18 posts tagged “religion”
I do try. I work hard at being respectful of people's religious beliefs. I don't mock transubstantiation, even though the thought of drinking some carpenter's blood creeps me out. I don't laugh at people who really believe Ram had an army of monkeys. Sometimes, though, religious people push my limits.
Take Israeli MP Shlomo Benizri, who belongs to--surprise!--the ultra-Orthodox Shas Party. Shlomo says that improvements in civil rights for homosexuals is directly responsible for recent earthquakes in Israel. That's the conclusion we're going with, Shlomo? Gayquakes? Because, what? All that business about plate tectonics and a convecting planetary mantle? What is that? A gay conspiracy to place the blame for earthquakes on natural causes that can be verified by science? Those sneaky queers. Next thing you know they're going to claim that flooding is caused by water.
Where does this sort of thing leave me in my quest to be respectful to people like Shlomo? Struggling. If Slow-mo's faith has led him to believe something that stupid, what am I supposed to think about the other things his faith leads him to believe? It's hard for me not to suspect that everything else he believes is equally stupid and misguided.
I'm trying. Some days are harder than others.
The big whoop-de-doo on the radio this morning was about Mitt Romney's speech on religion. There was a great deal of speculation that Romney intended the speech to lay to rest concerns about his fealty to the Mormon church. An echo of JFK's speech about faith and freedom that many people feel helped him beat public concerns about his Catholicism. Let me just say, I didn't know Jack Kennedy, but Mitt Romney's speech writer is no Jack Kennedy.
Here's the gem:
"Freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone."
Help me out, here, Mitt. Exactly which religion are you talking about that requires freedom? Exactly which freedom are you talking about that requires religion? Because no offense to the religious among you, but you all know that most religions have little or nothing to do with freedom.The Bible has plenty to say about how to treat your slaves, but it has nothing to say about not having them. There's no sanctity of human freedom in the Bible. Or the Koran. Or the Bhagavad Gita. Even Jesus, as much as I like the guy, did not condemn slavery.
Now, turning to Mitt's particular religion, let's look at what his own people have had to say about freedom. Brigham Young said this: “Human flesh to be dealt in as property is not consistent or compatible with the true principles of government. My own feelings are, that no property can or should be recognized as existing in slaves, whether Indian or African.” (Neither White Nor Black, pp.67-8). On the other hand, Young thought that black people should be indentured servants of white people, because of the "Curse of Canaan." Yup, all about the freedom there, being punished for a four-thousand-year old sin. In practice, the early Mormon church had nothing against slavery. It accepted slave owners as converts and allowed them to bring their slaves to the promised land in Utah. Young said, "I am neither an abolitionist nor a pro-slavery man."
So..."Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone"? Those are the words of either an ignorant dipstick or a desperate, scheming politician. Freedom and religion? They're not in a co-dependent relationship. Religion has stood on its own for millennium without any tender intercession from freedom. Freedom, though, it's a delicate thing and all too often it tends to shrink from the hot breath of religion on its neck.
I don't think there's anything wrong with people making decisions about health care based on their religious beliefs. You have to live (or die) with the decisions you make and you ought to be allowed to consult your conscience for those decisions. Like the 14-year old Jehovah's Witness who refused a blood transfusion. He died yesterday, from a combination of leukemia and the chemotherapy being used to treat it. The blood transfusion would have saved his life in the short term and perhaps even the long term, but he stuck with his convictions to the end. Good for him. He was old enough to make that decision.
Not good for me. I'd want that blood transfusion to save my life. That's how the world ought to work. Unfortunately, the world works like this: people want you to make decisions about your health care based on their religious beliefs. Conservative Christians wanting to deny women abortions, because they happen to believe it's a sin. Catholics wanting to deny people access to birth control, because they happen to believe it's a sin. We've heard the stories by now of rape victims delivered to hospitals, where they were refused emergency birth control, because the attending physician or a nurse or a pharmacist was opposed to it on moral grounds.
Imagine your daughter has been in a terrible car accident and the ambulance has taken her to a hospital run by Jehovah's Witnesses. In the waiting room, the doctor says, "Well, yes, a blood transfusion would save her life, but we oppose blood transfusions on moral grounds. We're going to be treating her blood loss with prayer."
