THERE IS NO LICENSE, TEST OR TRAINING FOR PARENTHOOD
Bear with me, this isn’t really a change in subject. If you wish to sell paper clips (here in the U.S.), you will probably need a business license. Outsiders (and customers) may perceive that this means you have passed some test or been given special knowledge of business practices, but that’s not the case. You pay your fee, you get your license. This same strategy applies to parenting. Prospective parents are not required to pass any tests or given any special knowledge. They just mate. When a child is produced, several things happen, usually simultaneously.
At a loss for how to proceed, they parrot what their own parents taught them. Unless they are convinced their parents had the whole thing wrong, in which case they parrot the opposite of what they were taught. This is an insidious process of which the new parents are usually unaware. They just try to answer each situation or question as it comes up, with no clear plan on how to proceed, but very definite ideas about what the outcome should be. The child should respect their advice (a good strategy for young children, as it can save their lives) to the extent that they will enthusiastically embrace a career chosen by their parents regardless of their personal preferences. The child should respect their religion, again embracing it enthusiastically, again regardless of their personal preferences or reasoned thinking, because we say so.
At least we have schools to take over some of the burden. What if we had to teach our children math, physics, history, etc. ourselves?
Any parent whose best answer is “because I say so,” is in trouble. It’ll work for a while, but a bright child will begin to resent being left out of the reasoning process. If the lives of the parents aren’t particularly inspiring, “because I say so,” becomes a death-knell; the child makes a note to be nothing like his or her parents. Then you’ve lost the battle. Anything else you say will arrive at their ears filtered through distrust of your judgment and your choices, not to mention distrust of your ability to put forth a reasonable explanation.
For many of us, who saw firsthand that our parents certainly had no special knowledge or reasoning power, we may reject the entire package provided by our parents. But for all of us, there will come a time when, with hormones (whose influence we don’t understand at the time) raging, we will break away from the parental unit (whatever its form). This is the natural outcome of being an animal on planet Earth. Any mammalian mother nurtures her young in the wild, always at a great personal cost, sometimes to the point of hardship. She teaches them everything she knows, grooms them, protects them. Then one day her hormones and the hormones of her young are no longer in harmony. She drives them from the nest or from her territory. This is a survival necessity for both the mother and her young. The territory which supports her cannot support her plus her young once they are adults and their strain on resources is as great as her own. Mother bears drive their cubs up trees and leave them there, heading to new territory. Mother cats drive their young away, keeping their territory for themselves. In both cases, if the mother and young meet again, it will go very unpleasantly. The only time this behavior is not seen is in herd mammals, yet even they often drive pubescent males from the group.
Humans always seem surprised by the fact that we do the same. It doesn’t matter how good you are to your children, they will, regardless, be driven to either seek their own territory or challenge you for your own. There’s no need for all that screaming! When offspring begin to rebel, they are really only asserting their independence, which parents want them to do, eventually. In theory. But in practice it’s not so pretty. Here’s a being about as large as you are, questioning or spurning your authority. This being was once so helpless you had to teach it how to get food into its mouth, and the experience felt rewarding to you both. Now the same child you turned your life upside down to accommodate is no longer showing worshipful obedience. It can be hard for some parents to accept.
I propose that the need for religion is a leftover effect from the parent/child bonding process, which happens when we’re too young as yet to think in words. Parenting can be rewarding, but being the child is much more so. Consider this; when we are babies, we have parents around us who;
1. Have a comforting presence
2. Make irritants stop or go away
3. Will overlook our mistakes and/or fix them
4. Provide food, shelter, and companionship
5. Protect us from all harm
6. Advise us when we don’t know what to do
7. Can make the seemingly impossible happen (like the appearance of a new bike)
8. Make us feel better when we’re sick
9. Love us even when we’ve been bad
10. Warn us of dangers, sometimes to the extent of placing themselves in danger to save or help us.
In short, in childhood we had the experience of what seemed to be perfect love. Consider the parallels with religion. The ecstatic presence of God could be a return to feelings we felt long before we had speech to explain it. Therefore it rises up, wordless, from the heart, and we feel all these wonderful reward-feelings we felt as babies, and as adults, we wish to return to them. It’s not unlike romantic love in this way; we try to find for ourselves and provide for our mates these comforting conditions. If our parents were abusive, these feelings may be more than a little screwed up; reward may be confused with (or mixed into) punishment in that speechless part of the brain. But the desire to return to the conditions of babyhood, where the loving presence sensed our needs without our even being able to articulate them is powerful stuff. Powerful stuff that our brain remembers but can’t articulate.
It may be useful to mention pets here. In our relationships with our pets, we can get all the parenting-reward feelings without the danger that they’ll suddenly assert themselves as not needing us any more. People who love animals more than people are (perhaps wisely) averting the trauma of having someone for whom one has made sacrifices and whom one taught everything eventually reject us. If this is true, a small animal maybe the perfect gift for "empty-nesters."
There are hundreds of theories out there, and thousands of experts who have studied the fields of religious anthropology and psychology, and can give you their own theories. I urge you to make use of them. Gather some information, then form your own opinions. This has just been a sample from my personal set.
WHAT THE HELL? * * * * * * * RATIONALITY VS SCIENCE &RELIGION * * * * * * * CAN ANY USEFUL SENSE BE FOUND, BETWEEN MEMES, BRAMES AND AN INFINITY OF DIMENSIONS AND UNIVERSES ON THE ONE SIDE AND TRANSUBSTANTIATION, SNAKE-HANDLERS AND MESSIAH-ON-A-POTATO-CHIP ON THE OTHER? A RATIONALIST'S POINT OF VIEW...
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
WHY IS RELIGION BAD?
What’s wrong with a little religion, anyway? I’ve put together a list of what I think Is wrong with a little religion (because its influence isn't as little as it might look):
1) War: (not in the distant past – NOW) (not only in distant countries; i.e., war on pro-lifers/homosexuals) War is always wrong. The Holy Crusades of the tenth and twelfth centuries are one famous example, but religious wars are still going on – check the news. Religion also provides Divine justification for the subjugation of other races and even ‘other’ genders. By this I mean that religious belief is responsible for the subjugation of women which is still being practiced all over the world. The fact that we don’t hear about it very often here in America is inexplicable and unfair, but women are still being denied the right to vote and in some places aren’t allowed to leave their homes without the accompaniment of a male.
2) Science stops here; The belief that Man is not meant to know some things (such as, in the past, what was inside the human body) can stalemate science for centuries.
a) Psychic phenomenon can be disproven by scientists, but prayer and miracles, according to the religious, can’t.
b) Medicine as the enemy: in making science/medicine the enemy, the church is allowing (actually encouraging) children to die for want of care. This is a shameful use of power over children, often done under the auspices of "protecting them"! The religious don’t seem to realize how cruel and insane that is!
c) It's impossible to estimate how many times mankind has suffered terrible losses because things were "being left in God's hands." And it seems quite unfair that religion will use science when it suits the purpose.
