Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Pseudoscientific Atheism, and the validity of Deism.

I am a great fan of many of the polemics of the new breed of vocal Atheists out there{Though I lean towards Deism as an Agnostic-Deist}, unfortunately some of them are dooing Atheism, science, and reason itself a disservice.

Case in point. Biologist and Atheist Richard Dawkins in his best seller{ for some reason found in the "science" section of your local bookstore} "The God Delusion" legitimately critizises Theism, faith, and religion. But he makes the grave mistake of taking down Agnosticism, Deism, and Pantheism with it. Granted Pantheism, beeing a "theism" is not very supportable{though it should be noted that a good percentage of so-called "Pantheists" are actually more accurately PanDeists or PanenDeists- since their God is an impersonal one, Theism neccecitates a personal god/divinity}. But Deism{PanDeism/PanenDeism} and Agnosticism are more supportable. In his book Dawkins calls Pantheism "Sexed Up Atheism", it's obvious he refers to Scientific Pantheism rather than classical Pantheism; Scientific Pantheism is poetic Atheism with poetic reverance for the natural universe, unlike classical Pantheism wherein they refer to the Universe literally beeing a intelligent and personal beeing. But Dawkins does not make that distinction.

Dawkins also essentuially accuses Agnostics of fence sitting, and Deists of beeing "watered down theists". He calls Atheism the 'default" position, that is NOT a 'belief" and does NOT need to explain itself{or themselves for "Atheists"}. Dawkins furtermore calls himself a Agnostic-Atheist but by such a small percetage of Agnosticism and in such a smarmy way that anyone using their reason can see he's merely beeing pretentious and "attempting"{rather poorly} to be "open-minded"/"open-ended".

Dawkins has began a trend of new Atheists out there that is a growing movement. He's not the only one that has infuenced this movement. Contrarian Journalist Christopher Hitchens, Philosopher/Neuroscience student Sam Harris,Philosopher and scientist Daniel Dennett and others have also influenced this movement. Personally I am a big fan of both Hitchens and Harris, as neither has gone out of their way to so blatantly mock other rationalists that are'nt Atheists{by this I mean the Agnostics and Deists}.Unfortunately, so many of the new Atheisst out there have like sheep followed their sheperd Dawkins example and effectively made a mockery of Atheism by belittling other non-theist rationalists, and by mixing{as Dawkins has} Atheism together with other ideologies with the implication that unless you also subscribe to these other ideologies and the mainstram opinion of this herd of Dawkinites- you are a heretic and not truly rational or in line with science facts. I call this the "Cult of Dawkins" or "Dawkinites".

Don't get me wrong, I like much of what Dawkins has to say, I agree with many of his opinions, and find him to be a rather laid back fellow. But Dawkins has made a joke out of Atheism and the new Atheist movement by making it so incredibly small-minded and hypocritical that so many intelligent people have bought into it. I also agree with Evangelical Christians on various issues, and find some of them to be very laid back and likable people as well, but I still comdemn their beliefs and have no problem criticising said beliefs or those views they espouse which I disagree with or see as abhorable.

The biggest mistake Dawkins and his fan club have made is in how they've attempted to corner the market on "science" for Atheism and not only Atheism, but their brand of it. Along with their utter lack of understanding about Agnocoticism, Deism, Pantheism,etc. For example, as a Deist myself, I've noticed that he and they tend to have an undersyanding of Deism that is purely limited to "Classic Deism" and the U.S. founding fathers, and have not noticed that as "liberal theism" became into beeing and more fashionable- Deism has seperated from the liberal theism of early Deism{or at least has EXANDED naturally and evolved past the views of the Deists of that era}.

Another big Mistake he/they make is in claiming the referances to God by great scientists and philosopers from the enlightenment till now, from Spinoza to Einstein to Hawkings, are just playful poetic gestures by Atheists. It's clear though from reading all their stuff that none of these were or are Atheists, Agnostics perhaps{but they all seem to lean more towards either Deism or PanDeism/PanenDeism than Atheism}. But what can be expsted, when these same hypocrital Atheist polemicists often like to make a claim that the founding fathers were Atheists{many aknowledge they were Deists of course; but even then they say...'they'd be Atheisst today", my question- "how the hell do you know that? are you psychic?}.

They've also made a huge mistake in thinking and claiming that Atheism is the rational default position, is not a 'belief", and need not explain itself.

Atheism IS a belief. AGNOSTICISM{between Atheism and Deism} is the"De-fault" that need not explain itself and is the truly faithless LACK OF BELIEF.Atheism is as much a belief, based in reason and science, as Deism is. Both Atheism and Deism are equally supportable given the evidence and theories provided us by scientists[from biologists and other earth sciences; to the sciences of the Cosmos and the quantum world such as Physics, astronomy, and Cosmology,etc}. When either Atheism or Deism claimed the market on science and reason, it makes a joke of the position, and is acting pseudoscientifically.

Science neither proves nor disproves the Atheist or Deist positions. I include in "Deism" some of it's ofshoot theories such as PanDeism and PanenDeism{mixes various aspects of Pantheism or PanenTheism with aspects of Deism}.Philosophically, both positions{Atheism,Deism and it's offshoots} are equally supportable given what we currently know about the cosmos and ourselves. But the STRONG Atheists would like us to believe that the facts PROVE Atheisms case and show DEISM to be a slightly more reasonable or less harmful version of theism. But as they like to do, they accuse Agnosticism of fence sitting thereby aiding the Deists whom beeing "watered down theists" aid the liberal theisst whom aid the liberal religionists whom aid the liberal Christians and Liberal Muslims whom in the end just provide an aid to nutty fundamentalists which aids terrorists. Ssee the mindtrap they have created, unless you are a Strong Atheist... you are helping the fundamentalists and supporting terrorism indirectly. An absurd leap of logic if ever there was one.Dawkins as his little cult of sheep have, has accused anyone and anything that isn't 100% pure Atheism of beeing pseudoscientific[and indeed some views and people are; Deists and Agnostics by far are not amongst these]. But effectively by claiming that science proves Atheism they have made themselves pseudoscientific. First of all, Science neither proves nor disproves anything related to the god question as science is UNCONCERNED with these philosophical questions{which should be relegated to "philosophy" not "science"}; There have been no experiments doen and then verfied and re-verified and peer reviewed{etc} to prove whether or not the Universe had a Creator, the questios is simply outside the realm of science and does not belong there, it belongs in "philosophy". So their claims are themselves pseudoscientific, and Dawkins is currently the biggest perpetrator of this pseudosceince in the new Atheist community{him and his growing followers}."The God Delusion" is even found, as I mentioned near the beginning of this essay, in the Science section of bookstores and libraries and is touted as a science book. But it's not, it's a Philosophical Atheist polemic/apologetic which utilizes some scientific facts and theories, this no more makes it a science book than a book polemic of Deism, or even than the pseudoscientific and rather absurd polemical books of Intelligent Design or Creationist pseudoscientists. And Dawkins growing fanclub have taken to making these same pseudoscientific and logical blunders. Even some of the other vocal Atheists in the book writing community and whatnot have begun to get sucked into the Dawkins hypocritical web{including many Scientists whom happen to be Atheists}.

Now, if they want to play the game that way and claim it is science or reason, than so be it. Then they better be willing to allow us other non-theist rationalists whom may be uncertain of Gods existence{Agnostics} or believe in a Prime Mover/First cause intelligence Creator{Deists} as well as Agnostic-Deists/PanDeists and PanenDeists into this game.

Now, that said, I refer the Dawkinites to the writings of respected Physicist Paul Davies, whom is as anti-religion as any of them, but whom displays a belief in the existence of a Deistic{more accuretely a PanDeistic or PanenDeistic} God. He has many books using science facts and theories and philosophically examining the question of Gods existence. Two of those books, which I am myself currently reading, are "The Mind of God; the scientific basis for a rational world" and "God and the new physics". Great books. I might mention that Dawkins mentions Davies in "The God Delusion" as beeing "somewhere between Einsteintonian Pantheism and an abscure form of Deism"{ie:PanDeism/PanenDeism}.

Now, these books cover many arguments,and Davies does it with a more integity towards looking at all angles than Dawkins does. Some of the Science based philosophical arguments Davies examines are the usual "argument from design" and two variations of the "cosmological argument", both of which he backs up as possible but also uses science to debunk{or in other words, shows that they are possible, but NOT needed, or rather that there are theories that challenge these two}, "Fine tuning", "conciousness", and various others.For example, he examined certain questions oft overlooked. Sure natural science explains HOW, but it does not explain why or even how natural laws are the way they are, and why these laws?