Imagine your son has a serious health problem and you check him into a Jewish hospital. "Yes," says the emergency room doctor. "We're going to be able to help him, but we'll have to circumcise him first."
Sounds crazy, doesn't it?
A Baptist minister in Indianapolis is protesting the suggestion that a foot-washing sink be installed at the Indianapolis airport to serve the growing number of Muslim taxi drivers who use the airport bathrooms at various times of the day in preparation for their prayers. Rev. Hillenburg claims the sink is unconstitutional--breaking the separation of church and state.
Why do I have a sneaking suspicion that if someone else were arguing for the separation of church and state in regards to an accommodation for Christians, Rev. Hillenburg would claim there is no constitutionally guaranteed separation of church and state? Why do I have a sneaking suspicion that if some misguided atheist were trying to get Christmas decorations removed from their local public park or the Ten Commandments from their local courthouse, Rev. Hillenburg would oppose the effort?
Rev. Hillenburg also claims that the sink is a special accommodation for one group of people. Like handicapped toilet stalls? As with other public bathroom facilities, including handicapped stalls, anyone would be able to use the foot-washing sink. More importantly, the impetus for the suggestion has little to do with religion and a lot to do with hygiene and safety. The taxi drivers are going to wash their feet no matter what, but currently, they're doing it in the regular sinks in the public restrooms, leaving behind a wet mess that breeds germs and makes the floors slippery. The simple fact is that if Christianity required its believers to wash their feet before prayer, every public facility in America would already have foot-basins.
"Some have tried to make this about the death of my son, Eric, that I am only a grieving father embittered because my son was killed in combat in this current war," Hillenburg says, dismissing the idea. I'll take his word for it, and assume that this is more about these two old standards: hatred of the Other, and contempt for everyone's religious freedom but one's own.
You thought Kathy Griffin was in trouble? A report by the government of India suggests that the Hindu god Ram doesn't exist. More specifically, it claims that a bridge allegedly built by Ram and his army of monkeys (how cool would that be?) is actually a natural formation of rocks, caused by erosion. Those blasphemers are likely to get what's coming to them, either by the hand of Ram, or more likely by the hands of Ram's angry followers.
Elsewhere, a Nepali airline sacrificed goats
in an effort to get one of their planes back in the air. This got played up in the media as a "humor" or "oddball" story, which strikes me as a bit of a double-standard. You won't see stories about the Pope performing the communion rite in the "news of the weird" sections of your paper, because the Western world only demands respect for its own religions. As an atheist
I love stories like this, because they just highlight what are to me the basic
absurdities found in all religions. Some people pray, some people
speak in tongues, some people hold brunches and rummage sales, some
people handle snakes, some people sacrifice goats, and everybody thinks he's got the in, the secret, the true path. Here's the kicker:
the plane made it safely to Hong Kong. Conclude what you will. The
aircraft mechanics do good work without the goat-fueled intervention of a Cosmic Muffin. Or the Mighty Akash Bhairab received the
sacrifice with pleasure and helped out.
I feel a similar annoyance when I contemplate Emperor Qin's terracotta army or the public display of Egyptian mummies. Westerners treat these things like cultural artifacts, suitable for display in museums, but the actual dead people involved, this was part of their religious life. Why do we find the Egyptian approach to the afterlife any more bizarre than Christian expectations of an afterlife?
Let me close by mentioning that today is Lord Ganesh's birthday. If I were going to believe in a god, I think I'd go with Ganesh, who symbolizes wisdom, prosperity, and happiness, and is also considered the "Patron of Letters." The perfect god for a writer. (Plus, he has this adorable little mouse companion who serves as his trusty steed. Shhhh...don't try to make it make sense.)
So, have a joyful Ganesh Chaturthi and a pleasant weekend!
If you knew you had one week to live, what would you do, where would you go, who would you see?
Submitted by normatheartist
Yeah, thanks, QotD. Thanks for reminding me of a horrible childhood experience. You think you're so clever, QotD. Just when I thought that memory had healed up, you had to go and rip the scab off. Why don't you just give me a paper cut and pour lemon juice on it?