3) Indoctrination of children: Let’s talk about the emotional, physical, sexual and spiritual abuse (which again, is not new). Let’s talk about teaching our little ones not to question anything the church says, including “Let’s go to war,” “Man is not meant to know some things,” “You don’t need medical care, you need more faith.” Yet the Bible teaches that "Faith is a gift," and we're taught it's not nice to ask for more gifts. What terrible puzzles we give them to unwind! Whether for good or bad, the children of religious parents will carry these experiences well into adulthood, perhaps to the end of their lives, without every thinking them through.
It’s very common among the religious to hear the defense that the teaching, for example, of evolution, shouldn’t be allowed because their children shouldn’t be exposed to such ideas. Perhaps this is because they realize that if given all the options, their children could very well chose to believe in evolution. This pre-emptive strike against the intellect of the child is another shameful misuse of power, and I can’t see any other reason for it than that they’re afraid their own case won’t hold up. If the religious disagree with evolution, why don’t they set out to prove it? Would God not provide them with evidence? And while we're near the subject, prohibiting things you consider offensive is not concern for the welfare or rights of others, it is CENSORSHIP.
And exposure to knowledge that homosexuals exist does not turn children into homosexuals. Science has shown us that there are differences in brain structure, to cite one example, between homosexuals and heterosexuals – that it may be a natural difference, formed before birth. If you won’t believe the science, believe the parents who find that through no fault of their own or the child’s, some children just come into the world differently-sexed. A survey of adult homosexuals reveals that they “have always known” they were different. It would appear that in condemning all homosexuals, we condemn our children to a life of shame and misery before they’re even old enough to have words for it, especially if it’s not something they’d choose to be if they had a choice. You had no control over what you were when you left the womb. Neither do they.
In studies of rats, it’s been shown that overcrowding can lead to increased homosexuality. If this is true, our children may be born homosexual because we live in overcrowded conditions, and the fault lies entirely with the parents, for living that way.
But wait a minute, what’s wrong with homosexuality anyway? It didn’t get a mention among the Biblical commandments. It turns out that the judgment of ‘wrongness’ comes not from God, but from the laws of man. One theory is that in overpopulous cities, especially in ancient times, there were so many homosexuals that the government feared there would be a very small next generation to tax. Homosexuals were executed as an example of what would happen if one didn’t get married and start producing children. It may be that homosexuality is just nature’s pretty handy way to reduce overpopulation when the ecosystem gets unbalanced. If you dislike homosexuals so much, try taking the larger view; at least they won’t reproduce, and maybe they'll raise some of our unwanted children.
4) Indoctrination of Indigenes: (still going on today); the church will teach you English, dress you in American clothes, and grant you both forgiveness for everything you’ve ever done wrong, plus eternal life, if you do – and think – exactly as they say to do. All you have to give up is your language, your culture, your art, your crafts, your heritage. The religious don’t seem to realize how uncharitable - and UNWISE - that is!
These behaviors are selfish and sanctimonious. If missionaries are afraid natives will say something they won’t understand, why don’t they use the peaceful and respectful expedient of learning the language of the natives?
Here is a truth; listen! People of other faiths believe in their gods just as much as you believe in yours. Their gods promise them a paradisial afterlife, protects them, and answers their prayers, just as yours does. The fact that they believe in a god by a different name doesn’t make them evil. Like you, they’re sincere believers just trying to get through this life, trying to make a living, raising their families as best they can. Zealous religious leaders on both sides invoke the ‘evil’ card because it makes them a good living, not to mention winning the adoration of the crowd. That doesn’t make it real, or right. And who says God only appeared to one people in one place, during one period of history, in this vast universe over all of which He rules?
Other religions are not the opposite of yours, they are the same. These ‘others’ believe in a god who is just and merciful, have a moral code based on the same needs, are prayerful and sincere in their devotions. If your god is infinite, can’t you accept that he may be known by different names in different languages/cultures? Why would you resent them for worshiping in their own way? Why is it any of your business how they worship? All religions agree that god is the source of all good things. All their prophets and holy teachers (and/or messiahs) agree that one should be honest, treat one’s fellows well, and be the best human one can be. How can this be reconciled with the idea that we should kill each other? Any religion that has caused war to be made should be ashamed of itself.
5) The church pays no taxes; This is the Mother of All Loopholes, and probably causes the rise of as many “religions” as true belief. And it’s not that the church is poor. Every year American churches rake in an average of 630 billion dollars (and that figure doesn't even include special funds or projects - just the basic tithing).
6) The church wiggles its way around the law: suicide is a crime, euthanasia is a crime, so why isn’t it a crime to handle (allegedly) poisonous snakes and encourage others to do so? Shouldn’t that be illegal, too? And why don’t they ever ‘wrangle’ snakes in the wild? Because they’d actually BE poisonous?
7) The image of the Virgin Mary; last seen on the side of an SUV, rendered in bird poop. Is this guy allowed to wash his car now? Will people bow in prayer when it passes? What ever happened to that Jesus potato chip? Did it rot away? If so, is it still holy? It’s toast or traffic signs or some new crazy thing every week. When the non-religious hallucinate like this, they’re arrested. The religious don’t seem to realize how insane this looks!
8) WE WILL BE SAVED: Perhaps the most destructive belief of all is that God will come to Earth in all His glory and fix everything. He will force peace among nations, and presumably remediate the environmental damage humans have caused. This belief may cause the religious to think it’s not our job (because it’s not possible, or because it’s not our ‘place’) to make peace among nations. And peace is like any other goal; you can’t get there if you don’t try. The same is true for environmental remediation. We may not be able to undo everything we’ve done to our planet, but if we don’t even try, believing some higher power will eventually do it for us, we have failed to fix anything by failing to try. There may be some justice to be found in this attitude after all. If the earth suffers a prolonged warming period and many species die, the harm to the planet itself may be minimal. It’s possible the environment will equalize itself again in a few hundred thousand years or so, but it’s not unlikely that one of the species to be lost will be human. So the problem will be ‘fixed,’ and new species will no doubt evolve to fill our niche. One can only hope they will be wiser than we. Even if humans survive the new conditions we’ve hastened to create, the extreme loss of life, the loss of our civilization and probable loss of our history could make these descendents unrecognizable. Will they still believe in a god? And if so, would we recognize him?
If you believe instead that aliens are coming to help us, the same argument holds true, but with a twist. I would only add that unless extra-terrestrials are a lot more altruistic than we are, they’ll probably wait until we’ve wiped ourselves out before coming to claim this beautiful and unique planet for themselves. Why would they bother to make war on us, further damaging the planet, when with a little patience, it can be theirs with no effort at all?
9)PRAYING FOR PEACE: Certainly it would seem that no harm could come from such a prayer, but that may not be true. Those who are praying for peace are not inspired to go out and make it happen, but are content to leave it in God’s hands. Well, we've been praying for peace for centuries, and it's no closer now than it was then.
