Showing posts with label Society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Society. Show all posts

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Hell is Home

As I've said before, Earth is Hell. Things are as bad as they can possibly be anywhere else. And if anyone can imagine things worse, they are free make things worse right here!

Saturday, April 07, 2007

God Protects Our Children?

Although the bible should sometimes be taken with a grain of salt, it is an excellent source for learning how to raise children. The advice it gives for dealing with a problem child is simple, straightforward, and 100% effective. Here's is an excerpt from Deuteronomy 21: 18-21 according to the New American Standard Bible:

18. If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, 19. then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his hometown. 20. They shall say to the elders of his city, `This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.' 21. Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel will hear of it and fear.
So, according to wisdom the bible, God's way of dealing with a problem child is to have them lovingly stoned to death by the local community. God's loving nature comes through very clearly in this command to his people.

Now, someone may say that I'm taking this text out of context. To such a defensive comment, I gladly suggest such a person should read whole chapter of Duet. 21. It is a list of commandments on when to kill cattle for murder, how to properly rape a woman captured during military conquests, and when to stone people to death for various deeds; among other things. This commandment to stone a problem child to death is simply one commandment from among that list, similar to the famous Ten Commandments.

This brief expose on the Bible's consideration of children was triggered because I recently ran across a request by a person looking for a scripture in the bible that showed God protects children from harm. Being the good former pseudo-fundamentalist that I am, I immediately felt inclined to clear up the issue on just how God treats children in the bible. Deut. 21: 18-21 is just one of a hundred examples where children are treated with disdain, as afterthoughts, and as property. The bible isn't the best place to look when trying to learn how to raise children. It doesn't really give any practical advice at all. There's nothing on how to change a baby's diaper, how to burp a baby, how to deal with bully's in school, how to read and write, how to teach a child about sex, etc etc. It does have a commandment about how one's hair should be cut, but if we followed that, we'd all look like a bunch of nappy hippies. More to the point, the bible promotes physical abuse and murder of our children. This more than offsets any supposed scriptures in the Bible that do offer mildly useful advise if interpreted in a particular way.

Friday, April 06, 2007

Agnosticism is false

From my view point, the word agnostic is a Christian-centric term use to describe something that is foreign to Christianity; that is something which Christians cannot understand. In the Christian mind set, an agnostic person isn’t sure whether their God exists are not. They are a person that doesn’t necessarily believe in the bible, but doesn’t really believe that the Universe came about by some random chance. In other words, a person who is agnostic is someone that hasn’t made up their mind as to whether they believe that God exists or not.

It seems that this is a false belief on the part of Christians. Also, it seems that this is why there really is no such thing as an agnostic person. When someone doesn’t have evidence as to whether or not there is a god or gods, this isn’t the lack of making one’s mind up about the matter. This is a statement that person does not hold to beliefs that cannot be proven about gods or otherwise. They are open to whatever can be proven with regards to reality, and are not held down by some ancient beliefs.

For example, by the Christian use of the term agnostic, a person would say, “I don’t know whether there is a God or not.” However, for myself, I know enough to know that-I-don’t-know. What does this mean? Well, I know that the idea of God is simply a metaphor for what is unknowable. At issue is the fact that I also know the idea of God comes with a ton of cultural baggage. For me to say that I don’t know the reality of God is itself an acceptance of society’s ideas about God. I know that God is an over used metaphor. I don’t need the God metaphor to make me comfortable about what I cannot know, that is the unknowable. Again, I know enough to know that-I-don’t-know. That is to say, I’m comfortable with not knowing what I don’t know. Another way I’ve said this before is, “I’m confused, but I’m comfortable with that confusion.”

So, because the term agnostic is used by Christians to define that which they don’t understand regarding the lack of belief in their god, it seems that the term doesn’t describe any person, but is only describes a phrase that people go through when they are losing their faith in Christianity, before they give up on the Christian metaphor all-together.

What are people called when they don’t have beliefs about gods, but also don't hold to the traditional ideas of atheism? The term freethinker comes to mind. However, freethought is also heavily loaded with history in which the average person just isn’t interested. I don’t care, for one. At this point, I contend there is no term coined as of yet which describes the average person who just doesn’t have god beliefs.

Why am I not an atheist? Well, this is a whole other topic. Let me just say my personal experiences and traditional atheism are mutually exclusive.

Monday, February 26, 2007

Jesus is Alive!