Since I'm reliving it anyway, I'll share it with the rest of you. You know I'm an unbeliever. I always have been. When I was four and my grandmother taught me to pray, I thought she was a little crazy. I had no idea who in the hell she was talking to, or where she'd gotten this wacky notion that some invisible guy was watching her and listening to her. I thought the whole idea was plain creepy. I was relieved when it turned out she couldn't prove the invisible guy existed.
That disbelief had not faded one bit by the time I was seven. There was never any hope for me becoming a believer. There were plenty of occasions when I was pressured into pretending to believe, but never any moments when I thought, "Yeah, that seems like it could be true." There was, however, a point in my childhood where I still could have walked away from religion without being scarred by it. Mrs. Stanley put the first nail in that coffin.
It was the K-3 Sunday School class, and one of our little classmates had recently died of leukemia. Nowadays, they'd call in counselors or something, but back in the 70's the Sunday School teachers decided to play a different game. The name of the game? What would you do if the doctor said you only had one week to live?
Looking back, I understand the nature of the game. It's obvious what answers we were supposed to give. We were supposed to show our families how much we love them and we were supposed to get right with God, so that we wouldn't burn in Hell for all eternity!
We were given a moment to think and then Mrs. Stanley asked for volunteers. At that age I was both a bit of an overachiever (my, how things change) and sympathetic to my teachers. I always felt bad for teachers when no one volunteered to answer, so I stuck my hand up, having taken a few moments to consider my options at the ripe old age of seven. (Seven, it's not too soon to start thinking about death.)
My answer: "I would see another doctor to get a second opinion."
I remember this, because I had a chance to see it in writing when Mrs. Stanley sent a letter home with me, informing my grandmother that I was banned from Sunday School for three months. The verdict was that I was "disrespectful" and had a "smart mouth."
It turned out not to be the last time I was kicked out of Sunday School. In fact by the time I was 12 I had been told to leave and never come back to my Sunday School class. That suited me just fine.
I am an internet explorer (no, not the software). I cruise around in the obscure corners of the web, looking for oddities. Remember the one about Jesus being Tom Selleck? This one is even weirder:
The folks at Bible Doctrine News would like to present for your consideration, the ways in which Ted Bundy's life is a parallel of the life span of the state of Israel. See? I can't make that kind of thing up. It's too crazy to be fiction.
If you can't quite bring yourself to click on that link, just have a little taste:
Ted Bundy was one of history's most evil domestic terrorists. A psychopathic necrophiliac and rapist who preyed upon college girls from 1973-75, he was a cold-blooded murderer. Born a bastard and rejected by his mother, he became the servant of Bel, the ancient god of Babylon. God sent him as a sign of the diaspora, and his life paralleled the birth and rise of the nation of modern Israel.
I don't want be too harsh on Larry, but I think he's a nutjob of the first degree. Of course, Larry has a ready retort for me:The Florida duck survived two near-death experiences in her rise to fame. Now, with the duck's picture on the weather map, it has become obvious that the angels orchestrated all this. The duck's rise to fame is somewhat analogous to Nancy Pelosi's. She became the first woman Speaker of the House this year after the Democrats won the elections. She was born March 26, 1940, where 26 is for Political Babylon and 40 is for maximum divine discipline. It was Day 86, for the Arab persecution of the Jew. Her dad was Jewish, but she is Roman Catholic. Her trip to the terrorist land of Gad in Asia this weekend corresponded to the Florida duck's picture over the Arizona-New Mexico desert and second near-death experience.
For those who have never made the greatest decision of life to accept the free gift of Eternal Life, please go to the Salvation page. Otherwise, the information presented on this web site will be meaningless. Those who aren't saved do not have a human spirit and cannot understand Spiritual information. What's worse, it is foolishness to them.
Yes, it is, Larry. Yes, it is.
*shit. Censoring myself so people can read at work
No, not that Word. If you're interested, I went over to Northern Sun Merchandising and they do indeed have the bumper sticker I mentioned yesterday.
Of course, they have a lot of other cool stuff that you might rather have. If you're interested in sporting a little sustained outrage, they've got you covered. They've got your Support the Troops, Impeach Bush sticker, or one that declares My Ten Commandments are the Bill of Rights. They've got any kind of political/religious/peace/environment shirt you could ever want, including that old gem from my college days: Another Skinhead for Peace. (Go Ghandi!)