If all we really have is each other, think of the time wasted praying for peace, and think of what would have happened if all those hours of praying had been spent DOING.
1) War: (not in the distant past – NOW) (not only in distant countries; i.e., war on pro-lifers/homosexuals) War is always wrong. The Holy Crusades of the tenth and twelfth centuries are one famous example, but religious wars are still going on – check the news. Religion also provides Divine justification for the subjugation of other races and even ‘other’ genders. By this I mean that religious belief is responsible for the subjugation of women which is still being practiced all over the world. The fact that we don’t hear about it very often here in America is inexplicable and unfair, but women are still being denied the right to vote and in some places aren’t allowed to leave their homes without the accompaniment of a male.
2) Science stops here; The belief that Man is not meant to know some things (such as, in the past, what was inside the human body) can stalemate science for centuries.
a) Psychic phenomenon can be disproven by scientists, but prayer and miracles, according to the religious, can’t.
b) Medicine as the enemy: in making science/medicine the enemy, the church is allowing (actually encouraging) children to die for want of care. This is a shameful use of power over children, often done under the auspices of "protecting them"! The religious don’t seem to realize how cruel and insane that is!
c) It's impossible to estimate how many times mankind has suffered terrible losses because things were "being left in God's hands." And it seems quite unfair that religion will use science when it suits the purpose.
3) Indoctrination of children: Let’s talk about the emotional, physical, sexual and spiritual abuse (which again, is not new). Let’s talk about teaching our little ones not to question anything the church says, including “Let’s go to war,” “Man is not meant to know some things,” “You don’t need medical care, you need more faith.” Yet the Bible teaches that "Faith is a gift," and we're taught it's not nice to ask for more gifts. What terrible puzzles we give them to unwind! Whether for good or bad, the children of religious parents will carry these experiences well into adulthood, perhaps to the end of their lives, without every thinking them through.
It’s very common among the religious to hear the defense that the teaching, for example, of evolution, shouldn’t be allowed because their children shouldn’t be exposed to such ideas. Perhaps this is because they realize that if given all the options, their children could very well chose to believe in evolution. This pre-emptive strike against the intellect of the child is another shameful misuse of power, and I can’t see any other reason for it than that they’re afraid their own case won’t hold up. If the religious disagree with evolution, why don’t they set out to prove it? Would God not provide them with evidence? And while we're near the subject, prohibiting things you consider offensive is not concern for the welfare or rights of others, it is CENSORSHIP.
And exposure to knowledge that homosexuals exist does not turn children into homosexuals. Science has shown us that there are differences in brain structure, to cite one example, between homosexuals and heterosexuals – that it may be a natural difference, formed before birth. If you won’t believe the science, believe the parents who find that through no fault of their own or the child’s, some children just come into the world differently-sexed. A survey of adult homosexuals reveals that they “have always known” they were different. It would appear that in condemning all homosexuals, we condemn our children to a life of shame and misery before they’re even old enough to have words for it, especially if it’s not something they’d choose to be if they had a choice. You had no control over what you were when you left the womb. Neither do they.
In studies of rats, it’s been shown that overcrowding can lead to increased homosexuality. If this is true, our children may be born homosexual because we live in overcrowded conditions, and the fault lies entirely with the parents, for living that way.
But wait a minute, what’s wrong with homosexuality anyway? It didn’t get a mention among the Biblical commandments. It turns out that the judgment of ‘wrongness’ comes not from God, but from the laws of man. One theory is that in overpopulous cities, especially in ancient times, there were so many homosexuals that the government feared there would be a very small next generation to tax. Homosexuals were executed as an example of what would happen if one didn’t get married and start producing children. It may be that homosexuality is just nature’s pretty handy way to reduce overpopulation when the ecosystem gets unbalanced. If you dislike homosexuals so much, try taking the larger view; at least they won’t reproduce, and maybe they'll raise some of our unwanted children.
4) Indoctrination of Indigenes: (still going on today); the church will teach you English, dress you in American clothes, and grant you both forgiveness for everything you’ve ever done wrong, plus eternal life, if you do – and think – exactly as they say to do. All you have to give up is your language, your culture, your art, your crafts, your heritage. The religious don’t seem to realize how uncharitable - and UNWISE - that is!
These behaviors are selfish and sanctimonious. If missionaries are afraid natives will say something they won’t understand, why don’t they use the peaceful and respectful expedient of learning the language of the natives?
Here is a truth; listen! People of other faiths believe in their gods just as much as you believe in yours. Their gods promise them a paradisial afterlife, protects them, and answers their prayers, just as yours does. The fact that they believe in a god by a different name doesn’t make them evil. Like you, they’re sincere believers just trying to get through this life, trying to make a living, raising their families as best they can. Zealous religious leaders on both sides invoke the ‘evil’ card because it makes them a good living, not to mention winning the adoration of the crowd. That doesn’t make it real, or right. And who says God only appeared to one people in one place, during one period of history, in this vast universe over all of which He rules?
Other religions are not the opposite of yours, they are the same. These ‘others’ believe in a god who is just and merciful, have a moral code based on the same needs, are prayerful and sincere in their devotions. If your god is infinite, can’t you accept that he may be known by different names in different languages/cultures? Why would you resent them for worshiping in their own way? Why is it any of your business how they worship? All religions agree that god is the source of all good things. All their prophets and holy teachers (and/or messiahs) agree that one should be honest, treat one’s fellows well, and be the best human one can be. How can this be reconciled with the idea that we should kill each other? Any religion that has caused war to be made should be ashamed of itself.
5) The church pays no taxes; This is the Mother of All Loopholes, and probably causes the rise of as many “religions” as true belief. And it’s not that the church is poor. Every year American churches rake in an average of 630 billion dollars (and that figure doesn't even include special funds or projects - just the basic tithing).
6) The church wiggles its way around the law: suicide is a crime, euthanasia is a crime, so why isn’t it a crime to handle (allegedly) poisonous snakes and encourage others to do so? Shouldn’t that be illegal, too? And why don’t they ever ‘wrangle’ snakes in the wild? Because they’d actually BE poisonous?
7) The image of the Virgin Mary; last seen on the side of an SUV, rendered in bird poop. Is this guy allowed to wash his car now? Will people bow in prayer when it passes? What ever happened to that Jesus potato chip? Did it rot away? If so, is it still holy? It’s toast or traffic signs or some new crazy thing every week. When the non-religious hallucinate like this, they’re arrested. The religious don’t seem to realize how insane this looks!
