Tagged: Jesus Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • DistroMan 20:00 on November 2, 2011 Permalink
    Tags: , , , , , , Jesus, , , , , ,   

    Psalm 2: Jesus Christ, come on down… 

    Psalms Part 2 of 150

    1 Why do the nations rage,

    and the peoples plot a vain thing?

    Because God has interfered in their business?

    2 The kings of the earth take a stand,

    and the rulers take counsel together,

    against Yahweh, and against his Anointed, saying,

    “The meek shall inherit the earth, if only BigNose would butt out!”

    3 “Let’s break their bonds apart,

    and cast their cords from us.”

    4 He who sits in the heavens will laugh.

    The Lord will have them in derision.

    5 Then he will speak to them in his anger,

    and terrify them in his wrath:

    Who said this?  Which kings?

    6 “Yet I have set my King on my holy hill of Zion.”

    7 I will tell of the decree.

    Yahweh said to me, “You are my son.

    Today I have become your father.

    Huh?  How?

    8 Ask of me, and I will give the nations for your inheritance,

    the uttermost parts of the earth for your possession.

    You didn’t, you haven’t and you never will.

    9 You shall break them with a rod of iron.

    You shall dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.”

    Oh, how compassionate of you.

    10 Now therefore be wise, you kings.

    Be instructed, you judges of the earth.

    11 Serve Yahweh with fear,

    and rejoice with trembling.

    Rejoice with trembling?  Please explain!

    12 Give sincere homage to the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish on the way,

    for his wrath will soon be kindled.

    Oh wrath, what a lovely thing.  As far as I can see, wrath is on a par with anger.  If anger is one of the seven deadly sins, then what does it say about your son and his wrath?

    Blessed are all those who take refuge in him.

    No, not blessed.  Just stupid.

    << Psalm 1      Index      Psalm 3 >>

     
  • DistroMan 20:00 on June 8, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , , Jesus, , , , , , , , United States   

    Q: Are we equal? A: Yes, but no. 

    I’m thinking of the religious amongst us.  If we were to go to a church this Sunday, stand outside and ask people as they emerge if they think we are all equal under God, they would most probably all say yes.  That is presuming that it was a happy clappy, love is in the air type service.  If it happened to be a more fire and brimstone, let’s kill the unbeliever type service there would be a lot of people saying no, but it’s the people who say we are equal that bother me.  I know who to watch out for when they are saying no and putting themselves out there in opposition to us.  But when they are the smiley, I love everybody because Jesus is in my heart type, you can’t tell when they are going to blow and come out against you or in what fashion.  I do admit though that there are plenty who will say we are equal and do honestly believe it.  They also believe that we will never be as happy as them without Jesus, but that is about as far as they go differentiating between us.  I get along really well with them and they are the majority in my life.  There is a troubling trend though.  The good ones are diminishing and the ‘down with the unbelievers’ are growing.

    Just how many who say we are equal are the type who when they go to church and hear their preacher saying that the godless are the enemy, that we eat our babies, that we have no morals, that we would as soon murder our neighbour as eat a hot Sunday lunch, would then sit there nodding their heads in agreement?  Most of them would.  When was the last time you ever saw or heard someone voice disagreement with their preacher?  I know I’ve never heard of it.

    We are told daily that our countries are based on Christian values and the believers are trying to get more and more of the Bible into our government and into our lives whether we are religious or not.  Not only are they trying to get their foot further in the door, but they are also actively trying to do away with anything that proves that their way is not the right way.  Take for example the way Texas have now managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century.  This is not only going to affect students in that state.  This is not just Texas history they are rewriting.  Any change in history of this magnitude affects the whole world.  There is no such thing as ‘just Texas history’.  History is a planetwide concern and should not be allowed to be rewritten under any circumstances.  This kind of action is tantamount to old style bookburning.

    Here in Australia, the religious have been getting worked up about the non-religious wanting to teach their children ethics.  I have no idea what their real agenda is in this matter, but the best we can think is that while ever we don’t teach ethics and morals to our children it allows them to keep saying that we don’t have any.  Could it really be that they are willing to fight this hard just to stop us proving we can be moral and ethical people just like everybody else?  It’s not that they don’t know it, but I suppose it would stop the preachers saying over and over in church every week how much better they are.  If their flock started to believe that we are just as moral, then what would be the point of Church?

    One day, far in the future, a future I probably won’t live to see, humanity may just learn that religion really is just load of rubbish.  It’s nothing more than fairy stories to control the people.  But this can only happen, ‘will’ only happen if we stop them from taking power again.  We must keep a separation of Church and State so that reasoning people have a chance to see the truth, because even reasoning people who don’t have the truth on display to examine will believe whatever is thrown at them every day of their lives by those who have a vested interest in maintaining power.

    CHURCH <  WIDEN THE GAP  >  STATE

     
  • DistroMan 20:00 on May 26, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , , , , , , Jesus, , , , , , ,   

    Ethics Trial debate is becoming a farce. 

    Abbreviations:

    * SRE – Special Religious Education – Single faith instruction, usually by a ‘chaplain’ of that faith.

    ** GRE – General Religious Education – Comparative religious instruction on many faiths.

    Last night on television here in Australia a show called Insight had a somewhat varied group discussing their opinion on the Ethics Classes that the Education Department hope to introduce on a fulltime basis.  As you have probably seen from previous articles I have written on the subject, the religious community have gotten in on the act and are trying every tactic they can think of to stop these classes going ahead.  We have heard arguments that:

    • it isn’t necessary because they already have religious classes
    • it has no moral basis
    • ethics lacks substance
    • the term ‘ethics’ is problematic
    • it’s not fair and just to the religious children
    • it’s hostile to religion
    • it just shouldn’t happen because they have an agreement with the government
    • you can’t teach ethics outside a religious framework
    • the children’s minds can’t critically analyse ethics
    • philosophy discussion ‘problematic’ at that age (10 to 12)
    • the work of the Greek and Roman philosophers is irrelevant to ethics
    • afraid more children will opt out of SRE*
    • wasn’t implemented in a way they approve of

    They gave some of the children a chance to give their opinion and describe the classes they are involved in.  I was amazed at the explanations of the ethics given by the children and how it was being taught, but the religious in the group could not come up with one reason that countered the children’s wish to continue.