The rediscovery of Jesus' family tomb has sparked a lot of debate. No one has seen all of the evidence yet, yet everyone is piping up with criticisms. So far, none of the criticisms have been scientific in nature. "Jesus family was too poor for a tomb of such luxury". Umm, for starters, there is no statement in the bible about Jesus' wealth! In fact, it is unlikely that anyone with so much influence was poor! How unscientific can one get? It's just funny how everyone is panicking.

Hey Christians, your god was just a man! Not even all Christians look to Jesus as a god. Certainly, he had a life prior to the age of about 34, when we started preaching openly. So, there's nothing odd about him having a family. In fact, there's nothing odd about his family being hidden from history! Perhaps the story of Jesus' death and lack of mention of his family is due to the fact that his followers were trying to protect them from the Roman Empire. Or perhaps the politics within the Christian Church were at play, as groups fought for control of the faith. Maybe Jesus lineage lost power in the group once he died, so their record was expunged to justify the resulting power shift. This sort of activity is evident from within the text of the New Testament. There is obvious tells about the rise and fall of apostles and other leaders within the Church in power struggles where the victor was not necessarily even familiar with Jesus (for example, St. Paul). After all, the Council of Nicaea was commissioned by the pagan Roman Emperor Constantine. If an outsider held that much say over the faith, how much more was the faith in flux from within?

So, do I believe these remains belong to Jesus and his family? No, I don't hold a belief about such things. Do I think there is a possibility that these remains are of Jesus? Yeah. In fact, I think it is likely.

Sunday, February 25, 2007

Every House Has a Maker

Did a god make our world? I must admit that I know that every house has a maker. A lot of work goes into making a house. A house is built by humans, using processes developed by humans, with materials discovered and formed by humans. We make houses to serve as shelter for our population. What does this say about how Earth came into being? 

Well in nature, we do not see such an effort being made. In nature, everything is random. Houses don’t just come into being by themselves. 

If this Earth was created by a nurturing and carrying god, one of the main things one should expect is that all of humanity's corporeal needs are directly addressed. For example, if an average person today was dropped into the middle of the wilderness without supplies, most persons would not be able to survive. Another example, people who raise animals feed their animals, groom them, raise them, protect them, provide companionship to them, and even clean up after their dirty business. Imagine what would happen if a cat owner didn’t clean the litter box. Yuk! 

Yet, this world doesn’t do any of that for us. We have to find our own food. We have to cook our own meals. We have to build the houses in which we live and the cars we drive. We even have to wipe our own asses. 

Bottom line, where there is a house, there is indeed a maker. Where there is no house, there is certainly no maker.

Good, bad and the ugly

Although I feel my actions are "good", I don't hold "good" and "bad" are moral standards. Everything that one does is both beneficial and detrimental at the same time. I may buy a loaf of bread for a poor family, but that loaf was made by growing and then killing yeast; it was likely delivered to the store in a truck that consumed fossil fuel that polluted the atmosphere; it was packaged in plastic, also from fossil fuel, that when discarded will be garbage polluting the Earth. Here's a more basic example: every breath we take adds a few seconds to our life, but also takes us one breath closer to our last.Something good is something we perceived as more beneficial than detrimental; and visa versa for something that is bad. So, from this, how does one presume a moral code? "Experience" is often sited. However, since everything is relative to one's prespective, how is society supposed to trust each individual's experience to steer them towards activities which it feels are more beneficial than detrimental?Once we answer that, then we can toss out religion. Any takers?
For me, my morality is based on my experiences. I do try to have all of my actions within what is preceived as being "good" (more beneficial than detrimental). Is there any way for society to codify this? Yes, through secular law. Of course, then one can get into the duscussion about fairness of certain laws, but that's another topic all together.

Thursday, August 24, 2006

Trouble with personal responsibility

Personal responsibility seems to be elusive to some people. It's like, there's individuals that don't really understand or choose to ignore just how their actions directly impact those around them, and their own lives.
If you cut someone off in traffic, you screwed up. Don't go flipping off the person cuz they were so scared they didn't know how to respond. In fact, let me make this broader. The Today show did a segment today where they talked about how parents are feeding their daughters self confidence, like they can do they want, but then don't give them the tool necessary to handle the empowering properly. They aren't taught how to handle failure, or that others need respecting as well. They aren't taught the consequences of their actions. They aren't taught how to take responsibility for themselves when the do something detrimental, such as drugs are teen sex. I think it is because my general (who's having and raising all these brats), took these lessons for granted. How we learned them, without realizing them is somewhat of a mystery. It means that my generation isn't doing a good job of passing this knowledge. The knowledge of personal responsibility. Society doesn't owe us anything other than thangs that make society good, like roads and schools and local police, etc. We are responsible for ourselves. I'm not just talking about in this society, but also Karmically. If you hurt someone in spite, that will come back on you somehow, so don't be all butthurt about it when it does. Anyways, people need to learn to take responsibility for their actions. Many people need to realized just how their own actions directly and indirectly affect themselves. Ok, 'nuf ranting on this topic.