8) WE WILL BE SAVED: Perhaps the most destructive belief of all is that God will come to Earth in all His glory and fix everything. He will force peace among nations, and presumably remediate the environmental damage humans have caused. This belief may cause the religious to think it’s not our job (because it’s not possible, or because it’s not our ‘place’) to make peace among nations. And peace is like any other goal; you can’t get there if you don’t try. The same is true for environmental remediation. We may not be able to undo everything we’ve done to our planet, but if we don’t even try, believing some higher power will eventually do it for us, we have failed to fix anything by failing to try. There may be some justice to be found in this attitude after all. If the earth suffers a prolonged warming period and many species die, the harm to the planet itself may be minimal. It’s possible the environment will equalize itself again in a few hundred thousand years or so, but it’s not unlikely that one of the species to be lost will be human. So the problem will be ‘fixed,’ and new species will no doubt evolve to fill our niche. One can only hope they will be wiser than we. Even if humans survive the new conditions we’ve hastened to create, the extreme loss of life, the loss of our civilization and probable loss of our history could make these descendents unrecognizable. Will they still believe in a god? And if so, would we recognize him?
If you believe instead that aliens are coming to help us, the same argument holds true, but with a twist. I would only add that unless extra-terrestrials are a lot more altruistic than we are, they’ll probably wait until we’ve wiped ourselves out before coming to claim this beautiful and unique planet for themselves. Why would they bother to make war on us, further damaging the planet, when with a little patience, it can be theirs with no effort at all?
9)PRAYING FOR PEACE: Certainly it would seem that no harm could come from such a prayer, but that may not be true. Those who are praying for peace are not inspired to go out and make it happen, but are content to leave it in God’s hands. Well, we've been praying for peace for centuries, and it's no closer now than it was then.
If all we really have is each other, think of the time wasted praying for peace, and think of what would have happened if all those hours of praying had been spent DOING.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
A FINAL WORD ON RACISM
Scientifically, there is very little to distinguish between races. All humans must eat, drink, need shelter, have the drive to mate, love and pair-bond. We all have skin, hair, eyes, teeth, the same number of limbs. We’re all born helpless, and are helpless against the onslaught of aging. So answer me this; how can one race be in God’s image, and any other race be very far off?
In ancient times it made perfect sense (genetically) to favor, protect, and cooperate only with people who were of our tribe and/or likely to return the favor. When existence is precarious, one wants to protect one’s own genetic line and those closest to it. It’s a brilliant survival strategy. But now that humans have overrun the globe, tribal isolation and pride is no longer required for survival. America was founded on the idea that people should be allowed certain dignities and religious freedoms. In practice it’s taking a lot longer than one would have anticipated, but by the time of this writing I’m honored to say we have a (even if only ¼) black president. I’d like to think this will end some of the unjustified racism this country suffers while preaching equality.
Do you think that God made only ‘your kind,’ and Satan, perhaps, made the rest? By that reasoning, Satan must be much more powerful, as there are always ten times more of ‘them’ than of ‘you.’
Our time is unique in history in that we face a planet-wide crisis. People of all nations need to consult and come to agreements about the remediation of damage before it’s too late for our efforts to have any effect. War is not exactly contributing to the betterment of the planet. It needs to stop. We have a common goal to work toward which transcends race and religion; saving our ecosystem. Intolerance has become the opposite of survival. We have a much better chance of surviving our own hand-made environmental apocalypse if we call on the wisdom and work of every culture and every race to solve our shared problems together. The very differences in viewpoint which cause us to kill each other could be the creative pool from which our solutions come.
In the interest of greater interracial understanding, I'll be happy to provide a link to music of the world to anyone who requests it.
In ancient times it made perfect sense (genetically) to favor, protect, and cooperate only with people who were of our tribe and/or likely to return the favor. When existence is precarious, one wants to protect one’s own genetic line and those closest to it. It’s a brilliant survival strategy. But now that humans have overrun the globe, tribal isolation and pride is no longer required for survival. America was founded on the idea that people should be allowed certain dignities and religious freedoms. In practice it’s taking a lot longer than one would have anticipated, but by the time of this writing I’m honored to say we have a (even if only ¼) black president. I’d like to think this will end some of the unjustified racism this country suffers while preaching equality.
Do you think that God made only ‘your kind,’ and Satan, perhaps, made the rest? By that reasoning, Satan must be much more powerful, as there are always ten times more of ‘them’ than of ‘you.’
Our time is unique in history in that we face a planet-wide crisis. People of all nations need to consult and come to agreements about the remediation of damage before it’s too late for our efforts to have any effect. War is not exactly contributing to the betterment of the planet. It needs to stop. We have a common goal to work toward which transcends race and religion; saving our ecosystem. Intolerance has become the opposite of survival. We have a much better chance of surviving our own hand-made environmental apocalypse if we call on the wisdom and work of every culture and every race to solve our shared problems together. The very differences in viewpoint which cause us to kill each other could be the creative pool from which our solutions come.
In the interest of greater interracial understanding, I'll be happy to provide a link to music of the world to anyone who requests it.
Monday, September 14, 2009
PEOPLE WHO AREN’T WHITE ARE STUPID?
Who came up with this ridiculous assumption????
There is no known correlation between race and IQ. Tests which once seemed to show there to be a correlation were later shown to be prejudicial. In other words, white people made themselves seem smarter by changing the test results.
Perhaps I should begin this by making a point of explaining that without the first human to make a spear, we wouldn’t have cell phones. Each innovation in technology is built on those which came before. The most remarkable technologies/inventions of all are those which were made the longest time ago, when there were fewer technologies to build on. In other words, humans invented the telephone long before they invented Wi-Fi, and the latter comes from building on the former, and both come from flint-knapping. Cave men didn’t – and couldn’t - invent Wi-Fi. So without these inventions and discoveries from other races, white folks might still be living in caves.
These are only a few of these countries’ inventions and discoveries (and it’s not always clear who did something first). Pick one where you’ve been taught stupid people live, and learn.