    It was explained by the person who originally put the syllabus together that scenarios are tailored for the age groups they are given to so that the children can not only comprehend the problem put to them, but analyse it and come up with different ways of dealing with them and then discussing those ideas amongst themselves with the objective of finding better solutions to ethical problems in their lives.

    The Anglican Minister confused me with his objections.  I can only think that he has no idea how atheism is defined.  He said,

    “If there was an atheistic teaching system we would be happy with that at the same time. Teaching all faiths is better than ethics with no faith component”

    and something about

    “Atheistic religion it’s a religion of some sort.”

    I don’t know what he is thinking because I’m not sure he knows himself.  None of his objections made sense and he was less than helpful in the discussion.  Whilever we include clueless people in these discussions, an outcome is impossible.

    The children who were removed from the SRE* classes told the audience that they were allowed to:

    • watch movies
    • read books in library or in the back of SRE* Classes
    • played on computer

    This is the part that really upsets the Non Religious parents.  Why, when the ‘religious’ children are being taught something their parents and the ‘chaplains’ are happy with, are our children being made to go without?  Blaming us for not wanting our children in those classes is no more than a smokescreen to reflect the responsibility back on us.  The trouble most of us have with that is that they wan to have their cake and eat it too.  I’ll explain what I mean by that.

    We take our children out of the SRE* classes, and they say it’s our fault. Fine, we take responsibility for our own children the same way they do for theirs.  Our children sit doing nothing and they say that’s our fault as well.  Sorry, but that’s not true.  It was part of the agreement they had with the government.  Why they would ever have made an agreement that the non SRE* children were not to be allowed to undertake educational activities is something they need to answer for as it is neither an ethical or moral stance.  So we took appropriate action to give our children a positive educational influence during that time and then they want responsibility back and the authority to stop us teaching ethics to our children.  We took them out of those classes and they didn’t care.  Our children sat idle and they didn’t care.  Why so much concern now?

    They showed a clip of one Minister teaching 10 to 12yr olds with toy bears.  THAT does not seem age appropriate to me.  If you can’t do better than that, it will only reinforce the decision to keep our children out of SRE.  While I certainly do not believe that all ‘chaplains’ would be that bad, I can only assume that they would have tried to show their best to the world.  If that is so, it was a pretty pathetic ‘best’.  They did themselves a great disservice and only managed to show how poor SRE* can be as an educational tool.

    It was also a sad reflection on the Victorian State Government to hear that they wouldn’t allow Humanist/Secular Ethics classes in Victoria because the group proposing it weren’t religious.  It really does show that the Christian Lobby in this country have quite a stranglehold on our Education Departments.  This is inappropriate in this day and age.  It needs to be looked at seriously and a resolution sought that will allow for our children to get better educations free of the restraints being imposed by a ‘special interest group’.  It is their ‘interest’ and not that of the wider community.

    Let’s get to some facts.

    1. They have the classes for their children that they want.
    2. We don’t have an existing alternative.
    3. Their children learn scripture according to their groups beliefs.
    4. Our children are banned from learning anything during that time.
    5. Some parents put their children into the SRE* classes because there is no alternative class.
    6. If there was an alternative, they would change their children over to that class as has already been shown during the trial.
    7. There has been up to 47% drop in SRE* attendance in some classes.

    This whole debate is entirely unnecessary.

    • They have their classes for their children, so why complain?
    • They haven’t cared about our children going without before, so why are they so interested in what we ‘do’ teach our children now?
    • Our children learning ethics is a good thing, so why complain?
    • They have GRE**, SRE*, Church, Sunday School and home. What more do they need?

    It really boils down to this:  The children of religious parents have the right to have their children taught the belief system they choose.  We, as either non-believers or parents whose children’s school does not have a chaplain for their ‘belief system’ would prefer to have our children taught ethics.  Why when they get exactly what they want do they think they have the right to deny us the exact same thing?

    Again, the explanation is simple.  They have to ‘automatically respect’ the other religions so they don’t make a noise about children of other faiths being taught in SRE*.  But we aren’t religious and are not given that respect.  We are nothing to them and in their opinion we don’t have equivalent rights to teach our children ethics.  It would not be in any of their interests for our children to be shown to be becoming more moral and ethical without their so-called religious beliefs.  It would once and for all show to the world that their gods and prophets are not needed for us to be good people.  They will continue to fight this even if we do get these classes approved.  It is not in their interests for us to be good.  How then do they claim that without God, there is no morals, no goodness, no compassion etc?  What use will there be for religion if that happens?

    THE DEMISE OF RELIGION IS AT HAND

     
    • Kat 11:58 on May 27, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      I am a strong supporter of teaching ethics in primary and philosophy to high school age students. One of the things that most strongly affected my thinking as a child was that while Mum wanted us to go to Catholic school where our thinking was often stifled – my father taught us many philosophies, encouraged critical thinking and had many ethical discussions on many topics.
      I taught my children ethics when they were primary school age and Philosophy when high school age. Even though my daughter has not pursued it academically – it has helped her make good life choices and decisions. My son is still interested and continually questions and discusses ethics and philosophy daily.

