria and a met woman who was blessed to have had 24 children—fully two-thirds of which survived beyond the age of five. The power of God is beyond our understanding. And this woman’s faith was a sight to behold.

Finally, I would like to address the scandalous assertion, once leveled by the Texas Pastor, Robert Jeffress, that my church—the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—is “a cult.” In fairness, he almost got that right—the LDS Church is a culture. A culture of faith and goodness and reverence for God Almighty. Scientology is a cult—this so-called religion was just made up out of whole cloth by the science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard. But the teachings of my Church derive directly from the prophetic experience of its founder, Joseph Smith Jr., who by the aid of sacred seer stones, the Urim and Thummim, was able to decipher the final revelations of God which were written in reformed Egyptian upon a set golden plates revealed to him by the angel Moroni. Many of you are probably unfamiliar with this history—and some of you may even doubt its truth.

I am now speaking to the base of our party, to the 60 percent who believe that God created this fine universe, and humanity in its present form, at some point in the last 10,000 years. Let me make one thing absolutely clear to you: I believe what you believe. Your God is my God. I believe that Jesus Christ was the Messiah and the Son of God, crucified for our sins, and resurrected for our salvation. And I believe that He will return to earth to judge the living and the dead.

But my Church offers a further revelation: We believe that when Jesus Christ returns to earth, He will return, not to Jerusalem, or to Baghdad, but to this great nation—and His first stop will be Jackson County, Missouri. The LDS Church teaches that the Garden of Eden itself was in Missouri! Friends, it is a marvelous vision. Some Christians profess not to like this teaching. But I ask you, where would you rather the Garden of Eden be, in the great state of Missouri or in some hellhole in the Middle East?

In conclusion, I want to assure you all, lest there be any doubt, that I share your vision for this country and for the future of our world. Some say that we should focus on things like energy security, wealth inequality, epidemic disease, global climate change, nuclear proliferation, genocide, and other complex problems for which scientific knowledge, rational discussion, and secular politics are the best remedy. But you and I know that the problem we face is deeper and simpler and far more challenging. Since time immemorial humanity has been misled by Satan, the Father of Lies.

I trust we understand one another better now. And I hope you know how honored I will be to represent our party in the coming Presidential election.

God bless this great land, the United States of America. Sam Harris

Christopher Hitchens in FiveMinutes

Courtesy of The Thinking Atheist

Christopher Eric Hitchens was an English author and journalist whose books, essays, and journalistic career spanned more than four decades. He was a columnist and literary critic at The Atlantic, Vanity Fair, Slate, World Affairs, The Nation, Free Inquiry, and became a media fellow at the Hoover Institution in September 2008. He was a staple of talk shows and lecture circuits and in 2005 was voted the world's fifth top public intellectual in a Prospect/Foreign Policy poll. He was a champion for atheism, skepticism, science, history and common sense. He will be sorely missed.

Atheist Billboards Ohio

Even though I is one, I do find atheists quite boring at times. They are always taking about God for Christ's sake!

And those that write about it, should learn how to write. Two Shocking Attacks on Atheism

2 Shocking Attacks on Atheism -- And How Atheists Fought Back

In the last few years atheists have become seriously organized, mobilized, visible, vocal and unapologetic about their atheism.
December 1, 2011


If there are just two things you take away from this story, they should be:

Anti-atheist bigotry and discrimination, of a completely overt, very ugly kind, is real.
Atheists are no longer putting up with it. If you fuck with them, they will fuck with you right back. And they know how to do it.

Two recent events in the news illustrate this bigotry vividly. In the first, a billboard company in Ohio rejected an atheist billboard campaign -- at the last minute, the week before the billboards were scheduled to go up, after weeks of extensive discussion and planning with no hint of trouble -- because the atheist content was deemed "obscene, unnecessarily offensive and/or not in the best interests of the community at large."

In the second story, a local merchant near an atheist conference put a sign on his shop door, explicitly saying that conference attendees were not welcome in his Christian business. And he got a faceful of Internet fury for his trouble. blah blah

Phil Hellenes

A clever man, technically, intellectually and philosophically, Phil Hellenes.








More Phil Hellenes on this blog here.

Science Saved My Soul and A Personal Journey

I would have expected to have heard of it, particularly given the size and cost of production, (see below) but the mini-series, Napoleon with its cast of thousands, was totally new to me.