INDIA: Shipyard/Dock, Dentistry, Bathrooms, Sewer Systems and Plumbing, Kilns and Ovens, Animal-drawn Plow, Astronomy, Geometry, Surgery and Hospitals, Smelting Iron, Buttons, the Decimal System, the Wheel
THE MIDDLE EAST: Agriculture, Alcoholic Beverages, Adobe, the Granary, Metalworking, Animal Husbandry, Paved Streets, Mapmaking, Soap, Algebra, Writing and the Alphabet, Smelting Copper, Glass, Oil Lamps, Astronomy, Sailboats, Accounting, Kiln-fired Brick, the Calendar, Standardized System of Measures, Armies
MESOAMERICA: Rubber, Jerky, Baseball, Chocolate
AFRICA/EGYPT: Struck-stone Tools, Cooking, Fire and Sterilization of Water, Burial, Bone Tools, Atlatl, Baby Sling, Herding, Pottery, Machete, Fishing, the Drum, Shelter, Chess, Irrigation, the Plow, Mining, Universities, Ceramics, the Razor, Spinning Wheel, Domestication of Animals, Bread, Wheel and Axle, Twisted Rope, Paper, Cement, Glass, Electricity, Banking, Pyramids, Weaving, the Bow and Arrow, Cosmetics, Basket-making, Numbers
GREECE: Geometry, Philosophy, Medicine and Democracy, Aqueducts, Fountains, the Shower, the Railway, Truss Roof, Caliper, Crane, Gears, Crossbow, Winch, Central Heating, Odometer, Surveying Tools, Analog Computers, Olympic Games , the Alphabet we still use today
ROME: Architectural Arch, Water Wheel, Hot-water Bath, Glass Blowing, Dams, Bridges, Aqueducts, Amphitheaters, Concrete, Treadwheels, Roads, Books, Hydraulic Mining, Glazed Pottery, False Teeth
CHINA: Silk, Abacus, Clock, Kites, Compass, Porcelain, Gunpowder, Printing, Accupuncture, Herbal Medicine, the Seismograph, Differential Gears, the Hot Air Balloon, Firearms, Matches, Dry Docks, Cast Iron, Bells, Forks, Ice Cream
ISLAM: Chemical Distillation Apparatus and Chemistry, Coffee, Refined Sugar, Restaurants, Stained Glass Windows, Parabolic Mirror, Damascus Steel, Asbestos, Kerosene Lamps, Garbage Collection, Tar Roads, Ventilators, the Windmill, Tooth-bleaching, Hair-remover, Lipstick, Toothpaste, Deodorant, Perfume, Guitar, Lute
ISRAEL: Did I mention Jesus was a Jew? The Jews invented our religion, the Bible, our moral code, and our concept of Law. They practiced intentional breeding, and may have originated it.
Some little-known facts about people of color:
Moses was married to a Cushite (black) woman (Ex 2:21). This means that (in spite of the fact that they weren’t to marry outside their ‘own kind,’ Jews have some Cushite blood.
Nefertiti, believed to be one of the most beautiful women who ever lived, was not exactly white.
Halle Barry, Denzel Washington, Beyonce, Morgan Freeman, Thandie Newton, Vanessa Williams, enough said.
Mankind originated on the continent of Africa. Many people seem to be able to ignore the fact that this means Man was originally black, and if we claim to be human, we are descended from Blacks.
Some people believe that looking at paintings of pharaohs, it seems pretty obvious Egyptians were black. Same with the Olmec. I don’t know. I just know people of any color are smarter than whites act.
There is no known correlation between race and IQ. Tests which once seemed to show there to be a correlation were later shown to be prejudicial. In other words, white people made themselves seem smarter by changing the test results.
Perhaps I should begin this by making a point of explaining that without the first human to make a spear, we wouldn’t have cell phones. Each innovation in technology is built on those which came before. The most remarkable technologies/inventions of all are those which were made the longest time ago, when there were fewer technologies to build on. In other words, humans invented the telephone long before they invented Wi-Fi, and the latter comes from building on the former, and both come from flint-knapping. Cave men didn’t – and couldn’t - invent Wi-Fi. So without these inventions and discoveries from other races, white folks might still be living in caves.
These are only a few of these countries’ inventions and discoveries (and it’s not always clear who did something first). Pick one where you’ve been taught stupid people live, and learn.
INDIA: Shipyard/Dock, Dentistry, Bathrooms, Sewer Systems and Plumbing, Kilns and Ovens, Animal-drawn Plow, Astronomy, Geometry, Surgery and Hospitals, Smelting Iron, Buttons, the Decimal System, the Wheel
THE MIDDLE EAST: Agriculture, Alcoholic Beverages, Adobe, the Granary, Metalworking, Animal Husbandry, Paved Streets, Mapmaking, Soap, Algebra, Writing and the Alphabet, Smelting Copper, Glass, Oil Lamps, Astronomy, Sailboats, Accounting, Kiln-fired Brick, the Calendar, Standardized System of Measures, Armies
MESOAMERICA: Rubber, Jerky, Baseball, Chocolate
AFRICA/EGYPT: Struck-stone Tools, Cooking, Fire and Sterilization of Water, Burial, Bone Tools, Atlatl, Baby Sling, Herding, Pottery, Machete, Fishing, the Drum, Shelter, Chess, Irrigation, the Plow, Mining, Universities, Ceramics, the Razor, Spinning Wheel, Domestication of Animals, Bread, Wheel and Axle, Twisted Rope, Paper, Cement, Glass, Electricity, Banking, Pyramids, Weaving, the Bow and Arrow, Cosmetics, Basket-making, Numbers
GREECE: Geometry, Philosophy, Medicine and Democracy, Aqueducts, Fountains, the Shower, the Railway, Truss Roof, Caliper, Crane, Gears, Crossbow, Winch, Central Heating, Odometer, Surveying Tools, Analog Computers, Olympic Games , the Alphabet we still use today
ROME: Architectural Arch, Water Wheel, Hot-water Bath, Glass Blowing, Dams, Bridges, Aqueducts, Amphitheaters, Concrete, Treadwheels, Roads, Books, Hydraulic Mining, Glazed Pottery, False Teeth
CHINA: Silk, Abacus, Clock, Kites, Compass, Porcelain, Gunpowder, Printing, Accupuncture, Herbal Medicine, the Seismograph, Differential Gears, the Hot Air Balloon, Firearms, Matches, Dry Docks, Cast Iron, Bells, Forks, Ice Cream
ISLAM: Chemical Distillation Apparatus and Chemistry, Coffee, Refined Sugar, Restaurants, Stained Glass Windows, Parabolic Mirror, Damascus Steel, Asbestos, Kerosene Lamps, Garbage Collection, Tar Roads, Ventilators, the Windmill, Tooth-bleaching, Hair-remover, Lipstick, Toothpaste, Deodorant, Perfume, Guitar, Lute
ISRAEL: Did I mention Jesus was a Jew? The Jews invented our religion, the Bible, our moral code, and our concept of Law. They practiced intentional breeding, and may have originated it.
Some little-known facts about people of color:
Moses was married to a Cushite (black) woman (Ex 2:21). This means that (in spite of the fact that they weren’t to marry outside their ‘own kind,’ Jews have some Cushite blood.
Nefertiti, believed to be one of the most beautiful women who ever lived, was not exactly white.
Halle Barry, Denzel Washington, Beyonce, Morgan Freeman, Thandie Newton, Vanessa Williams, enough said.
Mankind originated on the continent of Africa. Many people seem to be able to ignore the fact that this means Man was originally black, and if we claim to be human, we are descended from Blacks.
Some people believe that looking at paintings of pharaohs, it seems pretty obvious Egyptians were black. Same with the Olmec. I don’t know. I just know people of any color are smarter than whites act.
NATURAL HUMANS
Darshan Chande has a point (see “Comments”). I briefly defined a bad person as one who succeeds at the cost of good people, but I didn’t define what a good person is. I shall try to do so now.