  • DistroMan 20:00 on May 1, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , , Jesus, ,   

    Dictionary of Woo 

    House of Woo – Church/Temple/Synagogue etc

    Little Book of Woo – The Bible/Koran/Torah etc

    Woo – religion

    Wooffended – which is what all wooists will all get if they read this blog!!!!

    WooFighting – Battling against the forces of Woo

    Woofrock – what the woo rapists wear.

    Woohat – what the chief wooist wears.

    Wooification – Any wooists justification of crimes against humanity committed by god or his followers in the The Little Book of Woo. It also applies to raping virgins, incest and anything else that a wooist may justify, like hating gays and tripe of that nature.

    Wooify – Any statement or set of statements that turn science into creationism. Now stop wooifying my science!

    Wooism(s) – That long list of bible quotes you get from a wooist after debunking woo

    Wooist – theist/deist/believer

    WooMan – god

    Woomongering – preaching/praying

    Wooplonk – a mug of pretend blood.

    Woosign – two bits of wood nailed together.

    Woowafer – a bit of pretend corpse.

    Woowater – what they sprinkle on their new recruits, also known as ‘Liquid Stupid’.

    Woowish – an attempt to get something done without making any personal effort.

    WooWoman – godess

    WooWorld – that world within which you can’t enter till shutting down half your brain.

    If you have any more, please let me know and I’ll continue to add them to this post.

     
    • Greybeard 01:52 on May 2, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Then of course there is:

      Wooffended – which is what all wooists will all get if they read this blog!!!!

    • Greybeard 01:45 on May 2, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Then there are:

      Woohat – what the chief wooist wears.
      Woofrock – what the woo rapists wear.
      Woowater – what they sprinkle on their new recruits.
      Woosign – two bits of wood nailed together.
      Woowish – an attempt to get something done without making any personal effort.
      Woowafer – a bit of pretend corpse.
      Wooplonk – a mug of pretend blood.

  • DistroMan 19:00 on April 29, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , , Jesus, ,   

    The Bible is NOT the word of God. Not even close. 

    I have a problem with the Bible on many levels.  One is that it is just plain bullshit, but more than that is that people believe that bullshit and do so with full knowledge that it is bullshit.  I know that many xtians would like to argue the point with me over that, but it is still true.  I’ll explain.

    Onto the fairy story: God is omnipotent and omniscient.  God made us.  God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses.  <—-  Right there.  That’s the problem.  God, in his infinite wisdom gave his message to a man he knew to be fallible.  God knew we were corruptible.  Also, he only gave us the Ten Commandments.  He didn’t give us the Bible.  He didn’t give us any of those stories.  They were written at least 3o years after Jesus was thrown off the island.  None of those guys even knew Jesus.  So we have a book that is supposed to be the word of God that God didn’t write, that tells us stories of Jesus by people that didn’t even know him.  Not to mention that many of those stories contradict each other.  Oh, oh, mustn’t forget that there is no proof as to who actually wrote the Bible either.  That too must be taken of faith.

    If you hired a biographer to write your story would you accept this when they handed it to you?  If you were the publisher, would you accept a book so badly written and risk losing money on it?  Of course not, so why would god accept such a hodge podge of contradictions,  outright lies, behaviour that is not only violent, genocidal, petty, racist and misogynistic, but downright incestuous and pornographic in parts?  Not only would a god not want to have this be his words, but I would think that any intelligent being would have put a stop to it before it spread.  We sue people for slander for far less, so why would a god allow it?

    The Bible is an insult to any intelligent human being that is really honest with themselves and not willing to give up their freedom, self respect, morals, ethics and their right to self determination to a non-existent figment of the imagination of some power hungry, desert dwelling freak bent on domination of all he surveyed and beyond.

    If, and I doubt it, but if there are any xtians reading this, please, for just one day put aside your ‘beliefs’ and read the Bible from the beginning as if you’d never read it before.  Most probably haven’t, which is a plus for them really.  Read it with an open mind, a critical mind and think about how unlikely what you are reading really is.  Do not equate anything you read to what you already know and tell me what you think about a book written in this manner that purports to tell you how to live your life and what to tell and do to your children.

    THINK ABOUT IT AND LET ME KNOW

     
    • Greybeard 11:33 on April 29, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      God had a great opportunity to put some very useful information into 'his' book but strangely he declined to do so. He could have informed us of the Universe and our place in it. He could have told us about the Heliocentric Solar System; he could have enlightened us about science.He could have at least told us the principles of electricity. He could even have made it quite clear that he will not tolerate his priests molesting innocent children for 2000 years.

      Instead of giving clarity he gave us a dog's breakfast of conflicting stories, written by primitive blood-thirsty flat-earthers who knew no more about the Universe than anyone else of that era.

    • Sal 06:41 on April 30, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Before you insult me for being a brainless Christian, you should know that I'm atheist. I don't believe the bible is the word of God, but your arguments sound like a teenager's rant. You don't back up your one argument: you can't prove who wrote the bible. Other than that, it is just baseless insults.

      While there are Christians that are arrogant, ignorant, stupid, and over zealous, there are more nonreligious people that act just as irrationally. Instead of ranting about Christianity, why not stop and actually think why people like you are so intolerant and angry about something that doesn't really affect anything?

    • DistroMan 07:02 on April 30, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Angry? Yes. I am. I'm very angry about the abuse that has been handed out to countless tens of thousands of children by these so called pillars of moral society. They are nothing of the sort and don't deserve the respect they so vehemently demand. Intolerant? Again, yes. I'm very intolerant of people who commit these crimes and I'm intolerant of those who support them by either actively speaking out in their defense or sitting quietly by and not caring as long as it isn't their children who are being harmed. But I am not just being angry and intolerant because I'm an Atheist. You don't know me well enough to make those judgments. I suggest you just read the words and not try to attach unwarranted emotions to them.

