Jun
29
After Maressa Brown's article about an atheist wedding, I asked people what they said during their wedding ceremonies � vows that didn't mention a god, but still managed to show love for each other. ...
Jun
29
The child sex abuse scandal enveloping the Catholic church entered a new phase on Thursday when Belgian police raided a meeting of Bishops, who were meeting to investigate allegations of child abuse by clergymen in Belgium.
The police seized a number of documents and a laptop belonging to the former head of the Belgian Church, Cardinal Godfried Danneels. They also 'allegedly' searched the tomb of at least one former Cardinal in their hunt for documents. Apparantly we're supposed to be outraged by this - even the BBC's news website describes this as 'profaned the tomb'. Profaned? Surely you mean 'opened'. What is so special about the tomb of a Cardinal, as opposed to the tomb of anyone else? It seems the BBC's reporter has bought into the noxious idea that these self-serving parasitical scum are somehow worthy of automatic respect, rather than (as is more generally the case) automatic contempt. Yes, even when they're dead.
I'm personally very happy to see that at least one government is prepared to treat this outrageous, decades old cover-up as a criminal matter, and take the appropriate action. Most seem content to allow the Church to investigate its own affairs, which is akin to allowing Iran to produce its own report about whether its nuclear programme is peaceful or not. Or perhaps a more appropriate analogy would be letting a peadophile ring investigate its own members, and decide for itself whether their picture collections were just wholesome family holiday snaps.
Say the BBC:
"Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State - Pope Benedict's number two - was furious when he learned about how the police prevented the bishops from leaving the building where they had been meeting for nine hours, and took away their mobile telephones to prevent them communicating with their staff or with the Vatican."
You mean he was furious that his fellow clergymen were treated as though they were ordinary people, being investigated for covering up some of the worst crimes it is possible to commit? How awful. Poor lambs. Does he not know that it is standard practice to prevent a criminal suspect from communicating with accomplices? Rather than prevent the Bishops from leaving, the police should have hauled them down to the nick and taken their fingerprints and DNA.
So lets remember that the meeting was held to investigate allegations of child abuse in Belgium, by the Belgian clergy. Do you imagine for a second that the Church would even bother to hold such a meeting if they didn't have a huge wodge of complaints to investigate? Come on!
The BBC's report goes on to say:
"Cardinal Bertone angrily told reporters during a conference he was attending at a Catholic University in Rome that not even communist states dared to treat Church authorities and Church property in this way. He summoned the Belgian ambassador to the Vatican and handed him a formal protest note."
Why not just excommunicate him? That's what you normally do isn't it? Or perhaps you should send one of your crack team of exorcists to find out if the Belgian government have been co-opted by Satan and his demonic hordes. You superstitious, anachronistic hypocritical old fool. I hope the Belgian ambassador laughed in your face.
It is easy to see why Church figures feel a little hard done by here, but easier still to explain why they need to get over it, and wake up to the reality that they have brought upon themselves by denying these allegations for so long. For about the last 1700 years or so until very recently, the Church has done exactly what it wanted. And I do mean exactly. Suddenly it finds itself in a position where people aren't quite so fearful of its temporal power anymore, and are prepared to say occasionally 'hang on a minute, your minion has been fucking my little boy for years. Pardon me for being impertinent, but that can't be right can it?'.
For years the Church's response has been bluster, obfuscation and denial, and for the most part we've bought into their claims that it is an internal matter. In Ireland for example, it was common knowledge that Church schools were populated by wicked and sadistic old men and women, who were firmly of the opinion that the devil needed to be thrashed out of little children, and barely anyone raised a protest about this. But when it transpires that many of these old men also believed that the devil needed to be fucked out of little children too, we heard the first wimpers of protest, rising slowly to a crescendo as more and more people spoke out about the appalling abuse that they suffered. And the Church's response? We're sorry, a bit, now stop whinging and get back on your knees where you belong. Don't you know that you're a worthless little sinner and only we can save you?
Of course it's not just Ireland, and that's why the Church has a crisis on it's hands. And if there is any real justice, it will be the crisis that finally brings this disgusting organisation crashing down. Probably a bit too much to hope for though.
In the meantime, allegations of abuse keep cropping up. Millions of dollars have already been paid to shut people up in America. Claims are being 'investigated' by the Church in Germany, Spain, Italy, Ireland and several other Western countries. The Pope's last archdiocese in Germany is under investigation, and it may even be the case that the Pope himself has covered up the perversions of priests serving in his own backyard. Some infallability.