Napoleon is a historical miniseries which explored the life of Napoleon Bonaparte. In 2002, it was the most expensive television miniseries in Europe, costing the equivalent of $US46,330,000 to produce. The miniseries covered Napoleon's military successes and failures, including the Battles of Eylau, Austerlitz, Waterloo and the retreat from Russia.

It also delved into Napoleon's personal life: his marriage to and divorce from Josephine de Beauharnais, his marriage to Marie Louise, the Duchess of Parma and daughter of Francis II, and his affairs with Eleanore Denuelle and Marie Walewska. The series draws from Bonaparte historian Max Gallo's bestseller.

The miniseries was produced by GMT Productions in France and co-produced by Transfilm in Canada and Spice Factory in the UK. In the United States, it aired on the Arts and Entertainment (A&E) channel. Wiki

So having spent a few evenings watching the thing this week past, I breezed through some of the other uploads courtesy of fellow atheist, (the Unicorn part always being a good indicator) Lady Amalthea Unicorn.

Not being the type of bloke that instinctively follows the herd, but when a fellow sees a clip on the subject of science that boasts over a million hits, a chap has no option other than to click play and see what all the fuss is about.

And what a good move it was. Not just for its content alone, or for the argument that the clip made, but rather, because I could relate to the thing in such a personal manner.

So personal in fact, that the narrator describes to a tee, one of the definitive experiences of my life. But even had the clip not been relative to my own experience, it is still the best presentation on the magnificence of the universe (and argument for no God) that I have ever had the pleasure of watching. So please watch this excellent clip and I shall then elaborate.





With that fresh in your mind, might I ask you now to read and understand this below in a context to the Milky Way and our place as individuals in the universe. This is not something that I have just cobbled together, it is in fact something previously written, such was the magnitude of the impact of the night in question.

Light pollution, sure their wasn't a hint of it, somewhere near midway 'twixt France and Ireland.
There was just the one colour, black. A perfect black canvas that played its part in the creation of the few lines at the end this piece of prose; originally being writ as a stand alone few lines.

Some two or three years after the creation of those few lines, I joined for a brief spell, a little circle of writers who would meet every two weeks and read out whatever we had written on a subject chosen at the prior meeting, in this case "A starry night"
So then I composed the long intro of events leading up to the birth of those few lines. And here I cannot stress enough just how magnificent a sight it was.
I hope you can get a feel for the moment.
I employ a hybrid of Northern English vernacular with a biteen of Irish thrown in to add a little flavour, I hope you enjoy.


TOWING A YOKE

I got the job where most all jobs is got; in the pub.
Would I ship aboard a trawler going to France, and tow a boat back.
Giving it a bitteen of thought, and not wanting the sole company of two other men, I says “If Herself can come, you’re on”
“It’s a bit rough on board” says the skipper.
“Sure she’ll be grand, not a problem”
So off we sets; it were fair lumpy day; thought to me self,
I’m glad Herself’s with me, at least we can keep the bunk warm.
There’s nothing much to do on those kind of jobs, it’s all steaming.
Skipper weren’t up to much, he were a Kiwi, I think he’d
been to one of them antipodean charm schools, but that’s another story.
Next day, it were glorious, so we thought we’d soak up some rays.
We dragged the mattresses up onto the foredeck, just in front of the wheelhouse, it were the only place you could sunbathe.
True to form, Herself, not bein’ one for false modesty or bikini tops,
gets ragged off, and its tits out for the lads.
Now you can call me biased, but she’s a fair bonny lass, and I’m
sure lads in wheelhouse agreed wi’ me.
It must have made watch keeping a bit more interesting.
In fact if it weren’t for autopilot, I don’t think boat would have ever got where it were s’posed to.
But got there we did, and made ready the tow for next day.
Well Herself had brought her glad rags, so we hit the town
and got her lit. Herself with her long tanned legs n all glittery, she looked a million dollars, and I felt like one.
What’s all this got to wi’ stars? Well as the Manx say, “Traa-dy-Liooar” it’s a bit like manyana, only no where near as urgent, “Time enough”
So off we sets back with this yoke in tow. Now for them of you that
don’t know what a yoke is, well it’s a grand Irish word, and if you does
a bit of writing , then it’s a right handy one to have.
A yoke is anything, a big yoke, a small yoke, a grand yoke altogether, you gets the idea.
One crystal clear night, there’s Herself and Himself, that’s me, sat on a couple of fish boxes on the blunt end off this old yoke we were sailing on.
And there it were, in all it’s glory, the Milky Way. It just blew us away, I just haven’t got the words in me to describe it.
It were like we were little atoms, no them little things inside ‘em, them neutrons or protons or whatever they're called.
We were speechless, it were a wonder we’ll never forget.
It were some time later, I couldn’t get this sight out of me head, and then didn’t a few little lines appear, just like magic, and them lines were these.