      I do not believe in the Bible itself or the claim that it was written by anyone who even remotely knew Jesus or what God wanted. Do I care that I don't back that up? No. It's my opinion and I'll voice that opinion how and when I like.

      Of course I can't prove who wrote the bible. Neither can they. That is the point. How then can it be called the word of god?

    • the diff 22:25 on May 1, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      First, I want you to know I do not know you, or have ever read anything else you’ve blogged about, so I’ll ask you forgive my ignorance if you’ve addressed certain things previously. This was sent to me by a friend, who is an atheist, in whom I enjoy having great discussions about a multitude of things. Anyhow, your post intrigued me, and I felt compelled to reply, not in an attempt to proselytize, but because I think debate clarifies everyone’s position, and allows both sides to speak for themselves. Your post brings up excellent questions and points of contention, but in the interest of time I will stick to the one you pointed out as the most important, that being Moses and why on earth an omnipotent god of creation would use such a flawed human being to free His people from the bondage of the Egyptians (For the moment I would ask you suspend your disbelief on both the accuracy of, and Moses’s authorship of the Pentateuch and leave that for another discussion). Based on Moses’s own telling of his story, at the time of his first encounter with God, he’d already murdered and Egyptian and fearing his own life fled into the desert. Why would God, again in His alleged infinite wisdom, choose a man who had already broken one of the commandments before He’d even had an opportunity to give them out yet? If you look at the major figures of the bible, there is a similar theme. David was an adulterer who sent the husband of the woman he’d taken to bed out to die in battle so he wouldn’t get caught. Paul, the claimed author to over half of the epistles in the new testament, spent most of his time prior to conversion murdering as many Christians as he could find. Yet again, God chose these men to lead His people, and even called David a man after His own heart. The reason is simple. Based upon the lives of all these men, no one could conclude anything (again this supposes you actually believe these stories to be historically accurate) but that a God far greater than them placed them into the situations they were in to bring glory and honor to His name. Time and again the pattern is the same throughout both the new and old testament, that God chooses the most ridiculous and unlikely people to do amazing thing for His purpose, simply to make a mockery of those who in pride and arrogance place themselves above others.
      Obviously this reply doesn’t address even a tenth of the problems you have with the bible, mind numbed robot christians, or a multitude of other religious grievances, but I am lazy, so i’ll leave those be.

  • DistroMan 20:00 on March 24, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , Jesus, , , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Secularism is to blame for Child Abuse in Ireland says Pope – Part Two 

    Part Two

    8. First you have the arrogance to tell the parents how they feel. Not having children (or do you) how can you know?  You know nothing. If you did have even a small amount of real knowledge of what it is to be a parent, you would have done something much earlier instead of writing a how-to for priests who need to get out of trouble. You completely lack any credibility in this area.

    Then you start telling parents how their children should be brought up. Considering you are the leader of a sex starved organisation of men and women, you least of all, have a right to be telling them their children need to be taught how to behave by the Catholic Church.

    9. “Your experience of the Church is very different from that of your parents and grandparents.” I doubt that actually. Maybe it is, but only in the fact that you have been caught. With the sectarian war raging in that country it would have been near impossible for the children to speak out. Even if they did, the parents could hardly have said anything. Before that, communication being what it was in this world, everyone was so cut off that the children would have felt even more powerless than they do now. My bet is that it was even worse back then. But how would you know? You’d have to care first.

    “We are all scandalized by the sins and failures of some of the Church’s members.”  Some of the Church’s members Joe? How about you stop trying to minimise the whole event and tell it like it is.  Many of the Church’s members, sounds a whole lot more honest. You remember honesty don’t you Joe?  Understatement is as bad as fabrication under the circumstances.

    “But it is in the Church that you will find Jesus Christ, who is the same yesterday, today and for ever.” As are the priests, and that is what worries me most.  I have very little doubt that they will continue in the same way after a period of abstinence.  It’s the nature of the beast.  Man is not meant for that life.  It is unnatural and you have it within your power to change it.

    “He loves you and he has offered himself on the cross for you.”  Ah, you admit it now.  He did that crap to himself.  You can’t call that abuse when he did it himself willingly. How is that abuse? We call that masochism these days. Which would also make him a sadist as he did it to himself.  So your god is a sadomasochist.  It all seems to flow from there.  No wonder the Church as a whole is a hotbed of moral turpitude.

    “for he will never betray your trust!.” It seems that is exactly what just happened. People put their trust in him and they were repaid with deceit and abuse. That is not something new for the Catholic Church.

    “He alone can satisfy your deepest longings and give your lives their fullest meaning by directing them to the service of others.” Looks like he satisfied someones longings, just not the children’s, and they were directed towards the service of the priesthood. It is as it always has been and always will be.

    10. Please, oh please my priests, help me keep my position of power?  Lame.

    11. Laying blame and distancing yourself again. You do say that leadership was lacking, but you fail to go as far as it being your leadership that was lacking.  Take responsibility for this.  That is what fathers do.

    “Only decisive action carried out with complete honesty and transparency will restore the respect and good will of the Irish people towards the Church to which we have consecrated our lives.” True, but it has to happen from the top.  How many times does this need to be said before you understand?

    “This must arise, first and foremost, from your own self-examination, inner purification and spiritual renewal.” No Joe, from the top. You must show leadership. You must be a role model. Not just a powerless, annoyed and cowardly father figure.

    “In particular, I ask you to be attentive to the spiritual and moral lives of each one of your priests. Set them an example by your own lives.”  You  are asking them to do what you yourself need to do.  Lead by example. If a priest has wronged he must admit that wrong and step down. If a bishop has wronged, he must admit it and step down. That goes all the way up the line to you. You failed in your leadership. You set a bad example and must take personal responsibility.  Step down Joe.  Do the right thing.

