Churches in general and the Catholic Church in particular, are nothing more than organized tribal cults. They give to their respective tribes, as would any primal tribe; however, these modern-day mendicants mooch off of their secular brethren through tax-exemptions and other Christian privileges purposefully to give back to their primal tribes. They give not out of a sense of compassion to their fellow human beings, but out of a sense of community to their fellow limited and literal-minded tribe members.
One of the peculiar properties of truth is that it has a bit of a sting. It strikes me as queer that when one speaks harsh truth to ignorance, especially willful ignorance, predictably they are reprimanded with comment concerning the tone, rather than the substance, of their argument.
It is socially acceptable for flat-earther’s to publicly express their willful ignorance. Most are quite proud of their willful ignorance, and publicly display it as a badge of honor. Paradoxically, it is not socially acceptable to publicly point out their willful ignorance. For my part, I cannot, and will not give willful ignorance a free pass.
What makes classic literature the greatest of literary masterpiece is its ability to transcend time, and place of composition. What makes one able to appreciate it is one’s ability to transcend one’s contemporary time, and place of comprehension.
1. It implies that I deign the same irrational superstitious belief.
2. The audacity of it being so freely used reminds one of how it has been allowed to become a meme of the Christian White Privilege that so permeates our culture.
3. The passivity of those that recognize such, but somehow feel it is not worthy of a stance for their convictions.
I always respond with:
Don’t assume I share your delusions.
Have a Reasoned Day,
The rhetorical question is, why, to some, would my response come-off as sounding bombastic, yet somehow it is considered taboo to criticize the sender’s complimentary closing? The answer may be found in number two above.
Other people are simply the benchmarks by which we judge ourselves. The humble seek the companionship of others they adjudicate as superior, while the haughty search for those deemed to be inferior. The former look up to others for enlightenment, while the latter look down on others for power.
One has no choice but to ridicule religious belief.
The character House in the television medical drama of the same name once said, “If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people.” That is profoundly insightful. Any attempt to address religious belief with reason and logic to a believer will leave one with the same frustrations Sisyphus must feel.
In sum, address the rational with reason, and the irrational with ridicule.
For Troy Anthony Davis, tonight is the night that the lights went out in Georgia. No doubt, “Tea Baggers” across the nation are cheering for yet another execution of which they so shamelessly demonstrated broad support for during a recent Republican clown show under the guise of a primary presidential candidate debate. Ironically, these same knuckle-draggers lost one of their own earlier today as a white supremacist met his Maker at the hands of the State of Texas. The mental midget, and Texas Governor Rick Perry must be so proud as he added yet another notch to his lipstick case of the growing record number of executions under his reign. No doubt, he will sleep almost as well as Troy Davis this evening.
The recantation of seven of the nine eyewitnesses that testified under oath in the trial against Troy Davis was apparently insufficient to sway the Supreme Court of the United States to stay the execution of a black man in Georgia. The State of Georgia killed Troy Davis by lethal injection at 11:08 p.m. Eastern Time, two days shy of the 2011 CE autumnal equinox. With the exception of the United States, the civilized world has long since banned the death penalty.
One may simply add this execution to the litany of unconscionable wrongs committed by this country, both foreign and domestically. If, in contemporary times, one is proud to be an American, then they are either uninformed, ill-informed, or misinformed, and obviously spend little to no time in serious reflection. But then again, the patriotic knuckle-draggers of today are mostly of the reactionary persuasion to begin with.
As for me, I cannot expatriate to Europe fast enough. Autumn in Paris, who could ask for anything more?
Anytime the responsible idea of increasing taxes, or decreasing subsidies on corporations making record profits during times of economic recession caused by the economic policies implemented by the corporate masters, the specter of the “job creators” raises its ugly head in its usual punctual manner. The spurious “job creators,” especially corporations, have never, ever created a job. That is worth repeating, the spurious “job creators” especially corporations, have never, ever created a job. DEMAND creates jobs, not supply.
The idea that “job creators” create jobs, and must be kowtowed to so that they will give us the privilege of laboring for minimal sustenance is not only absurd on the surface, but it is utterly inconsistent with empirical evidence, particularly since the inception of the neoliberal experiment of the first 9/11 disaster of 1973. Supply-side economics has proven over, and over, to be an utter failure. Repeating supply-side economic mantras does not make them viable.
On 08.29.2011 I posted I posted a YouTube video on my blog titled, “Janet Porter Prays for Control of Government,” below which I penned the caption, “WOW! How disturbing is this? Religion should be criminalized before we find ourselves back in the Dark Ages.” As one may imagine, some found my caption as disturbing as the video itself. What follows is my response to a comment left by a fellow blogger. “dannyraysongs”responded to my comment as follows:
“I have to say that I’m also very disturbed by your comment Madison. It’s seems apparent here on your blog that you desire to get your message out. Are you really that naive to think that Christians, Jews and/or Muslims don’t desire to have more of their fellow believers in government positions? It seems quite apparent (or at least inferred) in your blog that you would like less devout believers (or atheists) in positions of government. Should we now police what people pray? Who would qualify to be hired as a Prayer Police Officer? I really do appreciate your talent as a writer, but I’m one of those right-wing Christians you obviously feel are so dangerous and deserving of criminal charges.”
On 08.29.2011 I posted I posted a YouTube video on my blog titled, “Janet Porter Prays for Control of Government,” below which I penned the caption, “WOW! How disturbing is this? Religion should be criminalized before we find ourselves back in the Dark Ages.” As one may imagine, some found my caption as disturbing as the video itself. What follows is my response to a comment left by a fellow blogger. “jodaph970”responded to my comment as follows:
“Sure, it’s disturbing, but I also find your comment (“Religion should be criminalized before we find ourselves back in the Dark Ages.”) to be just as disturbing. Embracing a tyrannical dictation of what others should and shouldn’t do is the very antithesis of America.”