And then they have one of my all time favorites:
The wacky Creationists are at it again, but for a change of pace, America's Favorite Argument is taking a trip to Africa. In Kenya, the evangelical Bishop Boniface Adoyo is unhappy about an exhibit of the remains of one of the oldest human ancestors. Turkana/Nariokotome boy is going on public display, front and center at the National Museums of Kenya. The Bishop wants the display relegated to a back room of the museum with a sign to indicate that "evolution is not a fact but merely one of a number of theories."
Sure, fine Bishop Adoyo. We'll get right on that. Just as soon as you put up signs in all your churches that say, "Christianity is not a fact, but merely one of a number of theories." It's like that old bumpersticker: If you won't pray in my school, I promise not to think in your church.
I have nothing against religion until it wants to waltz in and tell me what to think about science. I'm proud to be descended from monkeys.
...and religion goes home crying to his mom about what a bully science is.
I went to see Richard Dawkins speak at the university last night. It was a full house, and arriving 5 minutes before the talk was set to begin, we ended up with nosebleed seats, mostly surrounded by students. As Dawkins is a rather famous evolutionary scientist and infamous atheist*, lots of people have expressed surprise that he came to Kansas, primarily because they are unaware that Lawrence is a little blue island in a sea of red.
The most interesting and compelling parts of Dawkins’ lecture have to do with applying simple logic to the question of biological development. Too often, he observes, if science cannot immediately answer a question on some biological complexity, religion is quick to step in and say, “Well, it must be the work of God then.” As though there are only 2 possible answers. What he calls the “default” answer is what gets people into the faux debate about evolution. If Darwin’s theory can’t easily or readily explain natural selection so everyone with an 8th grade education can understand it after a 2 minute explanation, the default answer is God. Don’t understand natural selection? It must be God. (Familiar? Don’t support the War on Terror? You must be a terrorist.)
Dawkins’ main concern is a valid one—that children in America are being indoctrinated, not educated. I got to see that first hand, sitting next to a couple of students, who were forced to attend the lecture, and did not enjoy it. I sat right next to a prime sample of religious indoctrination.
Perhaps because of the size of the audience, but most likely because of the propensity for people to overtalk, the organizers didn’t offer a microphone for questions at the end. Instead, everyone received a little card prior to the talk, on which to write a question. When question writing time came, I couldn’t help but read the question of the student sitting to my right. Throughout the talk, he’d fidgeted in his seat and muttered vague sounds of indignation and disgust to his other neighbor.
At any rate, here is what my totally-not-gay student neighbor wrote on his card: How can you prove you have a brain, since you can’t see it?
It took a great deal of restraint on my part not to lean over and say, “Hey, retard, we have this thing called an MRI. Let’s us look inside peoples’ skulls. It’s a scientific advance.”
sigh If you have many religious friends, you’ll recognize where Mr. Not-Gay’s question comes from. That’s right, he didn’t even have the religious indignation to write his own question—he plagiarized it from a rather popular Christian indignation/Atheist “mockery” e-mail that has made the rounds many times over the last few years. I put mockery in quotes, because I suppose that’s what the e-mail intends to do, when all it succeeds at is making Christians look rather dumb.
The e-mail goes like this: a grade school teacher tells her kids that God isn’t real, just like Santa and the Easter Bunny. The proof she offers is that you can’t see God. One Christian child in her class oh-so-cleverly retorts that the teacher must not have a brain, because the children can’t see it. Hahahahah! Ha. Ha. The Christian who sent me the Hurricane What? e-mail also sent me this e-mail.
*Actually, I’d go so far as to say that Dawkins is an untheist, a word I coined to describe my own feelings about God and religion. It’s not so much that I simply don’t believe in an omniscient, omnipotent alien overlord. It’s more that the very idea of such a monstrous construct deeply offends me. I don’t disbelieve, I oppose theism, sometimes with a good deal of vitriol. Dawkins is in a similar frame of mind, and in addition to showing how religion has very little to offer the rational mind, he also took a few potshots at religion, including dismissing any suggestion that one need be an expert in “theology” to prove it ill-suited to explain most anything. He pairs up science and religion with astronomy and astrology. One seeks to explain things through observation and research. The other seeks to make a science of ignorance and superstition.
Richard Dawkins will be on The Colbert Report tonight. Hijinks will surely ensue.