    12. “we need to find new ways to pass on to young people the beauty and richness of friendship with Jesus Christ in the communion of his Church.” New ways Joe?  The church is so bogged down in the past with outdated rules and rituals that it can’t do anything new.   For a start, you won’t let it.  You have kept trotting out ridiculous rules that are costing millions of lives.  You can’t expect sexually frustrated people to contain themselves. Your God has never been able to help them with that and so it will continue. The lifestyle you expect them to lead is untenable, unworkable and unjust.  The ‘new’ needs to happen, I agree, but start with new rules that save lives and don’t pit one person against another.

    “By treading the path marked out by the Gospel, by observing the commandments and by conforming your lives ever more closely to the figure of Jesus Christ, you will surely experience the profound renewal that is so urgently needed at this time. I invite you all to persevere along this path.” Fundamentalism is never the answer. You will only create more problems for future generations to have to deal with.  You had just finished talking about ‘new ways’ and now you go backwards.  Make up your mind.

    13. “I am praying earnestly that, by God’s grace, the wounds afflicting so many individuals and families may be healed”. The problem is though that your prayer is only offering hope. It cannot be known that it will come to fruition. Therefore, you risk future atrocities. How can you take such a risk with even more children?  You don’t have the right.

    14. “I now wish to propose to you some concrete initiatives to address the situation.” When I read the word ‘concrete’ I stupidly expected to hear something concrete, like excommunication for offending priests, hard and fast rules to help put a stop to further occurrences of child abuse. But what do you propose? Prayer, hope, wishes, outdated ritual and meaningless pap. Joe, that is nothing more than mystical hand waving in a cloud of smoke. You may as well say, “abracadabra, see, all fixed now”.

    You end with a prayer. Nothing unusual there. The last section of said prayer goes:

    To you, Triune God,
    confident in the loving protection of Mary,
    Queen of Ireland, our Mother,
    and of Saint Patrick, Saint Brigid and all the saints,
    do we entrust ourselves, our children,
    and the needs of the Church in Ireland.

    Really Joe? Entrust the children to the church? Again? Hasn’t that already been proven to be unsuccessful? How many more children are you willing to sacrifice to your priests before you wake up to the fact that it won’t work. It does NOT work. It never worked, it isn’t working and it will never work with a church so full of itself and the power it holds over the people.

    Is this the same meaningless drivel you intend to offer to people in the United States, Africa, Australia, The Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany, Austria and everywhere else your beloved church has infected the land and abused the children?

    This is shameful and you should be ashamed. Ashamed of yourself for betraying your followers in their greatest time of need.

    Fathers who care for their children arrive at a time when they have a talk with their sons about responsibility and the choices they will have to make in their lives. Occasionally it is turned around and a son has to have a talk to a wayward parent. If that parent cares more for their children than themselves, they will listen. Joe, it is time for you to listen to your children. Listen to their pain. Their cries of anguish. Their pleading with the church as a whole to stop.  Or do you wish people to see you as a child who sticks their fingers in their ears and yells, “I can’t hear you!” ?

    To the Catholic people I say that this outrage is not your fault and you should not have to pay the price. Nor should your children. The Church has shown you nothing but contempt by the way you have been so shabbily treated in this matter. Every step of the way they have been full of words to make you feel better, but without making one meaningful step in that direction. You have been praying for centuries and this still happened. Do not let them tell you prayer will get you out. If you do that, your children and grandchildren will pay the price as you have done. Force them to change. I beg of you, for the sake of the children, not to step foot inside a church till the Pope agrees to real change. You must force them to put child proof locks on the churches. They must never again be left alone for one moment with children.

    To Joe. The bottom line here is that the people trusted you and the church to do the right thing. The church certainly let them down as it has always done.  But it was your job to change things.  If not yours Joe, then whose? You are the Pope. You knew of the atrocities being committed upon children from decades earlier all across the globe. You knew. When you became Pope you had the opportunity to start fixing things of this nature immediately and yet you did nothing. If you had been more devoted to the children instead of the church you may have lifted a finger to help, but when your attention is firmly fixed more on saving face and power, you fail in your mission. You do not deserve to be Pope. Step down Joe. Shut up shop. Put out the closed for business sign and fade away as gracefully as you are able. If you are unwilling to do that, then the least you can and should do, what is in the best interests of the people, is some real words meant to change things, not just prayer and wishes, but action.

    Something like the following:

    “These children are the future of our world, and they must not be made to bear the ignominy of the past. We shall set a goal that ANY priest, or nun, of any rank involved in these activities shall be cast out of this church and subject to the law of the land wherein the offenses took place, and a zero-tolerance policy regarding sexual abuse will be in force from this day onward.”

     
    • eda 10:10 on March 24, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      …The lifestyle you expect them to lead is untenable, unworkable and unjust….I guess this is the real problem. I like that you actually came up with some concrete solutions and mentioned that the church needs to be child proof. That's a really good start, any chance Joe follows your blog???

    • Loren 11:14 on March 24, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      The problem is simple – dear Papa Joe is insulated and isolated from anyone who might supply the brand of constructive negative feedback that could have sufficient power to awaken him from his reverie. The only outsiders who could get close enough, heads of state, most notably, suffer too much from an overdeveloped sense of diplomacy to consider such frank language. It will most likely require a chance act, likely during a public event involving ol' Joe, both to shake him and the sleepwalkers of his flock out of their torpor and recognize that the pontiff has no clothes.

      Such an event could get very ugly … but then, what has happened behind closed doors is already far more than ugly.