As A Deist{agnostic-deist; PanDeist/PanenDeist} I must pose these challenges and questiosn to STRONG Atheists. I had one Strong Atheist tell me there is a vaccum of evidence{ie no evidence} and the argument for "Multiverse theory"; Many Atheists also offer up the fact of the "singularity"{1}The vaccum of evidence? The Atheist cannot answer as to 'why" there are a set number of natural laws and WHEY they ARE the way they are. They cannot account for fine tuning. All they can offer is the multiverse theory{which personally appeasl to me as well}- which is a theory no less and no more valid than a Deistic intelligence.{2}They can offer the singularity, but not how it works exactly or why it exists or the exact nature of it's existence. I myself would suggest that perhaps the singularity IS GodAs a Deist I would point out the mathematical precisness of the Universe, and the absurd improbability that life[any kind; not neccaserily human or human like] could have arisen in the Universe if the initial conditions had been off by even the slightest percentage from what they were. It's allmost like those initial conditions were tweaked. Of course, even Paul Davies himself poses a challenge against this very argument{ I can't recall exact nature of his argument at the moment}- but that argument of his that some Atheists use is only theoretical itself, and it still does not account for the mathematical preciseness of the nature of the universe, why the laws are the way they are or even why there are laws in the first place and why there are a limited number of natural laws as opposed to a pure chaotic coup.

The Atheist can offer the argument of the "Static Universe", that is.. that the Universe always has been and had no beginning. That's possible, but then even most Scientists whom are Atheists believe the probability of the big bang, the Universe we know having a beginning{whether as something coming from nothing out of the singularity, or as a bubble Universe from a foam of a theoretical Multiverse}, so Static State Universe is currently, though possible, not as supported by findings as the big bang model is and most scientists support the big bang model. And though they can offer that the Universe is a neccasery and contingent thing, but they cannnot offer evidence or sound argument as to how or why it is and how or why that argument is any more valid than a neccasery intelligent prime mover force{God}.

The Cosmos display an innate intelligance. Perhaps that's illusionary and accidental, perhaps not. Ockhams Razor implies to me that it is what it seems to be...intelligent in some fashion.

Until Atheists can disprove such arguments using reason and factual proof, your theory of an atheistic universe is as and no more or les valid than our deistic one. If all you can offer is reactionary atheism against the insanity of theism, you'll have to do better than that. Deism is far removed from Theism{or at least...can be}. I offer that STRONG Atheism is a faith[at least if the atheist must call deism one}. Both are unproven but reasonable beliefs if "strong".But I suggest that both STRONG Atheism AND STRONG Deism[pandeism/panendeism} are reasonable BELIEFS about origins and nature of cosmos. If one condemns the other blindly- it is a faith{Dawkins for example displays this "faith"}. Strong Atheists like to pretend their poistion is the default, but it IS NOT! Agnosticism between the afforemetnioned two positions IS. Agnostic-Atheism and Agnostic-Deism{pan/en/deism} are just LEANINGS.

I've not seen a single STRONG Atheist or STRONG Deist dismantle these arguments or show them as false. And when they attempt they only wind up making themselves seem lke hypocritical faith-based fools asserting absolutes that they cannot possible know YET.

I might also offer this fact, that SOME Deists also make similar illogical, pseudoscientific, and hypocritical blunders as outlined here about many in the new Atheist movement. Allthough, the ratio of Vocal Deists to Vocal Atheistas acting so hypocritically is much smaller, though they DO exist. Paul Davies is obviously one of the more reasonable ones{moreseo than Dawkins and his adoring sheep} as are most others I've noticed.

So there you have it. Evidence and argument showing the hypocritical attitude and even pseudoscientific attitude of many of todays STRONG Atheists, pretenders to the throne of reason that they are, and specifically of Richard Dawkins and his clones. And the philosophical and scientific case for Deism{s}.

Deist polemicists of note:-Thomas Paine{revolutionary, polemicist, human rights advocate, U.S. foundinf father,etc}-
-Aristotle{greek philosopher}
-Voltaire{enlightenment philosopher}
-John Armstrong{Author "God Vs. The Bible",}
-Antony Flew{philosopher, former atheist polemicist}
-Raymond Fontaine, Ph.D. {Author of "My life with God in and outside the church";}-Baruch Spinoza{Pandeism/panandeism/pantheism}
-Albert Einstein{^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^}
....AND of course- Physicist Paul Davies

Some of my favorite Atheist polemicists:
-Christopher Hitchens{Anti-theist and Contrarian. Journalist, Author of "god is not GREAT" amongst many other books on politics, religion, and various issues as well as numerous articles}
-Sam Harris{author- 'the end of faith"....amongst others.

Please feel free to discuss.

In Reason:
Bill Baker

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

Mel Gibson's pseudo anti-semitism a diversion

July 28th, the day Mel Gibson revealed his anti-semitism?

The above mentioned day, Actor and director Mel Gibson was pulled over by cops for drunk driving, and launched into a allegedly anti-semitic tirade, saying "Fucking Jews. The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world"{no doubt related to the new war between Israel and Lebanon, where Israel claiming to defend itself due to two of it's soldiers beeing kidnapped by the militant Islamic group hezbollah, has killed hundreds of Labaneze civilians with rockets; which may seem Paranoid, but to be honest I can understand that paranoia, since they are surrounded by Islamic nut run states that want to obliterate them}anyways, I digress...

...Due to this, Gibson has been accused of anti-semitism, which is not new for him, since when he made the movie "The passion of the christ" he was accused of unfairly and anti-semitically demonizing Jews as a whole{a load of crap, but whatever. I mean we may as well call ALL evangelical christians anti-semitic, do we? No.}.

Is Mel an Anti-Semite?

Well, lets look at the definition of "Semite" defines "Semite" thusly;
1}A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.
2}A Jew.
3}Bible. A descendant of Shem.

Also refer to Wikipedia:

As we can see, Jews are NOT the only "Semites". Yet, in our discourse we ALWAYS use the term ONLY in referance to Jews, and anti-semite ONLY in referance to Anti-Jews.
When was the last time you heard anyone use this term "anti-semite" when a Muslim/Islamic/ARAB person or a Near the mid-east African type have recieved unfair prejudice? NEVER! You NEVER hear it! The term is used ONLY to give special preferance to the Jewish peoples, and anti-semitism is treated as if it is somehow so much more deplorable than any other kind of prejudice/discrimination/persecution/or racism, due to the horrible atrocity that That fuckhead Hitler and his ignorant Nazi herd inflicted on 6 million Jews{and many, many OTHER people as well}.
As horrible as the Holocaust was, and anyone whom denies the holocaust is a bloody idiot, and anyone whom has no compassion or sympathy for those that suffered{including and especially the Jews} is a bloody fuckhead; this does NOT make Jewish people{race or Israel the country, and especially not the RELIGIOUS Jews} or anyone else whom pulls the "anti-semite" word out ONLY in referance to Jews and jumps on the bandwagon of beeing anti-Jewish beeing the worst kind of racism or prejudice, correct in their dooing so..

Given the origins and meaning of "Semite", there are many Anti-Islamic and prejudiced against or anti-Arab Jews out there whom should also be labelled "Anti-Semitic"{same goes towards those prejudiced agains Northern Africans, so on and so forth}. Really, this term "Anti-Semitism" has no more meaning anymore. When someone is racist against Arabs or Islamics they should be labelled "Anti-Arab" or "Anti-Islamic", same for the African semites,etc.

As for when someone is prejudiced or racist against "Jews", it should be first defined as to whether they are against the politics/etc of the state of Isreal to one degree or another{and how much}, whether they are opposed to the Judaic religion{which, when referring to the faith/religion, this term "Judaic" should ALWAYS be used to distinguish from "Jews" the race/ethnicity, this way there will be less misunderstanding and we will find some whom we thought were anti-semitic or even anti-Jewish are really JUST anti-Judaic/religion}, or lastly-whether they are opposed to the race/ethnicity of the Jews. THEN, use the appropriate allegation against them; if they be against some or all of Israels policies -call 'em "anti-Israel" or at least "opposed to certain politics in Israel", if they are opposed to the faith/religion of the RELIGIOUS Jews{and the non Jewish followers of Judaism} call them "Anti-Judaic"{I would fit this label, but then again I oppose all the Abrahamic/monotheistic/theistic/absolutist faiths in general}, and finally for the Racists idiots-call em "Anti-Jewish", how hard can it be?

Now, in regards Mel Gibson. It is well known that he is a dedicated member of an Ultra-orthodox sect of Catholicism, a religion which alongside most of Orthodox/Fundamentalist/Evangelical Christianity which has been behind a disproportionate number of oppressions, genocides,persecutions, and wars in the last 1700 years of History{or at least western history}. Mel was raised in it by his Father, whom has been known to have denied the holocaust{or at least denies that the number of Jews killed were 6 million}-he probably fits into the "Anti-Jewish" label to some degree{ but beeing that I am unaware of the fullnes of his ignorance and prejudices; he could simply be opposed to the idea that 6 millsion were killed, but not neccaserily hate the Jewish race, I'm unsure myself, if any of my readers whom know more about Mels dad could clarify this for me, It'd be appreciated}. Gibson,however, given the definition of "Semitic" I've elaborated on, simply is NOT "Anti-Semitic" in general.
I also do not believe that he is Anti-Jew in general, he even has Jewish friends, one of whom came to his defense after his drunken tirade.