Delight the night
For hidden by day
Delight the night
We sailed the Milky Way
Our chariot of rust and rattles
Our space ship on the sea.

Nuff said?

As a perfect foil to the above, the video below, original title, How Big Is God? tries to use a similar argument for the existence of a god and creator. Due to the original being unembeddable and certain copyright issues, I captured the thing and re-uploaded it giving it the title, Not a Good Argument.

Which of course, for anyone with two neurons bolted together, is just that. Begging the question, why would the god of a 12,000 mile diameter planet, create a 136 billion light year universe? Originally posted under title: Thought For Today: God and His Creations




A couple more clips from the site of our Lady Unicorn, the first highlighting some of the less attractive traits of this benign creator that loves us all so.



And what post on religion could possibly be complete without a rant from the ubiquitous Pat Condell?



I would at this moment of writing, like to give proper attribution to the producer of the clip, and at this moment I am waiting for conformation that he and the uploader are one and the same. So of that, hopefully more later.

Another program that I had occasion to watch this week, one featured featured as it happens, on the Youtube channel of 'philhellenes' although my path to, Is There Anybody There? was via Richard Dawkins .net. Here again I have a personal interest in the program, Ballinspittle (home of the moving virgin) not being unknown to me, and not least me telling my best friend in Ireland not to talk out of his arse when describing the goings on regarding the all moving all dancing concrete statue of the Virgin Mary at said location. About eighty minutes, so it wouldn't be everybody's cup of Darjeeling.

"Is There Anybody There?"

Nicholas Humphrey's devastating study of religious miracles and other paranormal phenomena. Featuring the apparition at Knock, the Enfield poltergeist, the Woodbridge UFO, the moving virgin of Ballinspittle, and much more. A one and a half hour "special" for Channel Four, 1987.

I have just had it confirmed that 'philhellenes' is in fact both producer and uploader of the clip. To him, admiration and sincerest thanks. And the moment I have put this post to bed, I shall take a good stroll around his page. You might wish to do so yourself at: http://www.youtube.com/user/philhellenes

Swedish Churches 'Obsolete' Blow 'Em Up Say Half of Country

Yanky free thinkers, eat your heart out.

Swedish churches open SPA salons and Chinese medicine centers
Anatoly Miranovsky
28.10.2011

Sweden will get rid of its churches. There are not enough funds to maintain numerous church buildings as the country, according to opinion polls, has over 80 percent of the people who classified themselves as atheists. The methods for enticing people into churches would not be approved by the founders of the Protestant denominations. Places of worship now have SPA-salons and centers of Chinese medicine.


Professor of Ethics Swedish, pastor Hans Hammar Berryer, sent an open letter to the nation, in which he proposed to blow up churches or find a different application for them: turn them into cafes, pizzerias, houses, or industrial facilities.
In Sweden there are 3,384 church buildings. At best, five hundred of them are used for religious services once a month. Sweden is the least religious country in Europe.




The funding of confessions in many European countries is now obtained through the so-called church tax or its components. The payments are voluntary. This form of financing of religious infrastructure is used in Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Finland, Iceland, Spain and Italy.


The tax is paid in favor of a religious community. Refusal to pay means leaving the church, which takes away from a former community member a place at a church cemetery and some other temple services. Incidentally, it is not always possible to get a church tax on hand in the form of money. In some places this part of income on tax payer's request can be redirected to other purposes - charity or scientific development.

After the separation of church from the state in 2000, the right not to pay the clerics was granted to the Swedish Lutherans. Apparently, expecting a mass fleeing of the nourished herds from their pastors, the Swedish government decided to allocate 50 million euros annually for the maintenance of temple buildings through the support of the objects of cultural and historical significance.