The Pope himself has been a little more cautious than Cardinal Bertone in his response to the raid by Belgian police, at least in the sense that he didn't invoke communism. In a letter to the head of the Belgian Church he said
"I want to express, dear brother in the Episcopate, as well as to all the Bishops of Belgium, my closeness and solidarity in this moment of sadness, in which, with certain surprising and deplorable methods, searches were carried out.
"I hope that justice will follow its course while guaranteeing the rights of individuals and institutions, respecting the rights of victims, (and) acknowledging those who undertake to collaborate with it"
'Surprising and deplorable methods'? Ah yes, searching Church property as they would a business or private household. How deplorable that the holy brotherhood should be treated the same as everbody else. Note also that his hopes of 'guaranteeing the rights of individuals [Bishops and Priests] and institutions [the Church]' come before 'respecting the rights of victims [defenseless and innocent children beaten, abused and violated by said individuals]'.
If there is evidence to suggest that a priest raped a child, that priest must be tried according to the temporal laws of the country where the alleged incident took place, and if found guilty, sentenced accordingly. If it transpires that his Bishop knew about the allegations against him but failed to take the appropriate action, that Bishop must be tried for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. If his Archbishop knew, then so must he. And if the Pope knew? So far I don't see countries lining up to extradite the Pope, but I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins have taken legal advice about the possibility of having the Pope arrested when he visits the UK later this year. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this idea has been met with derision and even humour. I doubt their attempt will be successful (and you could bet your soul that if they had a chance, the Pope would cancel his visit in a snap - no martyr he) but I hope this attempt will open more people's eyes to the fact that this is not an internal Church matter. It is not for the Church to decide what to do with known sex offenders, it is for the courts to decide and punish those who are found guilty accordingly.
The police seized a number of documents and a laptop belonging to the former head of the Belgian Church, Cardinal Godfried Danneels. They also 'allegedly' searched the tomb of at least one former Cardinal in their hunt for documents. Apparantly we're supposed to be outraged by this - even the BBC's news website describes this as 'profaned the tomb'. Profaned? Surely you mean 'opened'. What is so special about the tomb of a Cardinal, as opposed to the tomb of anyone else? It seems the BBC's reporter has bought into the noxious idea that these self-serving parasitical scum are somehow worthy of automatic respect, rather than (as is more generally the case) automatic contempt. Yes, even when they're dead.
I'm personally very happy to see that at least one government is prepared to treat this outrageous, decades old cover-up as a criminal matter, and take the appropriate action. Most seem content to allow the Church to investigate its own affairs, which is akin to allowing Iran to produce its own report about whether its nuclear programme is peaceful or not. Or perhaps a more appropriate analogy would be letting a peadophile ring investigate its own members, and decide for itself whether their picture collections were just wholesome family holiday snaps.
Say the BBC:
"Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State - Pope Benedict's number two - was furious when he learned about how the police prevented the bishops from leaving the building where they had been meeting for nine hours, and took away their mobile telephones to prevent them communicating with their staff or with the Vatican."
You mean he was furious that his fellow clergymen were treated as though they were ordinary people, being investigated for covering up some of the worst crimes it is possible to commit? How awful. Poor lambs. Does he not know that it is standard practice to prevent a criminal suspect from communicating with accomplices? Rather than prevent the Bishops from leaving, the police should have hauled them down to the nick and taken their fingerprints and DNA.
So lets remember that the meeting was held to investigate allegations of child abuse in Belgium, by the Belgian clergy. Do you imagine for a second that the Church would even bother to hold such a meeting if they didn't have a huge wodge of complaints to investigate? Come on!
The BBC's report goes on to say:
"Cardinal Bertone angrily told reporters during a conference he was attending at a Catholic University in Rome that not even communist states dared to treat Church authorities and Church property in this way. He summoned the Belgian ambassador to the Vatican and handed him a formal protest note."
Why not just excommunicate him? That's what you normally do isn't it? Or perhaps you should send one of your crack team of exorcists to find out if the Belgian government have been co-opted by Satan and his demonic hordes. You superstitious, anachronistic hypocritical old fool. I hope the Belgian ambassador laughed in your face.
It is easy to see why Church figures feel a little hard done by here, but easier still to explain why they need to get over it, and wake up to the reality that they have brought upon themselves by denying these allegations for so long. For about the last 1700 years or so until very recently, the Church has done exactly what it wanted. And I do mean exactly. Suddenly it finds itself in a position where people aren't quite so fearful of its temporal power anymore, and are prepared to say occasionally 'hang on a minute, your minion has been fucking my little boy for years. Pardon me for being impertinent, but that can't be right can it?'.