His tirade came after Israel bombed the hell out of Lebanon. I have the inkling that Gibson does have some deep-seated anger towards the state of Israel{or at least the elite leaders thereof and some or many of their policies,etc} and perhaps even some dislike of "JUDAISM" the religion{or certain versions of it}, just that when he was wasted on alchohol and unable to properly explain it using the proper vocabulary
{and whom can fault him for this, the vast majority of us, even most liberal intellectuals don't have the right vocabulary to make such distinctions, that or they lack the patience to more explicitly spell things out to make them clearer; we live in a dumbed down culture in general} due to his drunkeness. And perhaps the taboo of speaking against anything related to Jewish people, even if JUST is the religion{there are non Judaic Jews ya know} or the Policies of Israel or what have you, has caused Mel to be afraid to speak his mind on those particular topics, and the dumbed down,non-explanatory vocabulary our culture pushed onto us[this oddly enough due to the political corrections of the liberal left-of which I am a part=or at least I'm left leaning}, and so it exploded in this drunken, not well thought out rant.

Is Mel a little off his nut? Perhaps. Most people are, especially most faith-based people of absolutist faiths. Is he racist,anti-semitic, or anti-Jewish{in general}=I highly doubt it!

I think that this current media, political and social attack of Mel{whom asked for it to some degree by getting drunk and then shouting off his mouth using the wrong wording} is just more pop culture sensationalism and focusing on celebrities, a carefuly crafted way{like so many other media diversions} to get our minds off of the really important topics at hand, in this case it may be perhaps a way to get people to stop questioning Israels overdooing it of bombing the civilian population of Lebanon{but then again, this is largelythe fault of those cowards Hezbollah hiding amongst the civilians and then taunting,threataning and attacking Israel; personally I'm unsure of where I stand on this, but I understand both sides of the argument for and against Israels bombing campaigns}.
Should Mel be scrutinized, sure, to a small degree. But for christs sakes, cut the religious nut a break. After all, he's no worse than 90% of the other faith based nuts out there and sympathizers of such that are trying to make him into a racist monster.

In Reason:

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, May 05, 2006

"Red Friday", support troops by supporting God!

The following is a letter to the editor of my local paper- "The Brandon Sun" about a new "Red Friday" campaign, wherein certain Canadians are callling for Canadians to support our troops in Afghanistan by wearing red every Friday, the article I read said specifically the following :

"A growing Internet campaign is calling on all Canadians to voice a love for God, country and home by wearing something red every Friday."{from the "Brandon Sun" May 05/06, page 2}.

I was suspiciuos of the movites and intentions of this thing so I wrote the letter below:

{Quote;The Very Irreverand Bill"/}
Regarding "Red Friday Campaign" article{May 05/06}.

On first inspection, this campaign will seem to many to be nice and supportive of the troops. But on deeper thought, it reveals that many Canadians wish to be clones of the U.S., whom our soldiers are risking their lives and dying for in Afghanistan, when our soldiers should'nt even be there, or at least should "no longer" be there. 9/11 was 5 years ago, the Taliban was removed right after that when the U.S. sought vengeance and justice for the crime committed on 3000 innocent American civilians. However, America could've took their own vengeance and took out the Taliban on their own, they participated in that and than left it up to us to clean up their mess. Five years later our troops are still risking their lives in Afghanistan, this is no longer simply a peace keeping mission, but occupation{one that puts our soldiers lives at needless risk}, it's time for our troops to be pulled out of there.

What I find disturbing about the "Red Friday Campaign", is that it's apparently founded upon few scary things that should not be mixed together and then deceptively packaged as "troop support". These things mixed are nationalism/patriotism, war,capitalist anti-socialist/communist political extremes, and religious fanaticism. Yes, religious fanatacism. The article states that the call is for God and country. This is particularly disturbing because of a growing trend happening in Canada to become America junior or Americas clone, this all started when the Conservative gov't came into power and is planning to mess w/gay rights at some point for the religious right and we have PM Stephen Harper acting like the U.S. President, irresponsibly playing favoritism w/Judeo-Christianity and monothiesm by saying "God bless Canada" at the end of speeches and whatnot. This "Red Friday Campaign" seems to be further indication of a social-political move amongst Canadian right-wingers to mix God and patriotism, and to scapegoat our soldiers for their religious and nationalistic arrogances. Seriuisly, if I were in the army and were stationed in Afghanistan against my wil-or even willingly, I as a nontheist would find it incredibly insulting to see my country turn into U.S. Jr. in this fashion, and to have my life which is at risk there beeing used by religious nationalists to promote their God and their nationalism.

Yes, I too do support our troops, our soldiers, and like American leftists I am showing my support by rather than participating in mindless religiously fueled pseudo-patriotism campaigns using the soldiers lives to promote such, I as a supporter of our troops will say what many Americans are saying to their leaders- "Bring our troops home, out of wars that they should not be in, or at least should NO LONGER be involved in; quit risking their lives for nationalistic and western stupidities and hypocrisies" .

I would'nt be opposed to this "Red Friday" campaign if it were not for the obviuos U.S. style religious right mixed with nationalism and capitalism sentiments laced in the rhetoric. Why even include "God" in this campaign? What does the monotheistic "God" have to do w/this? If someone wants to support our troops by calling for them to be brought home{as these soldiers wives should be dooing} or even if they support the troops beeing there- that's one thing, but to throw the monotheistic "God" into the mix, this means that like in the U.S.-unless you believe in "God" you will be considered less patriotic, this rhetoric of mixing "God" in there is a precurosor to such stupidity happening. Frankly, how is this any different than saying that the call is to "Voice a love for Zeus, country and home"? There IS no difference? Keep your personal faiths to yourselves and don't act as if to imply that Canada is a christian nation and that all the troops believe in your monotheistic "God"{or any god period}? This should be a wake-up call to Canadian rationalists of various types, Canadian non-monotheists and non-theists, Canadian liberal theists, to see how the Christian right and monotheistic right wish to slowly subvert and infiltrate our nation w/their theologically based values and biases, much like has happenned in the U.S., and the ultimate end will be the same repression and demoniation of those they deem unworthy of pure equality such as "Gays, atheists/non-theists of other kinds, Witches,etc,etc" just as has happenned in the U.S. If we don't sayand do something about this subversion, history will repeat itself and the whole of North America will slowly head into the era of Christian superstition, demonizations and oppressions, once again.

If this campaign must take place, then please support our troops by calling for them to be brough home, or at least stop throwing the monotheistic "God" into the mix w/your patriotism, thereby insulting all non-theistic soldiers serving in Afgnanistan and risking their lives so you can subversevely impose theological ideas on everyone whom does'nt share those ideals{this is not what they are fighting for}, soldiers have fought and died so that we can remain a country of TRUE Freedom "of" religions and freedom FROM religions both, TRUE social/political equality. This also turns it into an "Us VS. Them" religious war of "Christians/Judeo-Christians vs. the Muslims and everyone else". Is this what we want? And do you all want a culture war of Christianity/Monotheism vs. everyone else, like the one in the U.S.? Because if this is your aim, it could ugly, so stop it before it does. Because some of us are ready to stand up to the subversion. Yes, this subversion has begun since Stephen Harpers Conservatives got into power, there is a slow and steady trend towards Americanism and towards Christian arrogance beeing shoved into uor faces socially and politically, it became especially apparent once Harper started blessing Canada at speeches in the name of mean Bible/monotheistic God; and now with this steadily growing in popularity "Red Friday" campaign mixing this same "God" with national patriotism{and implying patriotism requires a love of a Monotheistic God} and acting like it is out of love for our troops, I'm not buying it people. I'm sure these soldiers wives and families DO love their loved ones whom are risking their lives in Afgnanistan, so they should realize that our troops no longer belong there anymore and they should instead begin calling on our gov't to bring their loved ones home from needless danger, rather than keeping mainly silent about this and acting like in ordert to support our troops we must support the place and battle they are in; because frankly they DON'T belong in Afganistan anymore fighting risking their butts on behalf of America which has consistently showed itself irresponsible and unworthy of our support in the Mid-East since Bush got ahem...cough...elected.

I'm not opposed to the "Red Friday" campaign in and of itself, so long as myths and theology/religion are kept sepeate from the campaign itself, and the campaign is instead used to call on our gov't to bring the troops back home out of Afghanistan and send em to a place where the can make a better impact rather than help eventually prop up a pseudo-democratic Muslim theocracy-which WILL be the outcome, just pull them out for lifes sake, they should'nt be there anymore. I urge readers to not buy into this American style faith/christian based pseudo-patriotism. It's more about theology and nationalism than about "pure" troop/soliders support{yes, that is "part" of it, but it should be ALL that it is about, not second to theology and nationalism}.

One last thing, I want to call on all rational Canadians to call on our gov't to remove the Monotheistic Gods special privelage in our Chrater of rightss and freedoms, for so long as the opening of the Charter reads "Founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God{monotheistic} and rule of law"{w/the God supremacy part noted first and foremost"}-then the Christian/monotheistic right will always be able to seek and recieve special recognition and privelages and subvert everyone else. Frankly, what the Charter says may as well say "Founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of Zeus and rule of law"-because in both cases, it's about myth and superstition and is not based on facts.