"I have studied statistics, and it terrified me," Hans Hammar Berryer was quoted by Novye Izvestia. "Since 2000, over half a million people fled from the church (the population of Sweden is 10 million).The situation is even worse with the younger generation. The Rite of Confirmation in the 1970s was held annually by 80,000 children. Today the number has decreased to 35 thousand. There are increasingly fewer parishioners, respectively, our revenues are falling. We just do not have enough to maintain 3,384 churches existing in the country. There are only three ways out: blow the churches up, fill them with people or turn them into pizzerias and production departments. "




The Bolshevik idea to blow up churches does not scare many Swedes. According to the online survey of the Swedish newspaper "Svenska Dagbladet", 46 percent of Swedes are in favor of the demolition of churches, 54 per cent are against it. Over 80 percent of Swedes consider themselves non-believers, that is, they are not paying to those carrying "the word of God."
Abandoned Protestant churches are being looted. Thieves do not only steal what is stored inside, but even take the copper from church roofs. This year 42 such instances have been recorded.

The liberal wing of the Lutheran Church parishioners is luring people with a complex of secular services. Now, the priests offer not taming, but rather gratification of the flesh. The churches offer massages, water treatment and purifying beverages.
Employees of the cult attract therapists and other specialists to their business projects. In particular, clients lying on a sofa under a warm blanket in modern Swedish Lutheran church can complain about their lives not only to the pastor but also a psychotherapist.
Another trend is Asian bodily practices and sale of proprietary Chinese qi energy by qualified instructors. More conservative parishes offer local developments in the form of various diets and exercise.

Thus, Protestantism that arose out of the Reformation of the Catholic Church is becoming the object of another Reformation. In 1517, Martin Luther posted his 95 theses against the orders of the Catholic Church on a church door at Wittenberg which, according to official history, marked the beginning of the Reformation.

In 2007, a Protestant Congress was held in Wittenberg that declared the policy of modernization that has already passed the "point of no return." The representatives of Germany stated that the number of believers in the Protestant churches in 2030 could fall from the current 25.6 million to 17 million people. At the same time the annual income of the religious communities will be reduced from EUR 4 billion to 2 billion.

However, these numbers only take into account the income from church tax paid by parishioners. As for the total profits of the evangelical churches of Germany (unification EKD), it is approximately 10 billion euros per year.
It is worth noting that the desire to bring the church to "universal values" often has the opposite effect. Thus, recognition of "normality" of sodomy by the Anglican Church and the introduction of female bishops has led to a massive exodus of parishioners and priests who do not want to deal with those degraded. Earlier this year, members of 20 former Anglican parishes and three former Anglican bishops have left for the Catholic Church.
 Pravda Ru

It's 2011 -- Why Is God Still Involved In American Politics? Speaking For God

I should have had this post out earlier in the week, but I have been in recovery. Not from too much grog, or even bad drugs, no something far more brain damaging than either of those. Mormonism! I've been reading about Mormonism, the tenets of Mormonism to be exact.

No linky for you just yet, because there is, once I've made myself a tin-foil hat, hopefully a post in the making. And if I can do justice to the thing, it should be of such incredulity, that you yourselves might have to retire to the bed chamber, quite possibly, with more than just a touch of the vapours. Of that though, another day.

Just a couple of paragraphs to get the feel, and then on to the article proper.

Things that used to be considered beyond the pale in politics, such as religious intolerance or ministers blatantly claiming they know who God supports in an election, have become normalized to the point where someone like Mitt Romney, who is odious in most respects but has never really made much of a fuss over his faith, is seeing religious tests becoming a major issue in his campaign.

Yes, just like the revival tent, going beyond the pale is just but a memory. But not so for those that speak for God; modern day Elmer Gantries! we got 'em coming out the woodwork. Ain't we Glenn? ain't we Pat?

Glenn Beck, Unhinged in Texas A read in its own right.

But it's this bit that's the cracker. Believe in the most outlandish batshit crazy stuff that you could possibly dream up and you are qualified to run for office. Believe in reality, and you haven't a snowball in hell's chance of being elected. Or if by some miracle (In the name of Noodles, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful) that you do manage to slip through the net, then beware, for "The Christians immediately drove him out into the wilderness. And he was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered to him." (Not)

I think ministering angels are a bit thin on the ground in North Carolina, not unlike Christians I shouldn't wonder.