For years the Church's response has been bluster, obfuscation and denial, and for the most part we've bought into their claims that it is an internal matter. In Ireland for example, it was common knowledge that Church schools were populated by wicked and sadistic old men and women, who were firmly of the opinion that the devil needed to be thrashed out of little children, and barely anyone raised a protest about this. But when it transpires that many of these old men also believed that the devil needed to be fucked out of little children too, we heard the first wimpers of protest, rising slowly to a crescendo as more and more people spoke out about the appalling abuse that they suffered. And the Church's response? We're sorry, a bit, now stop whinging and get back on your knees where you belong. Don't you know that you're a worthless little sinner and only we can save you?
Of course it's not just Ireland, and that's why the Church has a crisis on it's hands. And if there is any real justice, it will be the crisis that finally brings this disgusting organisation crashing down. Probably a bit too much to hope for though.
In the meantime, allegations of abuse keep cropping up. Millions of dollars have already been paid to shut people up in America. Claims are being 'investigated' by the Church in Germany, Spain, Italy, Ireland and several other Western countries. The Pope's last archdiocese in Germany is under investigation, and it may even be the case that the Pope himself has covered up the perversions of priests serving in his own backyard. Some infallability.
The Pope himself has been a little more cautious than Cardinal Bertone in his response to the raid by Belgian police, at least in the sense that he didn't invoke communism. In a letter to the head of the Belgian Church he said
"I want to express, dear brother in the Episcopate, as well as to all the Bishops of Belgium, my closeness and solidarity in this moment of sadness, in which, with certain surprising and deplorable methods, searches were carried out.
"I hope that justice will follow its course while guaranteeing the rights of individuals and institutions, respecting the rights of victims, (and) acknowledging those who undertake to collaborate with it"
'Surprising and deplorable methods'? Ah yes, searching Church property as they would a business or private household. How deplorable that the holy brotherhood should be treated the same as everbody else. Note also that his hopes of 'guaranteeing the rights of individuals [Bishops and Priests] and institutions [the Church]' come before 'respecting the rights of victims [defenseless and innocent children beaten, abused and violated by said individuals]'.
If there is evidence to suggest that a priest raped a child, that priest must be tried according to the temporal laws of the country where the alleged incident took place, and if found guilty, sentenced accordingly. If it transpires that his Bishop knew about the allegations against him but failed to take the appropriate action, that Bishop must be tried for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. If his Archbishop knew, then so must he. And if the Pope knew? So far I don't see countries lining up to extradite the Pope, but I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins have taken legal advice about the possibility of having the Pope arrested when he visits the UK later this year. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this idea has been met with derision and even humour. I doubt their attempt will be successful (and you could bet your soul that if they had a chance, the Pope would cancel his visit in a snap - no martyr he) but I hope this attempt will open more people's eyes to the fact that this is not an internal Church matter. It is not for the Church to decide what to do with known sex offenders, it is for the courts to decide and punish those who are found guilty accordingly.
Jun
25
Take a problem and let 100s of person, well versed with the problem field, objectively think an optimum solution for it. With perfect objectivity, 100 percent chances are that all shall find the same solution. But in practice, perfect objective thinking is not feasible, it always have a subjective touch which may make some minor differences in the thought-out solution. This is my 'Convergence Principle of Thinking', which has been tested and verified in varied situations.
This principle, though not spelled out before, is accepted by intellectuals of the world since historical times and is unknowingly applied in all human endeavors in practice. For this very reason, management decisions do not need be taken democratically but assumed to be right when some individual thinks and suggests for implementation.
Some cunning individuals thought that if every body starts thinking, they shall have same views and thus get unified into a strong humanity. This would have made ruling the majority by a few impossible. Since, desire for dominance has always been there in the air of human history, these cunning persons desirous of dominating the rest, found ways to block thinking by common people through doctoring them ways and means of thoughtless living. since thinking is a process straining the individual's brain extra-ordinarily, common people also felt happy in leading thoughtless lifestyles.
Ways and means doctored for thoughtless living were named religions with a common imaginary deity named God and individual incarnations of this imagination. The purpose of all religions is to block thinking process of followers and providing ever-failing easy solutions for problems of life in these religions. Thus, the God and various religions came into being on this earth. Every religion claims to preach universal truths of life and every religion has its own universal truths to be preached which is different from all other religions. This proves fallacy of religions and their universal truths.
If every individual starts thinking on his/her own, there shall exist no religion and hence no God, and all individuals shall come to know the universal truths of life. The world humanity shall be unified, undivided by various religions, and every individual shall be an atheist.
