I cannot say that spontaneous human combustion is my forte; however, judging from the bits and pieces of information concerning such that have entered my realm of thought, I must say that I am not convinced by any evidence that proponents have put forth to support such claims.
Certainly, a “loving” God would not allow such, but somehow I doubt One that engages in world genocide would take issue with a burning here and there. As a matter of fact, His followers have historically proven rather fond to burnings. I wonder if those that spontaneously combust are also of the more intellectual among us.
The military and police forces attract a great number of Hawks. Many are actually Chickenhawks, but more on that presently. They come stock with an aggressive and militant mindset. They are predominately white-wing reactionaries who are very traditional and theistic. They see the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) protesters as left-wing radicals who are very unconventional and secular. They believe the unemployed are so because they are lazy, and the have no work ethic. The OWS protesters see the downtrodden as victims of the system that, ironically, the Militarized Police Force are supporting against their own economic best interest. The contrast could not be greater.
Thus far the Militarized Police Force has demonstrated that they are, in fact, Chickenhawks. Their continual use of disproportional force against nonviolent, unarmed, passive protesters shows that they are just itching like a yeast infection to put a notch in their lipstick case.
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.