Atheists already face discrimination when it comes to running for public office. A number of states ban atheists from holding public office, even though the U.S. Constitution explicitly forbids religious tests for office. Of course, it’s difficult for an atheist to win enough votes to get office, so this conflict hasn’t been tested much, although one atheist city council member found himself under fire by religious bigots who wanted to use North Carolina’s ban on atheists holding office to push him out for not swearing his oath of office on the Bible.

I have embedded the short Rachel Maddow clip leading from the A number of states ban link. Perhaps it might be as well watching it first; whatever?

It's 2011 -- Why Is the Christian God Still Involved In American Politics?

The Mormon-bashing directed at Mitt Romney should concern everyone for what it reveals about the undue influence of religion in American elections.
By Amanda Marcotte
October 12, 2011

As an atheist and a liberal, it’s been tempting for me to simply laugh at Republicans fighting each other over the issue of whether or not Mitt Romney, a Mormon, gets to consider himself a Christian. From the non-believer point of view, it’s like watching a bunch of grown adults work themselves into a frenzy over the differences between leprechauns and fairies. But watching the debate unfold, I’ve become concerned about what it means to make someone’s religious beliefs such a big campaign issue, because it’s indicative of a larger eroding of the separation of church and state, which concerns not just atheists but all people who understand the importance of maintaining a secular government.

Robert Jeffress, an influential pastor who is the senior pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, went on "Focal Point" with Bryan Fischer and declared that one shouldn’t support Mitt Romney for president because Romney, a Mormon, isn’t a real Christian. This created a media dustup that was silly even by the usual standards of ever-sillier mainstream media campaign coverage. John King of CNN interviewed Jeffress, focusing strictly on the question of who Jeffress believes deserves to be called a Christian, and how firmly he believes that only people he calls Christians should hold public office. Candy Crowley of CNN dogged both Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann on the question of whether or not they believe Romney is a Christian, and then she got irate with the candidates when they refused to answer the question, claiming that it’s irrelevant.

These interviews are remarkable for what the CNN anchors didn’t discuss, which was the most important question of all: the separation of church and state. Even though our nation has a tradition of pastors staying out of partisan politics -- in fact, it is illegal for ministers to endorse candidates from the pulpit -- it seemingly never occurred to King to challenge Jeffress for overstepping his bounds by telling people that God wants an evangelical Christian who is a Republican for president. By making the story about whether or not Mormons are Christians, CNN left the viewer with the impression that only Christians deserve to hold public office, and that the only thing left to debate is whether or not someone “counts” as a Christian, making him or her eligible for office.

We’re a long way from the days when John Kennedy assured the public that he respected the separation of church and state and would keep his faith separate from his policy-making decisions. Now, even mainstream reporters take it as a given that politicians will let religion govern their actions, and the only thing left to debate on theology is how many angels any single politician believes dance on the head of a pin. Things that used to be considered beyond the pale in politics, such as religious intolerance or ministers blatantly claiming they know who God supports in an election, have become normalized to the point where someone like Mitt Romney, who is odious in most respects but has never really made much of a fuss over his faith, is seeing religious tests becoming a major issue in his campaign.

The ramifications for this shift affect more than conservative Mormons trying to win as Republicans. By not challenging the assertion that only Christians should hold office, mainstream journalists encourage bigotry against all religious minorities, including atheists. Atheists already face discrimination when it comes to running for public office. A number of states ban atheists from holding public office, even though the U.S. Constitution explicitly forbids religious tests for office. Of course, it’s difficult for an atheist to win enough votes to get office, so this conflict hasn’t been tested much, although one atheist city council member found himself under fire by religious bigots who wanted to use North Carolina’s ban on atheists holding office to push him out for not swearing his oath of office on the Bible.

There’s a reason the Founding Fathers wrote a national constitution that forbade religious tests for office and required the separation of church and state. It’s not just protection against the escalating religious bigotry we're seeing lately, but also because religion should have no place in politics in the first place. Neither atheists nor believers benefit when leaders are guided more by religious dogma than by rationality. Angels and demons might be a fine thing to worry about when you’re in church on Sunday, but when you’re trying to govern real people in the real world, it’s far better to rely on evidence and empirical facts, interpreted through reason and not through the guesswork of faith. This is why Kennedy defended himself against questions about his faith by saying, “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote.”