My friend, if we were all monks, there would be neither good humans nor bad ones, since the word “monk” seems to imply celibacy. You can’t have it both ways; if we act according to Nature, celibacy is quite unnatural. I apologize if you meant some other kind of monk. Regardless; whatever we are to become must begin where we are now. It would be a disaster if the millions of humans in my city suddenly decided to hunt and forage. We are, many of us, not in a position to just live in Nature. We’re not equipped with the skills (for example) to build our own shelters or obtain our own food, nor with the physical fitness needed to do so successfully. I agree with you that a good person should honor Nature, but let’s not be blind to the fact that not all that is natural is good. Sociopaths (bad people) so far as I know, occur naturally. Should they therefore be encouraged to act according to their natures? Ironically, they themselves don’t respect Nature or anything else.
Good people don’t need commandments to tell them how to behave, but I’ll list my personal 13 commandments here again for instructive purposes. Good people know these (or very similar) things “naturally.”
1. Do no harm. Not even with words. (Raise your voice, your hand, to no one) If you accidentally cause harm, apologize frankly and seek to repair the damage.
2. Support human rights everywhere (for you, too, are human).
3. Help or please someone else for no gain at all every day.
4. Do not betray the trust of another.
5. Pair-bond with sincerity and respect.
6. Don’t take more than you need. Of anything.
7. Celebrate your curiosity and reason; they are the gift of mind; our greatest gift.
8. In your work, be in harmony with your principles.
9. Practice thankfulness, kindness, and joy.
10. Redeem the Earth.
11. Sing, dance, and/or speak in unison with others.
12. Practice mercy.
13. Don’t judge someone without knowing them.
If you live in a home built by experts in construction, and use a computer to communicate, and use gas-fueled vehicles to move about your city, by your own standard you are not a good person; I don’t believe that’s true. The fact that you realize an inherent respect for Nature argues otherwise. Still, I wouldn't suggest that you discard your clothing, fashion yourself a spear, and attack the nearest hot-dog vendor (don't forget we are natural carnivores). If it were that easy, I’d have done it myself long ago.
Just as our pets have been bred into forms that never existed in the wild, so have we. How do you propose we actually become this Natural Human you consider good, given that for us all to become monks would end the race?
My friend, if we were all monks, there would be neither good humans nor bad ones, since the word “monk” seems to imply celibacy. You can’t have it both ways; if we act according to Nature, celibacy is quite unnatural. I apologize if you meant some other kind of monk. Regardless; whatever we are to become must begin where we are now. It would be a disaster if the millions of humans in my city suddenly decided to hunt and forage. We are, many of us, not in a position to just live in Nature. We’re not equipped with the skills (for example) to build our own shelters or obtain our own food, nor with the physical fitness needed to do so successfully. I agree with you that a good person should honor Nature, but let’s not be blind to the fact that not all that is natural is good. Sociopaths (bad people) so far as I know, occur naturally. Should they therefore be encouraged to act according to their natures? Ironically, they themselves don’t respect Nature or anything else.
Good people don’t need commandments to tell them how to behave, but I’ll list my personal 13 commandments here again for instructive purposes. Good people know these (or very similar) things “naturally.”
1. Do no harm. Not even with words. (Raise your voice, your hand, to no one) If you accidentally cause harm, apologize frankly and seek to repair the damage.
2. Support human rights everywhere (for you, too, are human).
3. Help or please someone else for no gain at all every day.
4. Do not betray the trust of another.
5. Pair-bond with sincerity and respect.
6. Don’t take more than you need. Of anything.
7. Celebrate your curiosity and reason; they are the gift of mind; our greatest gift.
8. In your work, be in harmony with your principles.
9. Practice thankfulness, kindness, and joy.
10. Redeem the Earth.
11. Sing, dance, and/or speak in unison with others.
12. Practice mercy.
13. Don’t judge someone without knowing them.
If you live in a home built by experts in construction, and use a computer to communicate, and use gas-fueled vehicles to move about your city, by your own standard you are not a good person; I don’t believe that’s true. The fact that you realize an inherent respect for Nature argues otherwise. Still, I wouldn't suggest that you discard your clothing, fashion yourself a spear, and attack the nearest hot-dog vendor (don't forget we are natural carnivores). If it were that easy, I’d have done it myself long ago.
Just as our pets have been bred into forms that never existed in the wild, so have we. How do you propose we actually become this Natural Human you consider good, given that for us all to become monks would end the race?
Saturday, September 12, 2009
THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE ANGELS
Why do bad people happen to good people? We all know there are bad people, yet we’re continually surprised when confronted by them (well, I am). If choosing the best-looking people to marry for thousands of generations makes the race better-looking, why doesn’t marrying good people (which surely we all want to do) result in the race becoming more “good” over time?
One reason has already been implied; they fool us into thinking they are kind, caring and responsible. Sometimes for our entire lives, in the same way that homosexuals used to survive by passing for straight.
By some estimates, half the mentally-ill are undiagnosed and 25% of the population are effectively sociopathic. When someone is psychotic, (I’m being very general here), they perceive things that are not there; voices, visions, etc.). When they are sociopathic, it means they do not perceive other people as human beings equally with themselves. It’s believed that this is caused by a lack of “mirror neurons” which would allow them to feel empathy for others. Imagine the implications if 25% of us are like this! Most sociopaths aren’t out to ‘get’ anyone, their behavior is just uniformly cold, callus, calculated. If they befriend us, it’s because we’re perceived to have financial or social value, not because they think we are their equals or fellows, or for loyalty or friendship, or any other good thing.
It’s easy to imagine there have been times in human history when such a person was more likely to survive than a good person. The problem is, it’s not just during bad times. In fact, even in good times, our society seems to favor the un-empathic. The man who feels sympathetic toward the failing business’ owner is less likely to push him until he breaks, while the sociopath has no problem cutting him to the quick. So the sociopath succeeds. Since he succeeds, he attracts mates. To be clear, the sociopath doesn’t choose to feel this way – he or she simply lacks the ability to believe that other people have feelings, or that it matters whether they do or not. We’re speaking here of the sociopathic adept – not all sociopaths succeed in “passing for straight.”
Consider the Ten Commandments; their very basis is as rules against betrayal. Don’t betray god, your parents, your neighbors, etc. So every sin really comes down to betrayal. And the adept sociopath can betray like no one else. What can a good person do about this?
I wish I knew how to tell the good people from the bad, but I haven’t learned the trick of it – I still feel, when betrayed, like I got a fist in the face and a knife in the back.
One out of four people you know are “not okay.” This is a disease that has no known cure, and the bad are out there competing for resources (including competition for mates) and success. Maybe one day science will offer us an answer, but apparently we're not there yet. The only sure protection I know of is to feel nothing for them – but if you’re a good person, you are incapable of doing that.
We spoke earlier about angels having no consciences, and these people are the same. They suffer no guilt, no matter the hurt they cause. Rationally, humanely, there’s nothing I know of that we can do about this. If anyone out there has a test for social response-ability, I’d love to hear it. Or if you have one of those detectors they used on Blade Runner?
