When I think of all the good a book written by a supreme, infinite intelligence might have done for this world, all the centuries of senseless suffering, hatred, and ignorance such a book might have averted, I get really pissed off at the bible. How can anyone pass off this weak collection of fables as such a book? This book filled with no greater wisdom than was common among the people of the age, filled with all the prejudice, racism, misogyny, zenophobia and ignorance of early man.
The bible contains no admonitions against racism, sexism, drug abuse, torture, child abuse, pedophilia, spousal abuse, or the abuse of animals. It contains no cures for any diseases, no scientific breakthroughs, no revolutionary political ideas, nothing. In terms of philosophical content, it is less than what one might expect from a first-year philosophy student. The vaunted "Ten Commandments" are a prime example of the weakness of the bible as either a source of knowledge or morality.
In Christian Mythology, The Ten Commandments are the ten moral laws given to Moses directly from God. They are commonly understood to be:
1.)"I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; you shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me, but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments."
2.)"You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not acquit anyone who misuses his name."
3.)"Observe the sabbath day and keep it holy, as the LORD your God commanded you. Six days you shall labor and do all your work. But the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God; you shall not do any work—you, or your son or your daughter, or your male or female slave, or your ox or your donkey, or any of your livestock, or the resident alien in your towns, so that your male and female slave may rest as well as you. Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the sabbath day."
4.)"Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your God commanded you, so that your days may be long and that it may go well with you in the land that the LORD your God is giving you."
5.)"Thou shall not murder."
6.)"Neither shall you commit adultery."
7.)"Neither shall you steal."
8.)"Neither shall you bear false witness against your neighbor."
9.)"Neither shall you covet your neighbor's wife."
10.)"Neither shall you desire your neighbor's house, or field, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."
Let's assume that they are not in order of importance. Let's hope anyway. I'd hate to think people really believed that saying "God-damnit!" is worse than committing murder. The first three are pretty much throw-aways. Most Christians don't even put the same level of importance on keeping the Sabbath holy and not saying the Lord's name in vain as they used to. Most certainly wouldn't stone a man to death for working on Sunday as Moses did in Numbers 15 of the Old Testament. These first three commandments seem to be little more than example's of the jealousy and insecurity typical of the vain, capricious, and emotionally infantile Old Testament Deity. Three testaments out of ten wasted on god's own ego (What a douchebag!) and the remaining commandments still leave much to be desired.
Almost every religion and culture on earth at the time these rules were authored already had laws forbidding, theft, murder, purgery, and slander. There were few cultures that considered disobeying or disrespecting your parents and lusting after your neighbor's wife or possesions a virtue. I can just imagine The Supreme Being with his infinite intellect finally appearing to the world and his sheep looking up to him and asking, "How should we live? What is good and what is evil?" and him answering: "Ummm... well... you shouldn't kill each other. That would definitely be wrong. Oh! And don't steal from each other or fuck each other's wives either. That's not cool."
"Yeah. Thanks, God. We sort of figured that much out already."
I don't know, I would have just expected something a bit more profound from an all-knowing being. For that reason, and in keeping with the idea that the morality of society is constantly evolving towards an ideal in which every individual's success and prosperity is maximized, I have decided to write my own set of commandments for the modern age.
1.) Love and Honor yourself. Do nothing which would pointlessly endanger your mental, physical, or emotional health, or otherwise negatively impact your quality of life unless it is for the larger goal of bettering or preserving the overall quality of life for all humanity or a neccessary risk toward the goal of improving or preserving your own quality of life.
2.) Love and Honor your fellow man. Do nothing which would needlessly cause harm or otherwise inhibit or negatively impact the quality of life of your fellow human beings, unless it is in retailation for or to prevent them doing harm to you or another human being. Yet, always act towards the betterment of humanity.
3.) Cherish, protect, and provide for your family.
4.) Fulfill your potential. Strive always towards the highest possible state of mental, physical, and emotional perfection, whatever that is for you, and strive to help others fulfill their own highest potential as well. Do not willing indulge or abide anything which inhibits your potential.