People like Robert Jeffress, when they propose religious tests for office--even ones held privately by voters--should face more challenges than reporters simply asking if they consider Mormons “real” Christians. They should be confronted with Kennedy’s words and asked directly why they disagree with our former president about the separation of church and state. They should be asked why they believe only a certain breed of Christians should hold office, and asked why they think it’s appropriate to demand that politicians put religious dogma before evidence-based and rational approaches to policy. Anything less than that is aiding the religious right in its mission to remake our secular democracy into a theocracy. It shouldn’t be tolerated. AlterNet

Jesoids Ban Richard Dawkins Event in Michigan Country Club

There is a link to the O'Reilly video in question at the bottom of the page. Personally I couldn't get past the one minute mark. The overwhelming desire to kick someone in the bollocks, having the tendency to interfere with one's viewing pleasure ever so slightly.

Billo is such an ignorant loud mouthed gobshite, or as some disillusion soul described him a while back: 'A great American.' And I'm not making that up, as hard as it might be to get your head around.

Bill O'Reilly, corporate shill and a great American.

Previous: Billo You're So Predictable

Richard Dawkins Event Banned by Michigan Country Club
October 10, 2011

The Wyndgate Country Club in Rochester Hills, MI, cancels Center for Inquiry–Michigan event with biologist Richard Dawkins because of his atheist philosophy.

Prejudice against atheists (video here & here) manifested itself again when The Wyndgate Country Club in Rochester Hills, Michigan (outside of Detroit), cancelled an event with scientist and author Richard Dawkins after learning of Dawkins’s views on religion. The event had been arranged by the Center for Inquiry–Michigan (CFI), an advocacy group for secularism and science, and the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science.

Richard DawkinsThe Wyndgate terminated the agreement after the owner saw an October 5th interview with Dawkins on The O’Reilly Factor in which Dawkins discussed his new book, The Magic of Reality: How We Know What’s Really True.




In a phone call to CFI–Michigan Assistant Director Jennifer Beahan, The Wyndgate’s representative explained that the owner did not wish to associate with individuals such as Dawkins, or his philosophies.

Although privately owned, The Wyndgate facilities are open to the public for special events and occasions. According to Title II of the Federal Civil Rights Law of 1964, “open to the public” means “all persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.”

After learning of the owner’s last-minute refusal to allow Dawkins to speak, CFI–Michigan asked the owner to reconsider his position, but this attempt to resolve the issue amicably was met with silence. The event, scheduled for Wednesday, October 12, will now be held at a different venue.

“It’s important to understand that discrimination based on a person’s religion—or lack thereof—is legally equivalent to discriminating against a person because of his or her race,” said Jeff Seaver, executive director of CFI–Michigan. “This action by The Wyndgate illustrates the kind of bias and bigotry that nonbelievers encounter all the time. It’s exactly why organizations like CFI and the Richard Dawkins Foundation are needed: to help end the stigma attached to being a nonbeliever.” CFI-Michigan: via RDF - Video link

Teddies 4 Blasphemy Day

He's a bit late getting his freak on is Teddy, but I suppose there are a few more hours of the day left in Jesus Land. Drive on Teddy!

''I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens''

Yeah...he's a nobody, but Florida "pastor" Michael Stahl has provided a great excuse to remind others just how many atheists and free-thinkers affect our lives and cultures every day. Stahl has suggested that known atheists be categorized on a list he called "The Christian National Registry of Atheists." Imagine what kind of names, past and present, such a list would provide. RDF

Robert I. Sherman, a reporter for the American Atheist news journal

Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are atheists?

Bush: I guess I'm pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in God is important to me.

Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?

Bush: No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God. positiveatheism.org

Bachmann's Direct Line To God

Bachmann makes me proud to be atheist


Michele Bachmann has once again made me proud to be an atheist. Her controversial comment on hurricane Irene last weekend that she now claims was just a joke (she’s got such a great sense of humor, that woman!) made me happy that at age 16 I rejected the Catholicism that was forced on me at baptism and turned to the light and reason of atheism.

Bachmann, a right-wing Christian who believes her guy in the sky does horrible things to punish people he doesn’t like, said of the storm that battered the east coast from North Carolina to New England: “I don’t know how much god has to do to get the attention of politicians. We’ve had an earthquake, we’ve had a hurricane.”