This principle, though not spelled out before, is accepted by intellectuals of the world since historical times and is unknowingly applied in all human endeavors in practice. For this very reason, management decisions do not need be taken democratically but assumed to be right when some individual thinks and suggests for implementation.
Some cunning individuals thought that if every body starts thinking, they shall have same views and thus get unified into a strong humanity. This would have made ruling the majority by a few impossible. Since, desire for dominance has always been there in the air of human history, these cunning persons desirous of dominating the rest, found ways to block thinking by common people through doctoring them ways and means of thoughtless living. since thinking is a process straining the individual's brain extra-ordinarily, common people also felt happy in leading thoughtless lifestyles.
Ways and means doctored for thoughtless living were named religions with a common imaginary deity named God and individual incarnations of this imagination. The purpose of all religions is to block thinking process of followers and providing ever-failing easy solutions for problems of life in these religions. Thus, the God and various religions came into being on this earth. Every religion claims to preach universal truths of life and every religion has its own universal truths to be preached which is different from all other religions. This proves fallacy of religions and their universal truths. If every individual starts thinking on his/her own, there shall exist no religion and hence no God, and all individuals shall come to know the universal truths of life. The world humanity shall be unified, undivided by various religions, and every individual shall be an atheist.
Jun
18
Agastya a seer from India of Mahaabhaarat period, from 400 bc to about 150 bc, founded the concept of agnosticism to save human thought energy from wasting in things which matter little to overall human welfare on earth. In his opinion, there are few things which are and shall always be unknowable to humanity - like the creator of this universe and the purpose of its creation. The idea is to look forward for progress and be on the march of a better human civilization where all humans shall be healthy and happy and put all our energies to attain this goal. In achieving this goal, questions such as when the universe was created and who created it matter little and we should not waste our precious energies on such trivial issues.
History is not all that useless to our progress. It teaches us where did the past humanity erred to avoid such instances in future, and where it fared well to keep them going on. But these historical information must be relevant to our present and near-future contexts. If the information from the past is irrelevant now and for near-future, it need not be looked into to conserve our energies. The questions about the creation are such matters irrelevant to our present and near-future, these being from extremely far off in the past. So, Agastya marked such issues as unknowable and this philosophy came to be known as agnosticism in honor of its proposer.
Issues of creation are from our real world. But with passage of time, some cunning fellows conceptualized an imaginary God as the creator of our universe, against the philosophy of agnosticism which prohibits thinking over the creation or its creator. Thus, existence of God or its non-existence also came within the purview of agnosticism, or in other words - whether God exists or not, is unknowable.
Thus, the concept of God is philosophically irrelevant to humanity and its onward march for a better world tomorrow. scientifically also, it has no foundation. Science has been trying to deal with the issue of creation, form, etc. of the Universe. Since science does not deal with any issue in philosophical terms, and agnosticism is a philosophical issue, these two ways of gaining knowledge are unrelated to each other, so do not interfere mutually.
History is not all that useless to our progress. It teaches us where did the past humanity erred to avoid such instances in future, and where it fared well to keep them going on. But these historical information must be relevant to our present and near-future contexts. If the information from the past is irrelevant now and for near-future, it need not be looked into to conserve our energies. The questions about the creation are such matters irrelevant to our present and near-future, these being from extremely far off in the past. So, Agastya marked such issues as unknowable and this philosophy came to be known as agnosticism in honor of its proposer.
Issues of creation are from our real world. But with passage of time, some cunning fellows conceptualized an imaginary God as the creator of our universe, against the philosophy of agnosticism which prohibits thinking over the creation or its creator. Thus, existence of God or its non-existence also came within the purview of agnosticism, or in other words - whether God exists or not, is unknowable.
Thus, the concept of God is philosophically irrelevant to humanity and its onward march for a better world tomorrow. scientifically also, it has no foundation. Science has been trying to deal with the issue of creation, form, etc. of the Universe. Since science does not deal with any issue in philosophical terms, and agnosticism is a philosophical issue, these two ways of gaining knowledge are unrelated to each other, so do not interfere mutually.
Jun
16
A network that never dared question the sincerity of George W. Bush's claims to pray, but still claims that it's a real, legit news organization, has asked is President Obama (you know, the BLACK president) really means it when he says he prays.
It reminds me of something Sen. Bernie Sanders told me years ago. Here, he sums it up in the documentary Outfoxed:
FOX seeks to separate Obama from the mainstream in every way they can, through 'birther claims,' every fucking conspiracy theory they can get talking-parasite Glenn Beck to regurgitate, and of course, religion.