Thank you "Brandon Sun" for printing and thank you fellow Westman residents for considering my thoughts on this matter.
As always,
In Reason:
Bill Baker

In Reason:
The very irreverand Bill

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, April 13, 2006

Boycott Easter {Christian Imperialism}

It's that time of year again. When we celebrate the death and ressurection of our Lord and Saviuor Horus...oh wait...Zeus.... no, that's not it....Santa?.... Oh right

I'm mad as hell and want to balk louder than the Cadburry easter bunny whilst searching for it's eggs.

Good{ahem, cough,cough!!!}Friday and Easter Sunday, the Christian holy-days are upon us this weekend, and in honour of this oh so persecuted faith group, the gov't offices and lots of secular business are closing their doors. As a result lots of people; many NOT Chrisatians, whom NEED the money they'd be making these days if they weren't FORCED to take them off in honour of the Christian myth, will be forced to observe at least to some degree. Sure, some will be happy as a clam, but others are barely muddling through and will be losing dozens dollars{some even more} that they NEED in able to muddle through; yes, lets make the poor starve and barely be able to pay their rent and bills in order to remember the death and ressurection myth of the ancient judeo-pagan myth cult man Jesus.

You know something else I find disgusting? I'm not sure about other cities, but here in Brandon,Manitoba the largely Christian run local Soup Kitchen- "Helping Hands" is even closing up. For many, the meal that is recieved every day{except for weekends, cause apparently the poor,homeless,welfare recipients, and hungry somehow magickally have more money for weekends and more food; assuming they've got working stoves;}at this place, is their only REAL or "substantial" mean{for some it's all they get; unless they go out and beg or borrow from friends and family; of course, "some" of these people are irresponsible dolts anyways, but not all of them are}, hmmm...the so-called Christians than run these soup kitchens apparently think that taking the day off is more important than feeding the poor,underfed, opressed poor masses; I guess they have forgotten that even Jesus and his diciples picked corn from the fields on a Sabbath holy day, meh. I am shocked that these so-called charities run by largely supposedly Chirst-loving people are closing their doors to the hungry so they can what? Really, what the hell is so damn important that they have to do on those days that they can't open for a few hours to feed people whom make next to nothing or whom are inbetween jobs or in certain circumstances where they are'nt currently able to feed themselves? What?

And what are the less fortunate to do, they can't go out and eat at expensive restaurants that might eb open, they can't go and do something; many will be forced to be cooped up in shitty slums all fuckin day{or, of course they could go to a Church good friday or easter service and be manipulated and guilte din their ignorance to beeing subservient to this lie of a faith and it's hypocrite tyrant mythgod}.

The worst thing is that this is the religious cultural imperialism of one particular faith on the whole damn country and culture at large, of a faith that whines all the goddamned time that it,it's followers, and it's god are oh so persecuted! Fuckers!!! The gov't and businesses observing this for them ins stupid!!! Do they close up for Ramadan{one of the many Islamic holy days}? Hows about Hannukah{Jewish}? Imbolc{Pagan}, or for the holydays/holidays of any other religion or creed, FUCK NO!!! Why the hell all the concesiions to the suppoedly persecuted Christian faith then?

Of course, there are those that'll claim "it's a secular holiday too?". Right, the easter bunny, chocolate{bowing to the God Nestle and other chocolate giants}. NO, IT' NOT!!! it IS "CHRSTIAN!" Just because you take the name that refers to a christian holy event and put athe face of a chocolate bunny on it doe'snt make it so! Plus, if so, than why the hell are we closing up our gov't offices and all gov't related places, malls, postal services, Public transit services, malls, grocery stores, and many other places? Why, for the love of chocolate bunnies? No, it's in order to give into the pressures of the Christian faith and honour their myths as if their myths are somehow more special than other myths! Plain and simple!

I recall the 1980's when everything was still closed on Sundays to observe the Sabbath{which is supposed to be Saturdays anyways; least the Seventh day advetists get this right}or 'Lords day" I recall the battles to stop this cultural religious imperialism, in the end we got a victory{but only "partial", cause things till generally open late and close early}. What we need to do to is do the same thing in regards all the other Christian holy days that are still enforced upon our society at large by this oh so persecuted religion{whiny,hypocritical ,imperialist fucks seeking special status for themselves-their faith-and their mythological three-headed hydra-dragon beast deity}

Lets fight back. I say.... BOYCOTT and PROTEST these dumbass Easter restrictions,closings,and when some dumbass christian or other idiot assumes that everyopne is a christian and says "happy easter" to ya{I had this happen to me today, and I happenned to be wearing a black metal t-shirt, a spiked gauntles-AND AN INVERTED CRUCIFIX AROUND MY NECK at the time}, and loss of our liberties and equality to give special status to this plague called Orthodox Christianity. Enough is enough!!!

In Reason:
The Very Irreverand Bill Baker

p.s. if you care to, please spread this message around.

Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Religious Tolerance Overrated? {political Correction}.

I've been thinking that what most people think of as "Religious Tolerance" in our pop culture today is really Politically Correct Bigotry and ignorance.

The fact is that very few "Religiuos Tolerance' advocates are scholars of the faiths they defend, nor do they truly know the religion. Most just take the words of the Religions/faiths adherents{or liberal apologizers} at face value w/out any logical discrimination or study of said faiths; those that DO study, study from the perspective of defending the faiths rather than truly studying the inner workings, the inner core doctrines, the true character of the faiths founders{prophets/etc}, the cultural and historical contexts of their scriptures nor the semantic meanigns w/in those contexts of variuos words and whatnot w/in their scriptures. Most take for granted the reality and most just accept the popular addage that 'all religions/faiths are equal and have similar core beliefs"{NOTHING could be further from the truth, this is a ideology that is strongly erroneous and dangerous to the core}.

I have tackled the Judeo-Christianity faith many times, and the Bible; exposing{along w/many others the core and character of it's Book, it's poor apologetics and pseudo-sciences, and it's insane and cruel founders}, I amongst many other apostates and other people who've studied have exposed this faith and it's dangers and lies; all attempts to defend it from us and accuse us of "intolerance" are weak and hypocritical.

I tend to trust the studies of apostates of faiths these days. Because the strongest apostes are usually people whove had the most dedication to said faiths and have done the most thourough studies{unless thay have become a part of another absolutist revealed faith, say leave Islam and became Christian, or visa versa}, No one of us has done this and come to uor conclusions because we want to, it is not psychollically or emotionally easy to analzyse and critisize your own faith like that, it causes more pain than you can imagine, but it can reap huge reards in the end to do so. So, we are not intolerant bigots or PREjudiced, we never wanted to lose faith, it's just that the reality of the contradictions,the cruelties and hypocrisies,etc, just became to overwhelming to ignore or minimalize.

I'm now reading through sites of former Islamicists{note that word, there is a big difference between "Islamic" and "Muslim", the wo words are different, "Islam" is a faith, "Muslim" is a culture/race or people}. The points they make, though contested by still devoted Islamicists, still often are agreed upon by those Islamicists{at least the well studied ones}though excuses for the things exposed are prominent. These former Islamicists having stdued deeply there own Scriptures{the Quran and Hadith} and other Islamic writings and other fields of knowledge; no for a fact that the "Prophet"{Muhammad} was a cruel and tyrannical murderer,theive,rapist,war-monger,etc. They also know that he had alot of wives and concubines and that his favorite was when he wa sin his 50's and she was around 6 when he asked for her hand in marriage and 9 when he consummated that marriage w/her{and further study reveals that she was not some super duper extra physically or mentally/emotionally mature child, she was like any other, perhaps more childish} and the time when he first decided he wanted her was when she was around 4-5. He was known to brutalize unbeleivers and to not obey the same laws he set out{such as the fact that he said the men could have only about 4 wives, whilst he had more than that}. He was known to have been a war tyrant, to have brutalized other people,etc. The Prophet "piss be upon him" was not much better than Judeo-christianities tyranys David,Moses, and others; and he was a hypocrite like the synoptic gospels Jesus Christ; allthough jesus had one up on this guy, Jesus did'nt rape little girls, have a bunch of wives and concubines, and he was a rataher pacifist and peaceable man{though he did set up laws he never fully obeyed and he did disobey parts of the Torah Law he considered irrelevant or an inconvenience}.

{Experts in Islam, an ex-islamics site}

Apostates of Islam=

Muhammad the child molester/rapist

"How to speak to politically correct Bigots"

"you quote the Quran out of Context"

"Does Islam contain the golden rule"

You've heard me drone on about Christianties faults before; the tyranny of Moses{Yahwehs great prophet} and David{a man after gods own heart},etc. The womanizing of Solomon and David. The cruel hypocrisy of Lot. The Inconsistencies and hypocrisies and cruelties and contradictions throughout the, the cruel violence and misognyny of Jehovah, Jesus cult hypocrisy. the Poor modern apologetics and pseudo-sciences. the irrational and excessive fear and guilt behind this faiths doctrines{even taught by Christ himself}. The genocide,infanticidemrape,war crimes, torture comamnded by Biblegod and done by biblegod in the scriptures,etc. I could go on and On.