5.) Live always as if your every action were to become the moral standard for all of humanity and the example you would have all others follow.
6.) Never stop learning, questioning, and examining. Reason is humanity's greatest gift and to inhibit reason or subjugate it to illusion and untested untestable belief is the highest sin. Know as much about yourself and this world and universe as is possible and share what you have learned with as many as possible.
7.) Love and accept the diversity of humanity. Tolerate and cherish differences in races, sex, sexual prefferences, and opinions and never discriminate, prejudge, or oppress on the basis of these differences.
8.) Teach your children with an eye towards the future and encourage them to grow beyond you. Do not indoctrinate them to a rigid belief system but allow them to disagree with your ideas and teach them how to reason and evaluate evidence and think for themselves. Humanity is like fruit and when it ceases to grow it begins to rot.
9.) Value the future of humanity beyond your own lifetime.
10.) Be happy. Life is brief.
It is interesting to note that as basic as these few commandments are and as much as most of modern society would now agree with them, most religions, including Christianity, would consider these sinful. The idea that we were to treat even those who were not members of our same religious groups with love and tolerance or that we were not to oppress members of different races, nationalities, genders, or sexual orientations alone would be unthinkable to the Abrahamic religions like Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. And allowing a child to think for themselves and form their own opinions about religion and philosophy would be heresy.
Many political groups would take issue with these ideas as well. Consider that as the elections draw near. You may call yourself a "Fiscal Conservative" but how much social conservativism and religious based bullshit are you willing to swallow for a few tax cuts? And do you really think the idiots who run their lives via this collection of mediocre fables have the intellectual prowess to balance a budget? History has shown otherwise. I fear for this country as it grows increasingly fundamentalist. This barbarous book of bullshit is one of the most dangerous tomes ever written and any mention of it as the basis of a candidate's ethical ideology should immediately disqualify them from serious consideration in the minds of any self-respecting atheist.
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion."
- Steven Weinberg, Nobel Prize-winning physicist
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Friday, November 11, 2011
The Big White Rabbit Revisited
We are a year away from electing a new president and right now it seems likely that the front runner for the most powerful leader in the world is a guy in magic underwear. There are many circles in which I would be lambasted for a statement like that. Criticizing or ridiculing a political candidate's religion is considered as distasteful as ridiculing or criticizing his race. This is ridiculous of course. You choose your religion. You don't choose your race, sex, or sexual preference. Those type of prejudices should be frowned upon and those classes protected. Idiotic beliefs and ideologies should not. Ridiculing religion should be considered a virtue. Let's look at it this way...
Imagine that there was a presidential candidate who claimed to see, speak to, and derive his moral beliefs from a big, white, talking, rabbit that grants wishes. Would you vote for them? Would you feel that this would be a good enough reason not to? Imagine what you would think if a candidate for the most powerful position on the planet were to begin his speech, "I would like to first thank the big, white, talking, rabbit, without whom, none of this would be possible." What would you think? Would you be ready to hand over the keys to the kingdom to such a lunatic? Would you see nothing wrong with making this whackjob the head of the most powerful military force on the planet?
We ought to question our religious leader's beliefs, particularly when those beliefs are nonsensical, racist, homophobic, sexist, classist, or simply illogical. The inability to think logically in regards to existential issues could very well be indicative of a larger problem. The guy who can't see that there's no magic in them thar undies, may not be capable of recognizing other obvious truths, like the fact that "trickle-down economics" has never helped the middle class. The guy who is incapable of thinking beyond the outdated, barbarous morality of the bible, is probably not the guy who should be electing judges to the Supreme Court.
"The big, white, rabbit says that all children should remain ignorant until they reach voting age, therefore I'm withdrawing all funding from public education."
Not outside the realm of possibility. Would you respect a candidate's right to such a moronic belief?