They, at once, perpetrate the myth of the 'good christian,' which FOX viewers love because they count themselves as such, and try to remove President Obama from that group. 'Sure he says the word 'prayer,'' FOX tells us, 'but he can't be a good Christian or a REAL American, like you good folks at home!'
It's so fucking disgusting and divisive and manipulative, I can't even wrap my mind around how anyone buys it.
It's just bigoted, closed-minded, uneducated, sore losers, hearing what they want to hear and ignoring what's true. These people deserve the Christo-fascism they daily demand.
It reminds me of something Sen. Bernie Sanders told me years ago. Here, he sums it up in the documentary Outfoxed:
FOX seeks to separate Obama from the mainstream in every way they can, through 'birther claims,' every fucking conspiracy theory they can get talking-parasite Glenn Beck to regurgitate, and of course, religion.
They, at once, perpetrate the myth of the 'good christian,' which FOX viewers love because they count themselves as such, and try to remove President Obama from that group. 'Sure he says the word 'prayer,'' FOX tells us, 'but he can't be a good Christian or a REAL American, like you good folks at home!'
It's so fucking disgusting and divisive and manipulative, I can't even wrap my mind around how anyone buys it.
It's just bigoted, closed-minded, uneducated, sore losers, hearing what they want to hear and ignoring what's true. These people deserve the Christo-fascism they daily demand.
Jun
16
Jun
9
Firstly, let me explain what is my view of a culture. It is what a children learn from their parents and elders in the society, or in other words, culture is composed of customs and traditions of the society which get naturally cultivated in the mind and lifestyle of children. Wit this definition, it may be or moving in right or wrong direction depending on whether customs and traditions of a society are right (scientific) or wrong (orthodox). So, culture is not a pious word, as is normally understood.
Greater problem with culture of a society is that the people usually pay great regard to their culture irrespective of whether it is right or wrong, and so resist any change in its norms even if it is non-scientific. This degrades the society. Europe critically analyzed its culture about 300 years back and entered into the age of renaissance which changed everything there - customs and traditions - thus, re-cultivating the people's minds and thinking. All people are not that great of being critical to what they are accustomed to. Conversely, India is still suffering with the burden of 2000 year old orthodox and superstitious culture.
The worst contributor of human culture in the history of humanity has been Plato who, in his Academy, researched on social dynamics and found that people can easily be slaved of misconceptions like God, religion, spirituality and other allied superstitions and he managed to float a theist culture all over the then world, particularly in Eurasia. That culture still prevails in most part of the world, blocking fresh thinking by the people for being terrified in the names of God and other Divinities, with various religions working as carriers of this terror. Thus, theism is the culture, exit from which people resist with all their might.
The original religion of humanity had been humanism. After the people were cultivated into theism, the converse of it - atheism, was coined as another name of humanism. Thus, theism and humanism face each other as opposite of each other. Unfortunately, for the huge and continuous investments in theistic religions by vested interests all over the world, most of the people today are theists forgetting everything about the real humanism. Even Jesus Christ, in whose name Christianity was floated about 200 years after his death, was opposed to misconceptions of religions and Gods for the whole of his life which he spent on Indian land along with his Theo (Dev) friends.
Greater problem with culture of a society is that the people usually pay great regard to their culture irrespective of whether it is right or wrong, and so resist any change in its norms even if it is non-scientific. This degrades the society. Europe critically analyzed its culture about 300 years back and entered into the age of renaissance which changed everything there - customs and traditions - thus, re-cultivating the people's minds and thinking. All people are not that great of being critical to what they are accustomed to. Conversely, India is still suffering with the burden of 2000 year old orthodox and superstitious culture.
The worst contributor of human culture in the history of humanity has been Plato who, in his Academy, researched on social dynamics and found that people can easily be slaved of misconceptions like God, religion, spirituality and other allied superstitions and he managed to float a theist culture all over the then world, particularly in Eurasia. That culture still prevails in most part of the world, blocking fresh thinking by the people for being terrified in the names of God and other Divinities, with various religions working as carriers of this terror. Thus, theism is the culture, exit from which people resist with all their might.
The original religion of humanity had been humanism. After the people were cultivated into theism, the converse of it - atheism, was coined as another name of humanism. Thus, theism and humanism face each other as opposite of each other. Unfortunately, for the huge and continuous investments in theistic religions by vested interests all over the world, most of the people today are theists forgetting everything about the real humanism. Even Jesus Christ, in whose name Christianity was floated about 200 years after his death, was opposed to misconceptions of religions and Gods for the whole of his life which he spent on Indian land along with his Theo (Dev) friends.