    • Richard C Brown 12:15 on March 24, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      About 30 years ago I did a seminar.At the end there was a question.The question was about the identity of god.
      The answer"She is Black and Beautiful"rang through the auditorium.I have pondered the question since.Maybe in the Church She is the secret being kept under the floors of the Vatican.
      Us guys never seem to get it right and the closest the church has come to the feminine is Mary.
      The spirit of the man jesus must really go bonkers at the churches actions today.By the way what does the holy ghost do at times like these.
      What and the hell is the pope telling the upstairs peoples.Same political BS as those reporting to the president of the USA.
      For a win/win what must take place?Keep speaking up and out..Communication works when heard.

  • DistroMan 20:00 on March 23, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , Jesus, , , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Secularism is to blame for Child Abuse in Ireland says Pope – Part One 

    The Pope’s verdict is in.  It’s our fault.  Secularism is to blame.  Who knew?

    After more than 15,000 reported cases of child abuse Pope Benedict XVI has written a ‘pastoral letter’ to the people of Ireland.  That link will give you the whole thing, the real deal.  As of this moment I have read 1/3 of this piece of drivel and already I am both shocked and not shocked.  How can that be you ask?  Well I had hoped for a lot more.   It should have gone further and I suppose I had high hopes that for once in his miserable life, the pope would have done the right thing.   On the other hand it’s the usual tripe trotted out by the church when they get caught with their hands in something it shouldn’t be.  I’ll deal with this piece of garbage one section at a time.  To the letter…

    1. He’s concerned, deeply disturbed and dismayed by what happened to the children by the church.  He listened to the bishops and he is confident that things will get better.  The part I like is this, “I am confident that, as a result, the bishops will now be in a stronger position to carry forward the work of repairing past injustices and confronting the broader issues associated with the abuse of minors in a way consonant with the demands of justice and the teachings of the Gospel”.

    Repairing past injustices?  Does he really think this can be repaired?  He can’t honestly think that.  It must be the damage to the church he wants to repair.  No sane person could possibly think that what happened in that godforsaken country could possibly be put right.  Stopping it from happening again maybe, but repairing?  He is not in touch with the realities of the situation and the damage done to the children and families.  Actually I don’t think he is in touch with reality period!

    2. The first sentence of this section is nothing more than laying the blame directly on the Irish priesthood.  Nobody else’s fault whatsoever.  Bullshit Joe.  There were reports going on for a long time and you knew about them and have done nothing.  You did nothing and hoped  the Irish Priests would take care of it and it would go away.  Well it didn’t.  You are their leader and you didn’t lead.  You failed not only the priests, but the children.  This is YOUR failure Joe.

    Then he goes on to say that it isn’t only the Church that is abusing children.  How weak is that.  There is no defense in the defense of ‘others were doing it too’.  How bloody childish.

    Then he says, ‘the task you now face is to address the problem’.  What?  You’re leaving it up to them?  This is also of your doing, if only by closing your eyes to the facts and not stepping in sooner.

    “Perseverance and prayer are needed, with great trust in the healing power of God’s grace.”  Grow a freaking brain man.  If there was a God he wouldn’t have allowed this to happen to the children.  Even if we did allow for his existence, how can you follow someone who would allow this to happen?  You distance yourself from the priests who committed these despicable acts and from the bishops who knew and allowed it to go on for so long.  How is that any different from you and your god?  You both knew!

    “At the same time, I must also express my conviction that, in order to recover from this grievous wound, the Church in Ireland must first acknowledge before the Lord and before others the serious sins committed against defenseless children.”  Again, you distance yourself and lay blame on others alone.

    “As you take up the challenges of this hour”.  And again you distance yourself.  There seems to be a pattern emerging here.  One that we are not buying into either.

    “It is my prayer that, assisted by the intercession of her many saints and purified through penance, the Church in Ireland will overcome the present crisis and become once more a convincing witness to the truth and the goodness of Almighty God, made manifest in his Son Jesus Christ.”

    What kind of crap is this?  That is just thinking of the Church, not the children.  Where is the goodness of your god in any of what has happened?  Do you think he allowed this to happen as a test for the Church?  I am amazed at your callousness Joe.  To speak about the future of the church while the people are still in pain is to ignore them and what was done.  That is cold.

    3. You go on in this section to try and draw energy from the past.  Good works from the past do not negate the horrors the present has inflicted.  Try dealing with the situation now instead of attempting to distract people from the crimes committed by the Church.  Your Church.

    “Those Irish missionaries drew their strength and inspiration from the firm faith, strong leadership and upright morals of the Church in their native land.”

    How can you even say those words without choking?  You really are out of touch with the pain these people feel.

    Again, harking back to the past looking for support where there is none.  Then to make matters worse you spew this crap, “Many dioceses, especially in Africa, America and Australia, benefited from the presence of Irish clergy”.  The things that happened and are happening even now in these countries may not have been the fault alone of the Irish Catholic Priests, but the Church has done just as much harm in each one of those as it has done in Ireland.  If not more.  All you manage here is to offend the people of those countries.

    “In almost every family in Ireland, there has been someone – a son or a daughter, an aunt or an uncle – who has given his or her life to the Church.”  Only to be treated in this manner.  You should be ashamed.

    4. The first paragraph is just an attempt to divert attention and lay the blame on secular society.  Secular society did not abuse the children. Priests and Nuns did.  Your lot.  Take responsibility for your own actions instead of blaming the innocent once again.  The Church tried that centuries ago and is still paying the price.  That is not a road you want to go down.

    The second paragraph has one thing I agree with.  “Certainly, among the contributing factors we can include: inadequate procedures for determining the suitability of candidates for the priesthood and the religious life; insufficient human, moral, intellectual and spiritual formation in seminaries and novitiates.”  I’d prefer to shorten it and say “insufficient human, moral, intellectual and spiritual formation in the Church as a whole.”  After that we get “and have obscured the light of the Gospel to a degree that not even centuries of persecution succeeded in doing.”  What about the centuries of persecution the Church itself has inflicted upon the people?