The idea that religious beliefs should be above scrutiny and their adherents beyond question is a bizarre one. These are the beliefs that guide their actions, shape their opinions and their world view. For our worlds leaders, these are the beliefs upon which public policy will be based and laws and constitutional amendments will be drafted. I want to know if a guy's religion once considered women as cattle and black people as evil (and yes, I'm talking about Mormonism.) Of all the beliefs and ideas a candidate holds, their religious beliefs should be the ones most heavily scrutinized.
The reason why it is still legal to discriminate against an entire class of citizens and deny them the same rights as other Americans is because of what some ignorant goat-herders wrote in a book two thousand years ago when people still thought the world was flat, the sky was made of water, and demons caused diseases. If you're a homosexual, you may want to consider that little tidbit when deciding who to vote for. A member of The Evangelical Church is probably not going to protect your rights. If you're black, you may want to look at the Mormon Church's history regarding their darker brethren.
This from one of the prophets of the LDS church, Brigham Young:
"You see some classes of the human family that are BLACK, UNCOUTH, UNCOMELY, DISAGREEABLE and LOW in their habits, WILD, and seemingly DEPRIVED OF NEARLY ALL THE BLESSINGS OF THE INTELLIGENCE that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been KILLED, and THAT WOULD HAVE PUT A TERMINATION TO THAT LINE OF HUMAN BEINGS. This was not to be, and the Lord put A MARK upon him, which is THE FLAT NOSE AND BLACK SKIN. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race -- that they should be the "servants of servants;" and they will be, until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree." LDS "Prophet" Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p. 290
"Ham will continue to be servant of servants, as the Lord decreed, until the curse is removed. Will the present struggle [the U.S. civil war] free the slave? No.... Can you destroy the decrees of the Almighty? You cannot." LDS "Prophet" Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, p. 250
And what about the ideas and opinions espoused by the founder of the Mormon faith?:
"Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became THE FATHER OF AN INFERIOR RACE. A curse was placed upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so WHILE TIME ENDURES. Millions of souls have come into this world cursed with a BLACK SKIN and have been DENIED THE PRIVILEGE OF PRIESTHOOD and the fulness of the blessings of the Gospel. These are the descendants of Cain. Moreover, they have been made to FEEL THEIR INFERIORITY and have been SEPARATED from the rest of mankind from the beginning. Enoch saw the people of Canaan, descendants of Cain, and he says, 'and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were DESPISED AMONG ALL PEOPLE.'" LDS "Prophet" Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection, pp. 101-102
(Quotes courtesy of exmormon.org)
Now, we are asked to leave these racist beliefs unmolested? Yes, the Mormon church has made strides to change their views toward Black people in recent years, but should we not at least broach the subject with a potential world leader? "Do you believe that the two greatest prophets of the faith you claim were wrong in regards to African Americans?" Shouldn't we ask this?
What about the Mormon religion's stance on equal rights for women?
Deborah Laake, who was excommunicated in 1993 for writing Secret Ceremonies, states that "it had been repeatedly impressed on me that if I failed to marry a faithful Mormon man...in a Mormon temple, I would be denied access to the highest level of Mormon heaven" (Laake 4).
According to Laake: "The patriarchal order is of divine origin and will continue throughout time and eternity" (Laake 39).
"I'd been conditioned to believe that if I didn't have babies, I wasn't worth much. Having children was what women were made for"
Mitt Romney, once a Bishop in the Mormon church, is credited with having had a "change of heart" in regards to gender politics and the role of women in church and society. Once, as reported by The Salt Lake Tribune in their article "Mitt Romney's Mormon Evolution" (November 22, 2011), Romney held views that paralleled the views of the church. Nancy Dredge, a 67-year-old descendant of Mormon apostle Brigham Young, recalled one instance in which Romney called her into his office to discuss the women’s requests to play a more active role in the church. "He said, ‘I’ve got a great job for you, to write up the notes for the men’s meetings!’ He didn’t get it," she said. "He thought we would be thrilled."
So, should a candidate's big, white, rabbits be left out of the discussion? Should we not consider the impact these fanciful creatures have on a candidate's political agendas? If we were talking about a Muslim, agreement would be almost unanimous. He would be grilled without relent over every aspect of his faith as Obama was. And rightly so. It seems that only popular, "acceptable" religions are afforded these extraordinary protections. Every leader who adheres to "magical thinking" should be interrogated on these beliefs be they Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Scientologist, or Mormon.
Should we take the risk that Christians who believe homosexuals are an abomination might make "laying with a man as with a woman" punishable by death? Should we take the risk that Mormon's who believe all African Americans are decedents of Cain and inherently evil and inferior might rescind or ignore equal rights legislation? Fail to uphold civil rights laws or prosecute civil rights abuses. Should we take the risk that they might fail to prosecute abuses against women or uphold laws meant to prevent gender bias? What about if we discovered that a candidate had a big, white, rabbit that told him America was the new Sodom and Gomorrah and must be destroyed by fire? Is that a belief that we should respect?
Call me prejudice if you will, but the guy in the magic undies probably won't be getting my vote, not unless he can convince me that his faith is a mere personal eccentricity and won't be influencing his politics. In other words, he needs to keep his big, white, rabbit in the closet with other bizarre personal fetishes like the guy who likes to wear diapers and get caned by women in black latex. I have much more respect for that guy then the guy who carries his fetishes up onto the podium with him and puts it into campaign speeches.
Imagine that there was a presidential candidate who claimed to see, speak to, and derive his moral beliefs from a big, white, talking, rabbit that grants wishes. Would you vote for them? Would you feel that this would be a good enough reason not to? Imagine what you would think if a candidate for the most powerful position on the planet were to begin his speech, "I would like to first thank the big, white, talking, rabbit, without whom, none of this would be possible." What would you think? Would you be ready to hand over the keys to the kingdom to such a lunatic? Would you see nothing wrong with making this whackjob the head of the most powerful military force on the planet?
We ought to question our religious leader's beliefs, particularly when those beliefs are nonsensical, racist, homophobic, sexist, classist, or simply illogical. The inability to think logically in regards to existential issues could very well be indicative of a larger problem. The guy who can't see that there's no magic in them thar undies, may not be capable of recognizing other obvious truths, like the fact that "trickle-down economics" has never helped the middle class. The guy who is incapable of thinking beyond the outdated, barbarous morality of the bible, is probably not the guy who should be electing judges to the Supreme Court.
"The big, white, rabbit says that all children should remain ignorant until they reach voting age, therefore I'm withdrawing all funding from public education."
Not outside the realm of possibility. Would you respect a candidate's right to such a moronic belief?
The idea that religious beliefs should be above scrutiny and their adherents beyond question is a bizarre one. These are the beliefs that guide their actions, shape their opinions and their world view. For our worlds leaders, these are the beliefs upon which public policy will be based and laws and constitutional amendments will be drafted. I want to know if a guy's religion once considered women as cattle and black people as evil (and yes, I'm talking about Mormonism.) Of all the beliefs and ideas a candidate holds, their religious beliefs should be the ones most heavily scrutinized.
The reason why it is still legal to discriminate against an entire class of citizens and deny them the same rights as other Americans is because of what some ignorant goat-herders wrote in a book two thousand years ago when people still thought the world was flat, the sky was made of water, and demons caused diseases. If you're a homosexual, you may want to consider that little tidbit when deciding who to vote for. A member of The Evangelical Church is probably not going to protect your rights. If you're black, you may want to look at the Mormon Church's history regarding their darker brethren.
This from one of the prophets of the LDS church, Brigham Young:
"You see some classes of the human family that are BLACK, UNCOUTH, UNCOMELY, DISAGREEABLE and LOW in their habits, WILD, and seemingly DEPRIVED OF NEARLY ALL THE BLESSINGS OF THE INTELLIGENCE that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been KILLED, and THAT WOULD HAVE PUT A TERMINATION TO THAT LINE OF HUMAN BEINGS. This was not to be, and the Lord put A MARK upon him, which is THE FLAT NOSE AND BLACK SKIN. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race -- that they should be the "servants of servants;" and they will be, until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree." LDS "Prophet" Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p. 290
"Ham will continue to be servant of servants, as the Lord decreed, until the curse is removed. Will the present struggle [the U.S. civil war] free the slave? No.... Can you destroy the decrees of the Almighty? You cannot." LDS "Prophet" Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, p. 250
And what about the ideas and opinions espoused by the founder of the Mormon faith?:
"Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became THE FATHER OF AN INFERIOR RACE. A curse was placed upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so WHILE TIME ENDURES. Millions of souls have come into this world cursed with a BLACK SKIN and have been DENIED THE PRIVILEGE OF PRIESTHOOD and the fulness of the blessings of the Gospel. These are the descendants of Cain. Moreover, they have been made to FEEL THEIR INFERIORITY and have been SEPARATED from the rest of mankind from the beginning. Enoch saw the people of Canaan, descendants of Cain, and he says, 'and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were DESPISED AMONG ALL PEOPLE.'" LDS "Prophet" Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection, pp. 101-102
(Quotes courtesy of exmormon.org)
Now, we are asked to leave these racist beliefs unmolested? Yes, the Mormon church has made strides to change their views toward Black people in recent years, but should we not at least broach the subject with a potential world leader? "Do you believe that the two greatest prophets of the faith you claim were wrong in regards to African Americans?" Shouldn't we ask this?
What about the Mormon religion's stance on equal rights for women?
Deborah Laake, who was excommunicated in 1993 for writing Secret Ceremonies, states that "it had been repeatedly impressed on me that if I failed to marry a faithful Mormon man...in a Mormon temple, I would be denied access to the highest level of Mormon heaven" (Laake 4).
According to Laake: "The patriarchal order is of divine origin and will continue throughout time and eternity" (Laake 39).
"I'd been conditioned to believe that if I didn't have babies, I wasn't worth much. Having children was what women were made for"
Mitt Romney, once a Bishop in the Mormon church, is credited with having had a "change of heart" in regards to gender politics and the role of women in church and society. Once, as reported by The Salt Lake Tribune in their article "Mitt Romney's Mormon Evolution" (November 22, 2011), Romney held views that paralleled the views of the church. Nancy Dredge, a 67-year-old descendant of Mormon apostle Brigham Young, recalled one instance in which Romney called her into his office to discuss the women’s requests to play a more active role in the church. "He said, ‘I’ve got a great job for you, to write up the notes for the men’s meetings!’ He didn’t get it," she said. "He thought we would be thrilled."
So, should a candidate's big, white, rabbits be left out of the discussion? Should we not consider the impact these fanciful creatures have on a candidate's political agendas? If we were talking about a Muslim, agreement would be almost unanimous. He would be grilled without relent over every aspect of his faith as Obama was. And rightly so. It seems that only popular, "acceptable" religions are afforded these extraordinary protections. Every leader who adheres to "magical thinking" should be interrogated on these beliefs be they Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Scientologist, or Mormon.
Should we take the risk that Christians who believe homosexuals are an abomination might make "laying with a man as with a woman" punishable by death? Should we take the risk that Mormon's who believe all African Americans are decedents of Cain and inherently evil and inferior might rescind or ignore equal rights legislation? Fail to uphold civil rights laws or prosecute civil rights abuses. Should we take the risk that they might fail to prosecute abuses against women or uphold laws meant to prevent gender bias? What about if we discovered that a candidate had a big, white, rabbit that told him America was the new Sodom and Gomorrah and must be destroyed by fire? Is that a belief that we should respect?
Call me prejudice if you will, but the guy in the magic undies probably won't be getting my vote, not unless he can convince me that his faith is a mere personal eccentricity and won't be influencing his politics. In other words, he needs to keep his big, white, rabbit in the closet with other bizarre personal fetishes like the guy who likes to wear diapers and get caned by women in black latex. I have much more respect for that guy then the guy who carries his fetishes up onto the podium with him and puts it into campaign speeches.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