I am aware that there is cruel and horrible shit in every ancient faith and it's founders{though I'm not too aware of anything in Budda and his philosophy, but I plan on finding out}, there are absurdities in modern religions and philosophies that could be pointed out as well; though many of them, not beeing of an "absolutist" nature or core founding, don't really need the same attack, but that does'nt mean they should not getting any challenges or exposings, just less important since they do not operate on a supposed divine mandate from the Universes Creator{or claim to}. The 3 Abrahamic religions pose special problems most faiths and religions don't since they have a 'one true god' concept and believe their scriptures to be "Gods true word", they ahve always had a special power hunger others have'nt as as much of.

My issue is this; I believe in religious "tolerance", but that term has come to mean "acceptance of" in our culture, it has come to mean politcally correct ass-kissing, which we do at our own peril. Even many well-meaning but ignorant faithless people jump on this politically correct bandwagon like sheep w/out truly thinking it throughh or knowing what exactly they are indeed defending. More times than makes me comfortable as an ethical human beeing I have seen faithless people and liberal pagans,etc{historically demonized and oppressed by these people; and are still to this day}jump to the defense of the Monotheists and the faithful when truly tolerant people such as myself{I'm not the only one} whom are tolerant of ALL religions and irreligions, so much so that we we wish to go after the few faiths that have the most cruelty/atrocity/absurdity/fear and guilt pushe donto children/intolerance towards ALL others-including sects of their own and expose their dangerous beliefs, we do it non-violently and yet w/tenacity and bluntness; yet we are the ones called "intolerant"-HOW ABSURD. Would you call the anti-racist or the anti-white supremacy person who speaks bluntly against the racist beleifs of such racists "intolerant"-I HIGHLY DOUBT IT!!! These few faiths are no better and in fact are just as bad, if not worse. For some reason "faith" and particularly the Abrahamic faiths are "untouchable"/"taboo". In some cases, hypocritical liberal leftist/proclaimers of "tolerance" go after Christianity w/tenacity and yet defend Islam{because it is politically and socially popular do to so since 9/11; again-political correction}-utterly hypocritical. You fools, do you not know that the Quran and Hadith are just as cruel and absurd and their prophet just as tyranical as that of the Judeo-Christian faiths and scriptures, do you not realize that the same tyranny you fear from the North American religiuos right RULES in much of the Muslim world in Islam?

When someone bad mouths the way that fundamentlaist Christians or Islamicists according to their "holy books" treat their women and children, ie:Islamic womens shrouds,etc, -these politically correct hypocrites defend the practice and they find the very few Islamic woman in the west whom are idiotic enough to defend their oppression, they see the many women is Islamic countires and homes whom say it is their right to wear it and it is part of their beliefs; do you not realize that most of these woman do this under social/political pressure from their religious leaders/families/politicians/etc whom guilt and fear them into it, that it is done because the social ramifications of beeing outcasts in their countires or communities or amongst their families and loved,oes and religiuos communitties,et,c are overwhelming {not too mention the threat of violence for beeing disobedient, even in questioning why they wear them}-and not to mention that a Loving Allah will make sure they are punished maybe even damned if they do not obey the doctrine/command, the psychollogical fear is overwhelming, so yeah-they publicly defend the practce, and yet way too many live in hidden shame and guilt and fear and hate the repression, but can do little or nothing about it. There are similar practices and beleifs and doctrines amongst Jews and Christians and in the Bible/Torah. Women have always been treated horrible by these faiths, their scriptures either make them slaves or second class citizens-and at the sanctioning of their tribal Deities. I am disturbed when so many so-called freethinkers are to politically correct to condemn this unethical,cruel, and hypocritical crap!!! I was reading on a Ex-Islamic site {} a letter written from a Pakistani Islamic girl/woman whom is still Islamic but expressed the tyranny she and other women are under{and yet she defended her faith; that's what indoctrination does people} and showed utter confusion. The author of the site replied w/compassion and yet anger at the faith and expresed their sorrow for her and others and said it brought them to tears. This is the shit that the politically correct defend.

I'll tell ya something. I've not yet read the entire Quran, but what I have read bothers me, and what I've heard of the Hadith{the sayings of Muhammad} disturbs me to the core. As far as the Bible and Christianity goes, I tell all people who've not been devoted orthodox christians yet whom are faithless freethinkers or just liberal freethinkers in general whom get mad at me for my exposings of the faith and Bible{I've had many do it, even get this-a few atheists and satanists}-you are ignorant, you do not know the ins and outs of this faith as I {and other aposates} do, you cannot comprehend, you have not studied these cruel ideas and commands w/in the "Good book", you know little or nothing, so please-before you attack us/me for defending YOU and ourselves against the thousands of years of tyranny under these horribel,unethical,cruel, fear and guilt induced, dangerous faiths, keep this in mind. And to you apostates whom are too politically correct,timid,etc, to join us-please at least silently agree w/us, you know well the dangers of these faiths, others of you left before you knew it all that well{as well as some of the rest of us}. It is the faiths we go after that are the truly "intolerant","PREJudiced","rude","insensitive",etc, and you know this damn well; so please think twice before thinking or calling us those accusations. We KNOW what we are talking about. Would you question Stephen Hawkings ideas on quantum physics or whatever-NO!!! He is an expert in his field, as are we in ours. So, when you want to call us those things or call us bigoted,etc, think about it, WHOM truly is such. It is these faiths, AND you whom jump on the politically correct bandwagon defend them so ignorantly and mindlessly.

I believe in "religious tolerance", but not the kind that is passed off these days in our culture, that is not "religiuos tolerance' it is blind and bigoted, it is sheep mentality, it is a flowery unrealistic view based in ignorance, it is naevety and gullibility at it's worst. Beeing tolerant of people whom ahve certain beleifs{not harming them or blidly hating them} is not the same as kissing their asses and defending their faiths themselves and beeing too stupid,ignorant,timid,politically correct to speak out the facts and truths about these faiths.

I grow weary{as do the others like me} of the incessant,midless attacks we get from those we are fighting on behalf of. Ingrates,traitors to true equality,free-thought,fact and REASON. I make no apologies for saying such things, because those I'm calling these things have made no apologies for attacking us. I had the last straw recently when I wrote a letter to the newspaper editor about how "God' should be taken out of the secular democratic charter/constitution and anthems of western democracy, because one view of the divien{monotheistic} should not be given extra favor over others; in that letter I defended the rights of and exposed the subjugation and persecution of others views such as pantheisms,polytheisms,deisms,etc, and above all of Atheists and Agnostics{whom get the heaviest persecution,subjugation,repression,demonization,and/or downright ignored,etc}-I shared it w/some friends my email before It got printed, one of thsoe friends-an atheistic satanist tore into me like a pitbull, accused me off beeing overly emotional in the letter{even "if" I was, it's w/damn good reason and backed up by evidence/facts}-yet the entire time this individual tore into me w/strong emotion{which this person hypocritically accused my letter of}I sat there and reaoned and stayed calm and debated rationally. I've heard rumor and have gotten the sense that this person is STILL mad a week later{I walked away from that debate shocked more than angry}-I never held any seriuos anger against this person after the debate, it was A DEBATE, and that is all. But after all this, I am angry and offended, I was defending atheists like this person against the oppression, and this satanic atheist got after me for dooing so, I just don't get it. Furthermore I told some friends about this and asked their opinions, one idiot ex-best friend of mine agreed w/this person about my letter; I gave them both the benefit of the doubt and went back over my letter to see if it was unreasonable-NOPE, IT WAS'NT!!! Another politically correct sheep exposed.

The ideological battle people like myself fight is to save humanity from the destruction that will come at the hands of these types of absolutist faiths. The politically correct herds defense of them will only lead to eventual demise, and the defense is base din utter naievety, people of reason have been fighting this battle for thousands of years, and yet we see a resurgence in these faiths followers trying to destroy all that we've worked for and all the positive and equal things that we've wrought, hiatory repeats itself and the dangerous cycle continues. It's time to evolve past this stuff people, to quit the de-evolutionary tendencies that we're creating by beleiving these things or defending them.

If we cannot even non-violently but verbally agressively speak against these beliefs, then what freedom do we have. Why is that we-the faithless don't get the same freedom and equality that those of faith[especially the very wealthy,powerful and dangerous Abrahamic faiths] have? The absurdity is astronimical!!!