At any rate, this is one of the darker, more seductive sides of religion; not whether we ourselves will get to go to heaven (that whole subject being disturbing) but whether or not those who succeed at the cost of good people will burn in hell.
One reason has already been implied; they fool us into thinking they are kind, caring and responsible. Sometimes for our entire lives, in the same way that homosexuals used to survive by passing for straight.
By some estimates, half the mentally-ill are undiagnosed and 25% of the population are effectively sociopathic. When someone is psychotic, (I’m being very general here), they perceive things that are not there; voices, visions, etc.). When they are sociopathic, it means they do not perceive other people as human beings equally with themselves. It’s believed that this is caused by a lack of “mirror neurons” which would allow them to feel empathy for others. Imagine the implications if 25% of us are like this! Most sociopaths aren’t out to ‘get’ anyone, their behavior is just uniformly cold, callus, calculated. If they befriend us, it’s because we’re perceived to have financial or social value, not because they think we are their equals or fellows, or for loyalty or friendship, or any other good thing.
It’s easy to imagine there have been times in human history when such a person was more likely to survive than a good person. The problem is, it’s not just during bad times. In fact, even in good times, our society seems to favor the un-empathic. The man who feels sympathetic toward the failing business’ owner is less likely to push him until he breaks, while the sociopath has no problem cutting him to the quick. So the sociopath succeeds. Since he succeeds, he attracts mates. To be clear, the sociopath doesn’t choose to feel this way – he or she simply lacks the ability to believe that other people have feelings, or that it matters whether they do or not. We’re speaking here of the sociopathic adept – not all sociopaths succeed in “passing for straight.”
Consider the Ten Commandments; their very basis is as rules against betrayal. Don’t betray god, your parents, your neighbors, etc. So every sin really comes down to betrayal. And the adept sociopath can betray like no one else. What can a good person do about this?
I wish I knew how to tell the good people from the bad, but I haven’t learned the trick of it – I still feel, when betrayed, like I got a fist in the face and a knife in the back.
One out of four people you know are “not okay.” This is a disease that has no known cure, and the bad are out there competing for resources (including competition for mates) and success. Maybe one day science will offer us an answer, but apparently we're not there yet. The only sure protection I know of is to feel nothing for them – but if you’re a good person, you are incapable of doing that.
We spoke earlier about angels having no consciences, and these people are the same. They suffer no guilt, no matter the hurt they cause. Rationally, humanely, there’s nothing I know of that we can do about this. If anyone out there has a test for social response-ability, I’d love to hear it. Or if you have one of those detectors they used on Blade Runner?
At any rate, this is one of the darker, more seductive sides of religion; not whether we ourselves will get to go to heaven (that whole subject being disturbing) but whether or not those who succeed at the cost of good people will burn in hell.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
APOLOGIA MAXIMUS MEA
For using these and any other videos to support my arguments, I apologize, as I do not own them. All rights belong to their original possessors. Sometimes they're just so appropriate...
I'M JUST SAYING...
The argument between Science and Religion is a war between two groups with almost exactly the same weapons and strategy.
You have to believe the Word Of God. We know it’s the Word Of God because it says so, right in there. We don’t have to believe what we see if it disagrees with the Word Of God. “But the Bible makes no sense,” you say? It doesn’t have to make sense, you just have to have faith. And if you don’t have faith, you will burn forever in hell. Questions mean your faith is lacking…and yet “Faith is a gift, not of works, lest any man should boast.” If you don't have the gift...what can your questions hurt?
Then there’s science. You have to believe what fancy math tells us, and scientists have to interpret for you. And if they discover something new in the math (or discover a new math), you have to change your belief to their new interpretation. But if you disagree with them, you have to learn their maths and languages and present your case as one of them, even though they make it very difficult to join the club. But if you don’t, or don’t believe them, you are simply and self-evidently stupid.
Both wrong. If you are living as you should, you have no need to follow either one. Church, as George Carlin once said, is a place where we go on Sunday to outdress each other. We give money to the church for its upkeep and for the poor. I’ve been the poor. My church brought over a box of canned goods no one else wanted on Thanksgiving. Apparently the only giving thanks expected was thankfulness that we took away these horrible foods. Yet the Catholic Church is not only a nation, it’s the richest nation on earth. So there must be no more poor, right? And don’t think science doesn’t get your money, too – they’re just a little more underhanded about it.
Science is mainly something that esoteric wizards do on computers, the results of which we have to take on faith, because we can’t possibly understand their reasoning or research. It may lead to better technology, but here’s a secret:
Being human has not changed. Good behavior hasn’t changed, and neither has bad behavior. The need for food, water, shelter, and love haven’t changed. Really, nothing important has changed.
In John 5: Yeshua heals a man who’s been there 38 years but never makes it to the healing water in time. He wasted 38 years waiting for a miracle! Whether or not he got one seems irrelevant, since his life is half gone over it. You may say he got his miracle, but what if he’d been born just 38 years later? No miracle, just torment, presumably life-long.
In medicine, it may take going to 38 doctors before you find one who will do the simplest thing; LISTEN. And it’s up to you to manage to see 38 doctors – they won’t do a thing to help. At last, it may be that if they listen, there is help available. But what if you can’t afford it? (After all, you’re paying bills to 38 doctors at the time!) And you’ve heard that pharmaceutical companies will help those who can’t afford their medicine – and it may even be true. Personally, I ran out of gumption after filling out the 38th form! Even if you navigate this whole system successfully, what they actually offer may be $5.00 off on a bottle of $350.00 medicine. Sorry, just a personal pet peeve.
In science, they tell us the universe is infinite, then turn around and try to figure out what shape it is. If it’s infinite, it can’t have shape, can it?
That 96% of the universe is missing shouldn’t be a great surprise, considering how narrow our perceptions are. Vision, hearing, even touch – we perceive in a very narrow band. The fact that we can mechanically stretch this a bit does not for one moment mean we can now perceive everything. And what is this “dark matter” and “dark energy?” If science doesn’t know, then aren’t we free to believe it’s spiritual effluvia of some kind? This is a hole big enough to drive a planet through. I’m just saying.
You have to believe the Word Of God. We know it’s the Word Of God because it says so, right in there. We don’t have to believe what we see if it disagrees with the Word Of God. “But the Bible makes no sense,” you say? It doesn’t have to make sense, you just have to have faith. And if you don’t have faith, you will burn forever in hell. Questions mean your faith is lacking…and yet “Faith is a gift, not of works, lest any man should boast.” If you don't have the gift...what can your questions hurt?
Then there’s science. You have to believe what fancy math tells us, and scientists have to interpret for you. And if they discover something new in the math (or discover a new math), you have to change your belief to their new interpretation. But if you disagree with them, you have to learn their maths and languages and present your case as one of them, even though they make it very difficult to join the club. But if you don’t, or don’t believe them, you are simply and self-evidently stupid.