Friday, May 19, 2006

Trouble with Crucifixion

People really do treat each other extremely poorly. The more I hear experts talk about the crucifixion, the more it becomes apparent just how little human well being was regarded in the ancient world. Even for criminals, this treatment was horrific. No matter what one believes about Jesus death, the fact that anyone (be it son of God or lowly criminal) was nailed to anything through their hands and feet is repulsive.
Make no underestimate, these people suffered. Some of the most sensitive nerves in the body where pierced with a large nail and then used to hang up a the body upon a tree, stake or cross, left to suffer agonizing convulsions and nerve shattering pain throughout the body while onlookers gawked. How inhuman does one have to be in order to condone this?
I know this sentiment regarding crucifixion is two thousand years too late, but people still do engage in similar activities in modern times. Even with recent American torture embarrassment, it is not a normal thought for us to accept the inflictation of real torture on the scale of the crucifixion. The guilt of those particular U.S. soldiers in the recent cases amounts to taking hazing a bit too far. There are people in our current world that not only feel real torture is acceptable, they take joy in committing the heinous acts and are rewarded for them. This posting isn’t as random as it may seem.

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Unions still have their place

I used to believe that Unions are no longer necessary, but I'm not so sure anymore. As the union power recedes over time, employers are becoming increasing arrogant again. (Enron wouldn't have come close to getting away with their scam with union bosses on their tail.) It's not yet as bad as the 1800's, but we aren't as far off from reliving that nightmare again as some seem to think.
Already, some of the basic protections for workers are being scaled back, being wrongfully labelled as "archaic". We should be pushing world's developing nations to aspirer to meeting the challenge of copying our system of labor. We should not be rolling back our system to compete with them. As someone who is firmly rooted in white collar middle class, I can say the only thang protecting my career is the rarity of my work skills. As the world market becomes more competitive, that rarity will diminish, as with many American jobs. We need to help other countries realize that having a suitable standard of living is just as important as having one or two successful companies in their country. Henry Ford gave us clear examples of how to run companies that benefit the employees and in turn, benefit the company because employee prosperity is spent buying company products. Anyways, we are on a slippery slope that we should back away from.

Monday, November 28, 2005

World of Hypocrites

Hypocrisy is part of the human condition, but it is not part of what it means to be human. We just have a bunch of people in our world that feel they have a right to tell others what to think or how to act while exempting themselves from those same rules (at least in their own minds). This is the classic scenario for over 2000 years since the rise of monotheism. It seems that the belief in only one god inherently creates a breeding ground for hypocrites and liars. 

The world is full of popular people who instruct their believers one thing, then turn around and do the opposite themselves. They are also capable of saying one thing here, but say the opposite somewhere else to appease whatever audience to which they are speaking. Open lying is terribly obvious these days when one does it on TV for an audience of millions, yet the likes of Pat Roberts still do so freely in full view of everyone, and they are never held accountable. Many professed Christians are now getting caught up in possible crimes of their hypocrisy such as bribery, insider trading, stealing, false testimony, treason, violating National Security, etc. These are the same people that just a couple years ago called upon fellow Christians to vote for them because they held the same religious beliefs. Now that all these people are being held accountable for their misdeeds, their proponents are standing by their sides saying, “They are being attacked because of their faith.” Is corruption really apart of the Christianity?

I get the sense that these people are the same that claim that Christians are being persecuted by this world. ::cough:: This world is under the power of Christianity and has been so for a 1000 years. Who in this world is persecuting Christians on a large scale? Other Christians, perhaps? Ridiculous. It’s as though the word persecution really means that a Christian’s misdeeds aren’t being ignored and other people aren’t helping that Christian to commit their misdeeds. What else could it possibly mean in the context of today’s world?

These issues aren’t limited to Christianity. Islam and Jewish faiths also carry this burden, but the Christians are in control, and it is they who must take the lead to stamp out the hypocrisy. Of course, for the time being, they will not, at least in the U.S.