We KNOW for a fact through study of all fields of knowledge{psysical and social sciences, as wellas history,mythology,semantics,etc,etc,etc} that these faiths are faery tales; and it's funny because it's perfectly fine to refer to smaller religions of the past that have few followers andmote as "myth' or "faery tales" {ie:Greek/Roman myhtology, Norse mythology, pagan faery tales/myths,Sumerian mythology, Egyptian mythology,etc,etc}and you can point out how horrible or hyporcritical those deities or their prophets were, yet call the faiths that retain higher numbers of adhernts the same thing and you are now "intolerant',"prejudiced","insensirive", when those faith have no more evidence in their favors, why this hypocrisy and absurdity???

Why is faith and particurly these few faiths I mentioned{Christianity,Islam,Judaism} so untouchable, so special??? What absurd philosophy makes them so? We have no problem pointing out the absurdity and/or cruelty of other ancient myhs. Would we react as nicely to the idea presented to us that we can at will jump off a building anf fly, or that we can throw our child off a building anf fly when we know factually that gravity will make us or our children fall to a gruesome death? Why should we apply different logic or standrads to faiths? Why should we not react w/the same doubt, and even the same repulsion against the popular idea presented that God is male and incarnated himself to sacrifice himself to himself to appease his own anger at us beeing the way he made us to be and then came back to life and floate dinto the sky phsically, or the idea that a child molesting,ciminal and misogynist war mongerering bigot recieved gods word from an an angel{which obviuosly this god knew nothjing of the fact that many of his commands and claims wpould be some day disproven by his own natural laws}! Why should we condemn Hilter for having so many jews tortured and killed and yet ignore the massive cruelty in the laws of the Torah/Bible and Quran; why should we condmen him and yet Defend Moses,David or Muhammmad? Why should we allow the bigoted christians and muslims to attack gays and maybe even be gay and join the faith{what self-hating person would join a religion which thinks so lowly of them? just because they are deciding to abandon most of it and only follow the lifestyle of Jesus whom commanded obedience to the letter of the law of Moses and commanded shit liek self-mutilation and himself beleived in that tyrant god and in the idea of an eternal hell torture, what the fuck!!!???, because they like a few of the things he said or did-or is said to have said or did; why be subtle worshipper sof him then, there were plnety of people before,during and after him whom, said and did similar things and did so w/out the hypocrisies of the other teachings you ignore???} why should they be allowed to get away w/tha and with calling men like Lot{whom was willing to let his daughters be gang raped to protect two angels whom looked like adult male strangers}or Moses{whom commanded so much cruelty and at the supposed command of his God}or Muhammad and his sicknesses.

What is this world coming to? Why do we abandon reason for such absurdities and cruelties and why do we the non-faithful or liberal faithful defend these religions and their beeing taought to innocent little children from birth??? That is abuse, and should be treated as abuse by law!!! Let idiot adults legally beleive whatever abusridies they wish, but not let little children get indotrinated w/such destructive and psychollocgially harmful crap!!! Would we be ok if someone called their kid stupid ona regualr absis which encourages them to go and tell other kids that they are stupid w/out just cause creating disunity? Probably not, most of us would cringe if we saw an adult call a child stupid or ugly,etc{even if it was technically true}, and yet we are perfectly ok w/the fact that billions of people tell their children from birth that they are sinful and evil by nature{tell a kid something enought times and they WILL become it}and they tell their children to go out and tlel other childrne this, or perhaps they share this beleif w/their childrens friends too or children theys ee around{perhaps througha faith-based charity} teaching them how worthless,sinful and evil they are and that they will go to hell forever unless they beleiv ein the loving God whom sacrificed himself to himself to appease his own anger at his own creation that he created that way. If anyone tells my child this{or even implies it by the sharing fof such a absurd faith system} I will smack them silly! If you have children or plan on it, think about the fact that "if" you don't speak out against such crap, that your child will be exposed to it and heavily{because these faiths are huge and favored} and your child may become a follower of such dangerous ideas irregardless of how you raise them in reason and they in turn will do that to their children and the cycle of dangerous beliefs will end up leading to a third world war.

Obviuosly as people of reason all we can do is peak out against thrse faiths and subvert their unfair huge degree of propogation in our culture and on our children. But the worst thing we can do is mistake "political correction" for "Tolerance".

What makes these absurd religiuons so damn sacred and untouchable, over all other views. What makes them worthy of any kind of respect at all? Certainly they DO NOT treat us all w/the same consideration or respect they demand or that politically correct slaves give these-their persecuters.

As Philosopher Christopher Hitchens once said "anything that can be asserted w/out evidence can be dismissed w/out evidence". Who says we have to tolerate and be nice about their beleifs? Sure we should treat the individual w/human dignity, but that does'nt mean beeing all "oh, whatever, that's nice" about their beliefs themselves. That kinda passivity will only hurt humanity. Beeing tolerant and compasisonate and open minded does not mean beeing fucking stupid and ass-kissing!!!

I'd like to suggest a reading of Thomas Paines-"Age Of Reason" , or Sam Harris's "The End of Faith; religion,terror, and the future of reason" . There are also great books from former memberrs of the Christian and Islamic faiths, amongst others, that expose these faiths. There are also books that basically just show faith itself to be dangerous and useless to us in this day and age and for our future.

That said, I finish up this essay{or rant} and ask people to seriuosly consider this stuff and to check out some of thsoe links I provided.. I know well that I will be alienated by some people, some will want little to nothing to do w/me{including som of whom I fight on behalf of; the faithless,atheists/agnostics/etc, liberal pagans, liberal faithists,etc}-this is a risk I am willing to face. I simply cannot remain silent just because of the social repercussions. On that, I'd like to Note that it is my belief that spirituality and religion are not harmful in and of themselves, just absolutes and revealed religions. I am a member of the Universist movement { } and I also like to delve into occult philosophy and some pagan mythology{the latter merely just for fun}, I apprciate religions and faiths like Buddhism or Taoism-they lack absolutes and elitism, their founders also did not teach the cruelties taught in the faiths I expose; and I consider myself somewhat spiritual and deeply plilosophical and open minded{I bounce back and forth between Deistic,Pantheistic,PanenDeistic beliefs about the nature of this Universe and of the possible or probable divine/deity/etc;}-though I am skeptical and approach all from a agnostic beginnign point and a Universist/Uncertainist methodology. So, I am not attacking religiona nd spirituality themselves, I challege faith itself{but do not condemn all}-my condemnation as any logcial persons condemnation should be, is directed towards absolutist faiths, and w/good reason and strong evidence and facts. Just so I'm not misconstrued as closed minded or arrogant.

I leave you, friends, to contemplate the philosophy I spoke, To examine the facts for yourselves, and to question your motives for defending these faiths and either ignoring or even ripping us whom do the exposing to shreds{if you are amongst those that do so}.I leave you to Consider the wisdom of the words of us open minded rationalists, us lovers of equality and liberty and haters of injustice,cruelty, and hypocrisy. But I also inform you that some of us, mysrlf for one, are losing pateince w/the exchanging ot "religious tolerance'" into "political correction' and ignorant,naeive, herd mentality, unrealistic butt-kissing. This political corrction has perhaps become the new "absolute"

Thank you for your patience,time, and consideration;

Your friend and friendly neighborhood Iconoclast

In Reason:
The Very Irreverand Bill Baker

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, September 08, 2005

Showdown at city hall council meeting; score one for religious right{or-should we?}

So, lately there has been a battle in my city for a local "Youth For Christ" to build yet another "home" for the less fortunate called "U-Turn 3" in a certain area of town, they want the land for $1 and a five year tax freeze.There was a meeting held a couple weeks ago in the City Hall, which YFC supporters packed and the local gov't had to basically admit that it was'nt fair to the opposition,etc. So last night there was another meeting, this time in the city councillors chambers, and supporters and opposers packed the room{more supporters though; again it was stacked against us, I believe it was set up that way}. I signed up to give a delagation/presentation, I did this last Friday. I got in. But I noticed that even though I was likely one of the last to sign up they put me third on the list of like twenty delegations, right after the first two which were reps of YFC{well the first was, the second were representing the U-Turn project, I say "were" because the second was 3 people}.The City gov't and the Mayor know me well{as they should, they have seen all my letters to the paper and also the Mayor has had to deal with me on a personal level and because I exposed the Fundies meeting to worship in his office, which created a huge controversy in my city, the local paper just kept it going too, hehehe!}

So, I think they knew what the expect from me and set me up on purpose! What they did was despicable, right before my delegation they got into this big discussion about not saying anything about those whom would use this "U-turn" facility because it would violate human rights code,etc. They implied those downtrodden whom would use it, not the evangelical christian organization itself , but they still used it against me. Each delegation gets 10 minutes, mine was about 8-9 minutes{I recited it at home before going} I was stopped dead in my tracks after about 1-2 minutes and forced to leave the stand, the Mayor invoked the "human rights" crap.I'm not going to type my entitre presentation because it's too long and I did'nt get to go over it all anyways, but what I will do is type the first couple paragraphs that I did get through.:

[QUOTE]:My name is Bill Baker, I reside in/around the area that YFC wishes to build their U-Turn 3 project in.First, thank you for giving me this opportunity to give this presentation, it's appreciated. I respresent sections of citizens whom are marginilized,ignored, and even prejudicely demonized for our views; the Faithless{not just Athiests and Agnostics, but other rationalists as well, such as Deists,Pantheists,Universists,Secular Humanists and more} as well as many marginilized religions such as liberal.moderate faithists, Neo-Pagans, Satanists, and others. I will not lie, I am self-appointed here.These people I represent{many of whom have come up to me and given me kudos for my recent battles with the religious right in Brandon} many of them are either too timid to speak up{here I was stopped and forced to skip to the next paragapraph}I/we take issue with projects such as "U-Turn 3"{and the others} as we believe{w/evidences} that their main purpose is not so-called "charity" but rather subversive prosalatyzing{and in some cases-blatant prosalatyzing}. I've years experience with YFC and evangelical christianity as I was one of their culture, what I say I say not from prejudice but from knowledge and experience{AGAIN I WAS STOPPED, AND WAS FORCED TO SKIP AHEAD A COUPLE PAGES INTO MY PRESENTATION; SO I ABANDONED WHAT I WROTE AND AD-LIBBED]. Yes, why should I or any other taxpayer whom may not agree with the archaic and dangerous moral prejudices of these people{ie:masturbation and homosexuality are evil,etc} and their disprovable pseudo-sciences{ie creationism, literal 6 day creation several thousand years ago, and their opposition to evolution,etc}and archaic fear-based theologies, which WILL be either subversevely prosalatyzed{or even blatantly in some cases} to the needy,downtroden, and the un/misinformed; why should I/we be forced to pay either directly or indavertently throught the gov't fundings or the fact that we have to pay full taxes while they get a tax freeze for their prosalatyzing efforts.{HERE I PARAPHRASE WHAT I SAID BECAUSE I DON'T RECALL IT WORD FOR WORD; IT WAS PRETTY MUCH HERE THAT THEY STOPPED ME AGAIN].[HERE IS WHERE I WAS FORCED TO STEP DOWN].[UNQUOTE]

So, one of my supporters left pissed off, another stuck around with me but was pissed as hell, even more than I was{LoL!}.Anyways, I stuck around and after a few presentaions I interjected between one and another with this to the Mayor and those present: "You speak of 'Human Rights'; what about the human rights of the faithless taxpayer or the homosexual taxpayer, what about the human rights of the gay whom will be told by evangelicals like YFC how sinful they are for beeing what they are, how about the human rights{by this point the Mayor was banging his gavel and someone was trying to escort me out} of the religious groups the Mayor discriminated against back in June;pagans,satanists,freethinkers, you remember that Mayor{he showed utter discrimination against them, violated their human rights w/his prejudices, you know it, it was said to me personally and then modified and said in the "Brandon Sun"}, this is a travesty, it's hypocrisy!" By now I was beeing escorted from the chambers and the Mayor was banging his gavel and telling me I was out of order{bloody hypocrite!}.

I hung out in the halls with a friend for awhile, and spoke loudly with him about the hypocrisy going on and laughing at it all,and paced around a bit. After this I walked past the open doors and shouted "SO MUCH FOR FREE SPEECH!" and walked out of the building{my friend said something into the room too,I'm not sure what,but I think it was actually more offensive than what I said}.

Aaaanyways,in todays Paper of our city called the "Brandon Sun", they have a article on it all- "U-TURN APPROVED" and explain that the council approved of it 7 against far as how many presenters were for or against, 21 for/ 13 against.I will not post the entire article, but only a few relevant parts.

[QUOTE]"after twice deferring the decision, city council finally voted late last night to approve a Youth For Christ proposal to build an apt block during a lengthy and sometimes heated special meeting that saw one man ejected frm council chambers."

"Marnie McGregor, general manager of the Brandon Chamber of Commerce, told council that it was unfair to give tax breaks on the proposed YFC apt block because three of the 12 units would be rented on the open market, 'How would it be fair to give one landlord an advantage that is not avaliable to other landlords in the city?" she said."

"Throughout the meeting, speakers were often confused about what exactly they were allowed to say. The mayor repeatedly said that discussion about the people who would use the proposed U-turn facility was forbidden, because it might constitue a violation under the human rights code and make councils decision subject to a human rights challenge; he said speakers would only be allowed to comment on the city's sale of the land for $1 and a proposed tax forgivness. That rule was was somewhat inconsistently applied,however, with the Mayor cutting off some speakers and allowing others to proceed in their comments about the benefits or drawbacks of U-Turn facilities and their residents; the city clerk even pointed out one instance of the Mayor violating his own rule".

"One man,Bill Baker, was ejected from the meeting after he refused to stop speaking despite requests from the Mayor". Baker objected to what he described as an intolerant attitude among YFC employees towards non-christians, and said public money should'nt be spent on an organization that holds such views.'So Much for Free Speech' he shouted as he left the building"[UNQUOTE]

That last paragraph was also the last paragaraph of the article{probably for dramatic effect,LoL!!!}.Anyways, I just sent a letter to the editor about the metting today, hopefully it might get publushed, we shall see I suppose.Here is that letter.

[QUOTE]Once again another so-called fair meeting at the City Hall in regards YFC'S "U-Turn" project{Sept 7th}. But again the cards were stacked against the opposers of this proposal, and especially against the marginalized faithless freethinkers,Pagans, and liberal/moderate faithists whom also happen to be demonically decieved according to evangelical Christianity. I was stopped dead in my tracks barely a couple minutes into my presentation{I'd say about a minute and a half, for a guess} . They would not allow me to go forward because first I explained in full detail the segments of society I represented and because of what I had to say{it's taboo to speak against absolutist monotheistic faiths, but not so against other marginilized religions and also faithless philosophies}. I tried to explain why I thought it was unethical to keep throwing charity into faith-based organizations hands and to expect the taxpayer{via the gov't we pay} whom may not agree w/the archaic moral prejudices of evangelical groups{ie:masturbation evil, homosexuality evil,evolution-evil, pagan religions-evil,etc}as well as their disproven pseudo-sciences{ie:creationism according to orthodox intrpretation of Bible,etc} and their fear-based theologies of a loving god that will send good people to hell simply for not following the right religion,etc. I had other things to say, but I was forced to cut through most of it and get to the end of my presentaion and why I as a tax payer should not be forced to inadvertantly help such people of unreason to subversevely shovel their unreason onto the needy and often ignorant masses of society. I do think we need organizations like these to help these people get ahead in life, these oppressed people, but at the same time-not absolutist/fundy/evangelical/faith based, disguising their prosalatyzing as "charity' and "positive lifestyles"{yeah- one based on the ignorances,prejudices, fear/guilt,etc of evangelical christianity}. I speak not from PREjudice, but expereince and knowledge of this faith-having spent most of my life as one of them. Now, the Mayor kept appealing to "human rights" stuff. What got me ejected from the room all together was when I spoke up after listening to a few presentations and said to him and everyone present- "You speak of 'Human Rights'; what about the human rights of the faithless taxpayer or the homosexual taxpayer, what about the human rights of the gay whom will be told by evangelicals like YFC how sinful they are for beeing what they are, how about the human rights{by this point the Mayor was banging his gavel and someone was trying to escort me out} of the religious groups the Mayor discriminated against back in June;Pagans,Satanists, faithless freethinkers, you remember that Mayor{he showed utter discrimination against them, violated their human rights w/his prejudices, you know it, it was said to me personally and then modified and said in the "Brandon Sun"}, this is a travesty, it's hypocrisy!" By now I was out of the room. Sad, because we all know the favoritism that the Mayor and much of the local gov't has towards evangelicals/fundamentalists, we've seen fundies meet in the Mayors office for worship, we've seen city reps sent to evangelical so-called "business" meetings in the U.S. on the citys/taxpayers dime{when many of us don't share those theological archaic moral and spiritual prejudices of theirs}, we've seen the mayor solicit donations for evangelical groups,etc.
What happenned last night was just another shred of evidence that the evangelical/fundamentalist christian community has more than it's fair share of wealth,power,influence, and favoritism showered towards it, and that the gov't is sleeping w/the church. We should become part of the theocratic states of America! The mayor, whom does'nt know jack about human rights and equality, kept invoking it when it suited him. For shame! So, he can be intolerant towards religions he knows nothing about, but someone like myself cannot speak about a so-called larger religion that I have years experience with? What absurdity! When will this stop?
How about the gov't take responsibility for the poor and downtrodden that it has forced into that position in the first place-instead of shovelling them into the hands of evangelicals all the time?
Now, not all those at YFC are intolerant, not "all" evangelicals are either; but these organizations as a whole and this segment of the christian faith as a whole disguises their intolerance in love rhetoric and seeks the opportunity to turn the world into a bunch of ignorant creationist,monogamous heterosexual,anti-homosexuality,anti-pagan,anti-freethought/reason/facts, Orthodox Christian fools whom fear beeing sent to hell by a loving god so much that they can't see the forest for the trees.