Both wrong. If you are living as you should, you have no need to follow either one. Church, as George Carlin once said, is a place where we go on Sunday to outdress each other. We give money to the church for its upkeep and for the poor. I’ve been the poor. My church brought over a box of canned goods no one else wanted on Thanksgiving. Apparently the only giving thanks expected was thankfulness that we took away these horrible foods. Yet the Catholic Church is not only a nation, it’s the richest nation on earth. So there must be no more poor, right? And don’t think science doesn’t get your money, too – they’re just a little more underhanded about it.
Science is mainly something that esoteric wizards do on computers, the results of which we have to take on faith, because we can’t possibly understand their reasoning or research. It may lead to better technology, but here’s a secret:
Being human has not changed. Good behavior hasn’t changed, and neither has bad behavior. The need for food, water, shelter, and love haven’t changed. Really, nothing important has changed.
In John 5: Yeshua heals a man who’s been there 38 years but never makes it to the healing water in time. He wasted 38 years waiting for a miracle! Whether or not he got one seems irrelevant, since his life is half gone over it. You may say he got his miracle, but what if he’d been born just 38 years later? No miracle, just torment, presumably life-long.
In medicine, it may take going to 38 doctors before you find one who will do the simplest thing; LISTEN. And it’s up to you to manage to see 38 doctors – they won’t do a thing to help. At last, it may be that if they listen, there is help available. But what if you can’t afford it? (After all, you’re paying bills to 38 doctors at the time!) And you’ve heard that pharmaceutical companies will help those who can’t afford their medicine – and it may even be true. Personally, I ran out of gumption after filling out the 38th form! Even if you navigate this whole system successfully, what they actually offer may be $5.00 off on a bottle of $350.00 medicine. Sorry, just a personal pet peeve.
In science, they tell us the universe is infinite, then turn around and try to figure out what shape it is. If it’s infinite, it can’t have shape, can it?
That 96% of the universe is missing shouldn’t be a great surprise, considering how narrow our perceptions are. Vision, hearing, even touch – we perceive in a very narrow band. The fact that we can mechanically stretch this a bit does not for one moment mean we can now perceive everything. And what is this “dark matter” and “dark energy?” If science doesn’t know, then aren’t we free to believe it’s spiritual effluvia of some kind? This is a hole big enough to drive a planet through. I’m just saying.
Monday, September 7, 2009
ABOUT THOSE ALIENS…
So let’s say you meet an ordinary guy on an ordinary day, and here’s what he says:
1. He’s seen aliens.
2. The aliens have spoken to him privately. (Depending on which of these fellows you meet, he may have received a message for all mankind.)
3. He now has special powers. Which won’t work if there are unbelievers present.
4. He has no physical evidence.
5. The aliens have been watching over us, and will save us.
6. The aliens have great powers and can do ANYTHING, especially read our minds.
7. The aliens are going to reveal themselves at a certain secret date and time.
Now if this guy is correct, your whole world-view would have to be changed. But I’d be the first to ask, “What do they want with all those bovine and primate lips and butt-holes? Is someone making hot dogs?” I'm afraid I'd have a hard time believing in such beings even if I met one.
And yet, as outrageous as these claims sound, just try substituting the word “God” for “Aliens,” and you’ll see that you just met most of the human race. Now try substituting the words “Spirits in the Spirit Realm,” and you have met very nearly the rest of the race.
Doesn’t this sound as though we have an inherent need to believe something exactly like this as simply a cost of being human? Yet we don’t have to. To some it seems unreasonable to give up the comforts church offers such as community, the illusion that we’re helping the poor, speaking and singing in unison, and validation for judging others. But look what else we give up;
1. Armageddon
2. Being judged for every move (even every THOUGHT), when we’re not bad people
3. Eternal torture because we failed to do something exactly right – like not work on Sunday!
4. Guilt for breaking silly laws and shame for being human.
And look what we gain:
1. Help the helpless ourselves, thus getting the full, rich reward of service to others.
2. Stop making one rich corporation richer.
3. Do what's right because we're good people, not because we fear damnation.
4. Help each other knowing we're the only help we've got.
It's what John Lennon meant when he said, "Imagine."
1. He’s seen aliens.
2. The aliens have spoken to him privately. (Depending on which of these fellows you meet, he may have received a message for all mankind.)
3. He now has special powers. Which won’t work if there are unbelievers present.
4. He has no physical evidence.
5. The aliens have been watching over us, and will save us.
6. The aliens have great powers and can do ANYTHING, especially read our minds.
7. The aliens are going to reveal themselves at a certain secret date and time.
Now if this guy is correct, your whole world-view would have to be changed. But I’d be the first to ask, “What do they want with all those bovine and primate lips and butt-holes? Is someone making hot dogs?” I'm afraid I'd have a hard time believing in such beings even if I met one.
And yet, as outrageous as these claims sound, just try substituting the word “God” for “Aliens,” and you’ll see that you just met most of the human race. Now try substituting the words “Spirits in the Spirit Realm,” and you have met very nearly the rest of the race.
Doesn’t this sound as though we have an inherent need to believe something exactly like this as simply a cost of being human? Yet we don’t have to. To some it seems unreasonable to give up the comforts church offers such as community, the illusion that we’re helping the poor, speaking and singing in unison, and validation for judging others. But look what else we give up;
1. Armageddon
2. Being judged for every move (even every THOUGHT), when we’re not bad people
3. Eternal torture because we failed to do something exactly right – like not work on Sunday!
4. Guilt for breaking silly laws and shame for being human.
And look what we gain:
1. Help the helpless ourselves, thus getting the full, rich reward of service to others.
2. Stop making one rich corporation richer.
3. Do what's right because we're good people, not because we fear damnation.
4. Help each other knowing we're the only help we've got.
It's what John Lennon meant when he said, "Imagine."
Sunday, September 6, 2009
NEXT TIME, ALIENS!
In these times, we no longer pray to make the sun come up, for rain (except facetiously). We pray now for “that” job, “that” boy/girl friend, someone who’s ill, money. The generally-accepted deities are a couple of thousand years old, and they had nothing to say about cell phone etiquette. I don’t think queues had even been invented, much less standing-in-line courtesy. We need someone a little more up-to-date. And we need to decide if it’s okay to pray for a big-screen TV, or if that would be asking too much.
So if we were building a deity today, what would he be like? Would we have to do ritual dances or chants for results? I think we know better than to make “sacrifices” of living beings. With our new commandments and these things clarified, all we need is a ‘messenger.’ Maybe it would be better if he or she were not divine…Traditionally, there’d be a ‘miraculous’ birth story; maybe a baby doctors thought could not be saved, but an angel appeared or something? What do you think?
So if we were building a deity today, what would he be like? Would we have to do ritual dances or chants for results? I think we know better than to make “sacrifices” of living beings. With our new commandments and these things clarified, all we need is a ‘messenger.’ Maybe it would be better if he or she were not divine…Traditionally, there’d be a ‘miraculous’ birth story; maybe a baby doctors thought could not be saved, but an angel appeared or something? What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)