    5. If you don’t step down, you’ll be meeting with a lot more abuse victims Joe.  A lot more.  That is unless you’re more heartless than I think you are.  Ireland is only one part of the larger picture.  You’ve tried to deflect attention on this matter by saying that it isn’t just the Church that commits these crimes.  That is true Joe.  What is also true is that there is no other organisation on this planet that practices child abuse to the extent that your beloved Church did, does and will continue to do until the day it breathes it’s last breath.

    6. You start off well, but then go on to say “It is in the communion of the Church that we encounter the person of Jesus Christ, who was himself a victim of injustice and sin.”  He was a victim of his own abuse.  He as your god, sent himself down as his own son for that to happen.  It was his own plan all along.  Who are you kidding?

    “I know some of you find it difficult even to enter the doors of a church after all that has occurred.”  I would advise them to nail the doors shut and never enter them again.  You and yours cannot be trusted.  You have shown that over a very long time.  Ever heard of ‘once bitten twice shy’?  Well you have bitten us way too many times and can’t be trusted any longer.  Go away.  Shut up shop and leave the people alone.  You are an anachronism and are no longer needed.

    “I pray that, by drawing nearer to Christ and by participating in the life of his Church – a Church purified by penance and renewed in pastoral charity – you will come to rediscover Christ’s infinite love for each one of you.”  Purified Joe?  How can it be pure considering what this letter is all about?  You call that a pure church?  And what will you do if one more child is hurt?  Say the same tired old thing again?  And again?  And again?

    7. Laying of blame on the priests again.  Yes, they committed the acts, but yet again you forget that you knew it was happening and failed in your duty of care and allowed it to continue with no real attempt to put an immediate stop to it.  You are just as guilty.

    “These children are the future of our world, and they must not be made to bear the ignominy of the past. We shall set a goal that ANY priest, or nun, of any rank involved in these activities shall be cast out of this church and subject to the law of the land wherein the offenses took place, and a zero-tolerance policy regarding sexual abuse will be in force from this day onward.”

     
    • eda 14:12 on March 23, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Brilliant! So well written and with amazing arguments. I love your precision and it pleases me a great deal that someone can say everything that ought to be said as well as you do. Thanks.

  • DistroMan 19:49 on February 26, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , , , , , Jesus, , , , , ,   

    Why are Wooists so interested in what we do? 

    First I’d like to start with the exact opposite and say right up front that Atheists aren’t so much interested in what Wooists do or think as in stopping their disproportionate influence on society.  Why?  That takes us back to the original question.

    It seems that Wooists have this overweaning attitude to everything that anybody who doesn’t believe in their skyfairy does.  What is it about our actions that so  intrigues them that it not just borders on voyeuristic, but goes way past that point?

    You see, why I bring up this point is that we are forever hearing about people taking out court orders etc, to stop stalkers.  First, I want to get a decent understanding of that word.  Let’s not give anyone a reason to say this isn’t what they do. So here, is the meaning of stalk.

    1. To pursue by tracking stealthily.
    2. To follow or observe (a person) persistently, especially out of obsession or derangement.
    3. To go through (an area) in pursuit of prey or quarry.

    Let’s take them one by one and see how they fit.

    1. To pursue by tracking stealthily.  When you think about how organised they are and the fashion in which JW, LDS and SDA go house by house, street by street, it would seem that they do have some kind of plan they work to.  They don’t let you know they are coming, they just turn up.  THAT sounds like stalking to me

    2. To follow or observe persistently, especially out of obsession or derangement.  Rather self explanatory.  How much more persistent can you be?  They never stop.  Also, because they keep coming back even after I’ve asked them not to, I’d call that obsessive too.

    3. To go through (an area) in pursuit of prey or quarry.  Well, that’s easily seen as stalking.  How many times have they knocked on your door?  How many times do they need to be told no, before they stop?  They keep coming back looking for converts.  We are their quarry.  They want to convert us.

    It was alright for us to exist to some extent while we were being quiet about their activities, but since they’ve ramped it up to the point of influencing our governments, ripping us off with their tax exempt status and abusing our children with complete immunity, we have become outspoken and they don’t like it.

    1. Websites have been hit with DDOS attacks.
    2. Forums are invaded by wooists and we get abused, insulted and threatened.
    3. Try putting something about atheism on your car and see how long before it gets vandalised.
    4. Drive past a church and see how many of their signs are either insulting or threatening about us and our future.
    5. Try getting your son into the Scouts once they find out you are atheist or gay.
    6. Try getting into some churches when they find out you are gay.

    Now they are influencing the internet by getting governments to install filters.  This is happening here in Australia at this very moment.  Once they get the filter up and running it’s only a matter of adding URL’s or words to the filter and bingo, sites just won’t appear.  When governments change, how do we know what the next one will add?

    Church groups already influence the government censors.  Don’t kid yourselves that they aren’t on the committees that view the movies, listen to the cd’s and try out the newest computer games before any of them are allowed to be sold, played or viewed.

    You have to ask though, if they are seeing all this bad stuff, how many of them have then gone out and shot somebody, raped someone, set fire to a building, stolen a car, murdered someone, robbed a bank?  That would seem to argue against their existence.

    You will see signs on buses nearly everywhere you go extolling the virtues of religion or some particular religious group, but atheist signs are now too inflammatory.  Why is one inflammatory and the other not?  It’s just two opposing groups points of view.  If one can do it there is no reason to stop the other.

    These things go on and on.  Religion can, but we mustn’t.  The strange thing is that we aren’t even in the minority here.  So why is it happening?  Because non-believers, secularists, humanists, atheist or whatever label you wish to use are not as outspoken.  We are becoming more so because our rights as equal citizens is being eroded day by day by wooists who think they have the g-d given right to rule.