Enough is enough!
I call all the faithless, all the pagans, all the moderate christians, the gay community,etc, to join me in this fight against this subtle tyranny{as opposed to simply secretly giving me kudos when they see around or in the paper}-I cannot fight for you on my own, join me. Stand up for yourselves! My email is, I encourage you to contact me.

I have no doubt YFC are sincere about their wanting to prosalatyze those archaic,prejudiced,disprovable,ancient moral vlaues and theologies and pseudo-science to the downtrodden, I also believe many of them truly do care as individuals too, but that is no excuse to take advantage of the needy like that{and of the gov't and taxpayer}.

Frankly, if they want this they should get the MANY,many churches and well off evangelical/fundies around this city to pay for their own prosalatyzation of the bad news of damnation and all beeing worthless crap unless they serve a disproven deity.

Our gov't should be ashamed for fornicating with the evangelical!

Thank you and "so much for free speech Mayor, so much for 'human rights'.

Bill Baker


One of the worst things was that ALL presenters addreses were on the meeting itenerary sheet for all the public to see, which I thought was disgusting. I went to the City Hall today and told them that "If I receive any harrasment or criminal activity against me because of the views I've expressed and the fact that people got to see my address, I will hold those whom added our addresses to the sheet and did'nt inform the presenters before hands that their addresses would be on the public sheet, I will hold them and the Mayor responsible, and I hope anyone else whom may be harrased or have crime commited against them because of this will too".

Hahahaaa!!!Wow, what a showdown!
And friends, there is more to come. There is a revolution brewing against the elite absolutist faithless subverting our democracies. I for one will keep up the good fight of reason against unreason, friends join me and all the others like me, together we can make this a more fair,equal,just,raitonal, truly tolerant, ethical, democratic society and future world.
As Thomas Paine{U.S. founding Father,Patriot, and famous Deist} once Said- "There is no greater weapon against errors of any kind than REASON, I have never used and other and I trust I never shall"; let that be one of our motto's.

In the meantime, please visit my other sites/blogs "Day of Reason"- {which is a blog to promote a worldwide "Day of Reason" which I decided to promote after the U.S. freethinkers decided to do a "National day of reason" as a response to a U.S. and International move for a "National day of prayer" and "Global Day of Praper"} and Raving Madman-

Also in the meantime, please check out the Universist movement{a religious/philosophical movement of faithless freethinkers ranging from Atheists,Agnostics,Deists,Pantheists,Trancendentalists,etc} based out of Birmingham,Alabama,U.S., which has become a global phenomena in under two years;

In Reason:
The very irreverand Bill Baker

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, August 18, 2005

The nature of the divine...

Is God all loving,moral,just,etc?....
I have a question.I used to be a Christian, first a evangelical/fundamentalist and then I spent some time as a Liberal Christian before becoming a Deist, then a Pantheist. I settled on Universist{which embraces unites faithless reason based freethought philosophies: Atheism,agnosticism,pantheism,deism,trancendentalism,etc} and have been so for over a year and a half. I have also embraced Symbolic Satanism some months ago, and consider myself both. I am "Agnostic-Deist".That said, one of the biggest questions that led me from both types of Christianity as well as to a small degree from Deism{even though I fault deists not Deism-a simple beleif that there is a creator; and still promote and Usually "lean" towards Deistic thought}.

This question is as follows:

Ok, fist off we'll disregard both types of Christianity as well as Deism, for this can be aimed at all{including some types of pantheism} though it is not neccaserily aimed at Deism but alot of Deists{whom attempt,like some of their heros such as Thomas Paine, whom happens to be one of mine as well; attempt to vindicate the Designer, or "natures god" from the cruelty and hypocrisy of biblegod-O.T. mainly but also N.T. to some degree and often,like Paine and Jefferson,etc, assume that the Creator is ultimately just,loving,reasonable,etc because there seems to be order in the Universe, even though there is also chaos and violence to bring order about, and because of the existence of "reason" which evolved into us}. I know liberal Christians also try to vindicate god from the O.T. model of him a bit and think in purely theistic or perhaps panentheistic terms.My question:If God exists and pre-existed all things, all energy forms and matter, all thought forms, and knew what would come to be from his/her/it's creation; and all these things and all the good and the evil, the harm and the help, the hate and the love, the mercy and cruelty, the chaos in the Universe{s} and all tjhe horrible acts that sentient and non-sentient species do to each other{in our case war,oppression,persecution,prejudice,rape,murder,m olestation,torture,war crimes,etc,etc,etc}and allows them and allows suffering and starvation on innocent children and the brutally selfish to gain riches and pleasure during,

All these things,like we ourselves, coming from w/in the depths of "god" whom thought/spoke everything that is into existence{which would not exist w/out having first existed w/in the depths of god}-as a manifestation of his/her/it's will and inner nature and character.In this case, as it would seem to be and cannot be escaped from, and for the orthodox Christians and muslims,etc, Satan/Shaitan/Iblis,Ahriman,Lillith,etc, and his fall and subsequent leading a third of angels to be w/him in this rebellion and all the so called harm and hate he "supposedly" gave birth to{I have a different intrpretation of the story/myth myself}, then would'nt that have been gods will-since all those thought forms and energies that led to that pre-existed w/in gods beeing and were willed into existence{as they could not exist otherwise}; would'nt this make god, by whatever conception,faith,philosophy, you see him/her/it from, either evil and bad{using these terms in a relative sense to what democratic,advanced races such as some humans think of as such, though the terms have no real cosmic meaning and are our contructs} or in the very least-neutral, neither or both{good and evil, hateful and loving,occasioanlly reasonable and occasionally unreasonable/just and unjust, harmful and helpful,etc} or perhaps none of these because she/he/it would now be emty of all feeling/emotion and intent of though as he/she/it may have then emptied it out of itself into the universe and now god is mindless and w/out personality{and in fact perhaps is now -"us"; menaing that when we do good that is god, whe we do harm-that is god}.Ultimately though would this not make "god" by whatever conception, evil, or both good and evil, or neither and empty and void?nonetheless, the concept espoused by so many people for so many faiths{and versions of those faiths} and so many philosophies that god is love, god is just, god is moral/holy/righteous;and the claim that god has no evil/hate/violence/immorality/unfairness/etc in him/her/it; that very claim is made completely void and provable as wrong.

It all is a manifestation of this gods will{however you concieve of an eternal,pre-existent creator}; meaning that it is false and wrong to say stuff like "god is love" or "god is not hate",etc, because god is neither or both; common sense{even according to faiths own conceptions that god is pre-existent,created all,is omni-etc} dictates as a fact that god is not those things that most say.So therefore all those that try to justify god and/or vindicate him/her/it or try to say that god is love and has not hate, is holy and has not evil, is light and has not darkess, is just and has not injustice,etc{whether evangelical/fundamentalist or liberal/moderate Christian,Muslim,Jew,etc; or White light Neo-pagan/Wiccan, whether Hindu, whether Deist or pantheist,etc,etc}-are liars and cold-hearted when they try to glorify a god of pure love and holiness when someone is in such great suffering; or perhaps just confused like god is confused.

I won't be like the "strong" atheist and say as Neitzsche did-"god is dead" or "god does not exist", that is a absolute claim I simply cannot prove{which is why I am agnostic}.But I will say "god is evil" or "god is not love/holy/just", or "god is all value judgements{and no one can tell another that what they do/say/think/beleive/etc is against gods will; regardles sof how cold or evil or sick it is".and actually for the orthodox/fundamentalist/evangelical Christians; the earlies O.T. writings, such as the book of Genesis have a a vision of a neutral god. In the first chapters of the book of Genesis God said "now man is like us knowing both good AND evil"{modern intpretations of this may mean something different; but the authors of these books likely had a conception of god as both the author of good things and bad things; and actually throught the O.T. god often says so himself; "I create the light and the darkness, I create help and calamity, I the Lord to all these things" from Isiah 45:7 is one of other examples}.

Can anyone logically and evidenceally refute this? When I would bring this question up when I was still Christian and struggling w/my faith , even in "question" format as opposed to ranting opinion format, NO ONE-NO RELIGIOUS LEADER OR CHRISTIAN OR PERSON-PERIOD was able to answer it and it was as if they were scared to even try. It stumped/stumps just as much if not more than the "who created god" question. Except this one has to do w/the fundamental nature of god.

You may find this message offensive or pushy,etc. But many people such as myself don't get the same respect from believers in a good god as they and their friends get from us/and everyone else. We find it offensive to be constantly bobarded in this world by this bullshit message of a loving god-since it seems it is so fundamentally untrue. Frankly, I find the fact that most will be offneded at someone like me dooing something like this highly hypocritical whilst they either offend us w/that b.s. OR condone those that do{at least much more than they would condone us to them}.
I challenge all to prove me wrong!

In Reason:
The very irreverand Bill Baker

P.S. This was typed a long time ago. I have settled on the idea that IF God exists, it is BEYOND Good and EVIL as percieved via human biases. Not both good and evil or enither, becuase this is still anthropocentric, viewing God through human dualities, IF it exists- it is BEYOND these ideas.

Labels: , , , , , , ,