She added: “He said, ‘Are you going to start listening to me here?’ Listen to the American people because the American people are roaring right now. They know the government is on a morbid obesity diet and we’ve got to rein in the spending.”

Huh? more

Atheist Camp and The Great Unicorn Hunt

.
Other than offering a signed tenner I don't know to what degree (if at all) the good professor is actively involved in this project.

The aims of the camp sound so Richard Dawkins, but that in itself proves nothing, perhaps the organisers just took a page out of Dawkins book, and I might add, where better a place to take one from.

Aims
"Campers are taught that ethical behaviour is not dependent on religious belief and doctrines, that religious belief and doctrines are sometimes a hindrance to ethical and moral behaviour, and that irreligious persons are also good and fully capable of living a happy and meaningful life."

An atheist summer camp in Somerset is offering children aged seven to 17 a "godless alternative" to religious camps traditionally run by the scouts and church groups.

Some of the 24 children arriving at Camp Quest in Bruton seemed a little young to be tackling the weighty concepts ahead of them....snip

The summer camp, designed with the children of atheist parents in mind, has a slightly daunting mission statement.

It is "dedicated to improving the human condition through rational inquiry, critical and creative thinking, scientific method… and the separation of religion and government"....snip

(Of Unicorns)

The only proof of their existence is contained in an ancient book handed down over "countless generations".

A prize - a £10 note signed by Professor Richard Dawkins - is offered to any child who can disprove the existence of the unicorns.

Outside the camp gates, a single lonely demonstrator criticised both Professor Dawkins and the camp he supports.more

Video 2m.40s

You Would Drive The Goddamned Bus If You Worked For Me

.
Or you'd be down the fucking road, another wanker looking for a free pass because he tags believing in the unbelievable "faith" therefore he thinks in the workplace he can pick and choose what he finds "acceptable."

And we have seen before where citing faith in the workplace leads to:

In some of these cases, pharmacists have gone to such extreme lengths as refusing to fill prescriptions for rape victims; refusing to transfer the prescription to another pharmacy or even to return it to the woman so she could take it elsewhere; and giving women religious lectures and chastising them for being "irresponsible."more

Back to the story at hand.

Man Refuses to Drive "No God" Bus

A Christian bus driver has refused to drive a bus with an atheist slogan proclaiming "There's probably no God".

Ron Heather, from Southampton, Hampshire, responded with "shock" and "horror" at the message and walked out of his shift on Saturday in protest.
First Bus said it would do everything in its power to ensure Mr Heather does not have to drive the buses.
Buses across Britain started displaying atheist messages in an advertising campaign launched earlier this month.
Mr Heather told BBC Radio Solent: "I was just about to board and there it was staring me in the face, my first reaction was shock horror.
"I felt that I could not drive that bus, I told my managers and they said they haven't got another one and I thought I better go home, so I did. more

And what was it the good professor Dawkins said on my previous bus story?
"They have no decent arguments, they have to take offence, it's the only weapon they've got."


.

Is Richard Dawkins Bus Campaign Getting Out Of Hand?

.
He's such a dear isn't he, always polite, never aloof and always the diplomat, a thoroughly likable bloke all in all, I would think even the Jezoids would have trouble taking exception.

Some of you will be aware of the bus ads that Richard Dawkins endorses and for those that are not the bottom line is, life is for living, so fuck the miserable theocrats and their miserable fucking ways, get partying, though I do have to admit he does tend to put it rather more eloquently than I.

Here then is a report from the Guardian and an accompanying two minute film featuring the creator of the campaign Ariane Sherine and not least the good professor being his usual pleasant self although he does manage a little barbed one liner at the end.

Have a take on Polly Toynbee the Guardian columnist, I couldn't help but wonder how long she would have been in employment were she reporting for some Yankee news organisation.

Atheist bus campaign spreads the word of no God nationwide

Anyone who has spent a chilly half-hour waiting for a double-decker may already have doubted the existence of a deity. But for those who need further proof, a nationwide advertising campaign aimed at persuading more people to "come out" as atheists was launched today with the backing of some of Britain's most famous non-believers.

The principal slogan – "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life" – can already be seen on four London bus routes, and now 200 bendy buses in London and 600 across the country are to carry the advert after a fundraising drive raised more than £140,000, exceeding the original target of £5,500. more

Oh least I forget, the header, brought about when I happened on this yoke the other day.




.