    So what we have are ‘believers’ who have insinuated themselves into government in such a way as to influence policy and they think that is their right. You also have non-believers who have had enough and are speaking up about it.  Now the ‘believers’ are unhappy and say we should keep out of it because they know better than us.  Why?  Because their little book of woo tells them so.

    I’m sorry, but I thought we run our country based on it’s constitution and the laws we lay down around it.  None of them are entitled ‘little book of woo’.  It really is time my friends for the idea of ‘not talking about religion’ to end.  They have had their chance and have been found lacking.  Remove their religious influence and get back to running this country for everyone including those who don’t believe, those less fortunate and those without a large mouth backed by church groups and not the ideas of some Zombie from 2000 years ago.

    ZOMBIES DON’T GET A VOTE

     
    • Web Tour 19:00 on February 26, 2010 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      If they thought they could get away with it, some of these Christian fundies would probably go back to torturing people and burning them alive. They're disgusting.

  • DistroMan 20:58 on February 24, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , Jesus, , ,   

    I am not an advice columnist, but just this once… 

    I was asked today for some advice.  While I don’t normally give out advice as I don’t feel it’s my place, this isn’t quite a personal thing, so I’ll answer it here.

    I am drinking and pissed off so I need to see what you think of this shit!!!

    First thing, if you’re pissed off, stop drinking.  Those two are a problem waiting happen.  Wait till you are happy then have a drink.

    One thing has always pissed me off, and that is the religious fairytale we had shoved down our throats.

    Truth should only have to be imparted with love and respect and it will be believed.  If someone is ‘shoving’, I’d be asking why.

    The truth will set you free. Bullshit will keep you in the dark ages. For years, decades even, I lived under the constant fear and anxiety that the big, jealous, angry “skydaddy” had a big club over my head and would beat and torture me with flames if I didn’t jump to his every whim. Not only was I going to be tortured but also 90% of all the puny humans would be tortured endlessy unders gods cup of wrath to be poured out in full fury. We are all evil and we should all burn in hell because we deserve it because adam ate a peice of fruit. We should go groveling on our knees patheticly begging jesus to save our black wicked souls so we could sit bowing and praising jesus in heaven forever while 90% or earth’s folks would be writhing in intense and endless agony in hell.

    You mean like this:




    What a sick and demented religion! I believe christianity is nothing more then evil mind control over the masses to keep humans dumbed down and in their subserviant places. The only people who believe such rubbish are those who are superstitious and lacking in proper education.

    While I agree with most of this, not all of them are lacking in a proper education.  This may not seem to make sense, but even with an education you can still believe in woo if you fall into the traps set for you.  There are those that are lacking in self esteem and will fall hard when shown ‘the love of Jebus’.  It’s a support network that they may not have had outside of the church or have left behind and don’t have in their new life elsewhere.  How many people move house only to find themselves without friends or family.  If you’ve had it good, losing it can make life seem very empty.

    Christians tend to cherry pick the “good” verses and ignore all the “bad” verses to make their archaic, blundering fairytales functional for living with. My brain was too intelligent and logical to buy into such wicked, twisted bullshit but I couldn’t shake the fear of hell till recently….

    Something that has become so fully a part of your belief system is never gotten rid of overnight.  It can take months to years before all the last vestiges can be rooted out.  Some people find bits still hiding away much later in life without them ever having known they were there.  I still hear people say ‘amen to that’ who are no longer believers.  It’s just habit.  Don’t beat yourself up over any of it though, because your anger only gives it more power.  Ignore the still shit and let it die a natural death.  It’s kind of like have a song stuck in your head.  You can’t get rid of it by trying.  Just taking your mind of it and doing something else is the best way.

    SEE WOO, SEE WOO FOR WHAT IT IS, SEE WOO RUN

     
  • DistroMan 21:13 on February 19, 2010 Permalink
    Tags: , Jesus,   

    The Bible makes sense! NOT!! 

    So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:27

    God must be kinda freaky looking then.  He has breasts, a penis AND a vagina.  Kinky bugger.

    And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Matthew 25:40

    Just to clarify here, it is King as in God as in Kingdom of God.  So whatever I have done to another I have done unto him?  Hmm?  Knowing that he made us to procreate, it seems a rather kinky thing to do.  Freaking Pervert!!!  Each to their own I suppose.

    For those who think I may be being a little perverse myself by using that analogy, I give you this little gem.

    Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. Matthew 25:1
    And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. Matthew 25:2
    They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: Matthew 25:3
    But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. Matthew 25:4
    While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. Matthew 25:5
    And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. Matthew 25:6
    Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. Matthew 25:7
    And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. Matthew 25:8
    But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. Matthew 25:9
    And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. Matthew 25:10
    Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us. Matthew 25:11
    But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not. Matthew 25:12

    I don’t feel so perverse anymore.  It seems I might have been made in his image, but it doesn’t say much for his morals.  Why does he have to use virgins to make his point?  Freaking Pervert!

    And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. Matthew 1:16

    Are we sure he’s really Christ? Hmmmm?

    Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. Matthew 1:23

    So who is he?  Jesus, Christ or Emmanuel?  Did we get the right one?  Maybe our saviour is the imposter.

    But you might want to believe him anyway, because this guy isn’t playing games you know.

    But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. Matthew 10:33-34

    Also, considering that there were over 60 chroniclers around between Jesus’ birth and 100AD, how come none of them ever mention the sun disappearing for hours or all male children 2 years and under being put to death? There are many instances like this that are not told by anybody else whose writings survive to this day.  Not only is the bible not to be taken seriously, it is full of crap.

    Edit: Found this a few days later and decided it would fit well with this blog, so added the video.  Thanks to TheThinkingAtheist.


    “>

    I CALL SHENANIGANS

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel