There has been much talk about the building of a mosque near Ground Zero. Those against the mosque say, while legal, the erection of a Muslim place of worship so close to the place where the World Trade Center once stood is highly inappropriate.
Those in favor of the mosque say it will show New York and the rest of the world that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are peaceful.
But you know who are really peaceful - Atheists!
So how about we scrap plans for a mosque and build a shrine to a group of people who have always retained the ability to refrain from slaughtering thousands of people for any reason whatsoever! And do you know how frustrating it is dealing with fanatics trying to convert you!? Yet not one Mormon missionary has been found dead in the living room of an atheist. What amazing restraint we have! Perhaps extreme atheists are occasionally cited for protesting inappropriately, but again, you'll notice history books completely lack sections about atheist uprisings in which thousands of believers were slaughtered in the name of nothingness. Atheist martyrs aren't willing to blow themselves up so that people will stop believing.
Despite backing up our non-violent rhetoric with non-violent action, we've never been honored. We're known as the freaks. "They relentlessly protest having our version of god shoved down their throats," the religious fanatics say. Religious folks feel confident their beliefs are correct simply because they have many fellow followers at home and abroad.
But despite the fact that atheists are the minority in every corner of the world, we've never violently lashed out. No atheist in a Muslim country dares to speak out for fear of being stoned to death for the horrific sin of not strictly following the tenants of Islam. Atheists in Christian countries, such as America, are considered outcasts, because, as the Christians say, "America was founded on Judeo-Christian philosophy."
People belonging to organized religions have always used oppression of their people in certain parts of the world as justification to kill. Atheists, oppressed in every part of the world, have never needed to justify violence, because we've never mastered the art, or had a desire to master the art, of mass killing.
Yet we atheists are the epitome of freakishness because we don't enjoy seeing overtly religious displays on public property.
I suppose I shouldn't condemn the weak masses, who only lash out because they're not mature enough to handle the unknown. Their desire to pretend that every unanswerable question is answerable by humans is so overwhelming that they must either kill, or justify the killing, of those who point out the fact that some mysteries will forever remain.
Since I have no chance of successfully completing my mission, I won't start a Facebook page attempting to garner support for my Ground Zero shrine to atheism. Doesn't matter really, the majority of my life is not spent trying to please what may or may not be above the clouds based on the writings of people who lived centuries ago. It's amazing how saneness is so prevalent in a group of people who start with a rational premise.
Not Talking About It Doesn't Make It True
Certainly I lean one way politically, but have never considered myself uber-partisan simply because I believe the majority of politicians are buffoons. One of my favorite habits of elected officials on both sides of the political aisle is refusing to discuss topics about which they're clearly wrong.
"Did I pardon that criminal because his wife was one of the biggest donors to my campaign!? That is a ridiculous question and I refuse to dignify it with a response. Next unrelated question!"
It's as if some people believe that preventing the discussion of a certain topic means they're in the right.
Ever try and have a rational discussion regarding the alien/outer space beliefs of Mormons with a Mormon? To some followers of Mormonism, the proposition, "Let's discuss Kolob, which you believe is the star closest to the throne of god," are fightin' words.
Why are people so adamant they hang onto religions when the mere mention of a specific belief held by followers of the religion is cause for massive tension?
That's the beauty of atheism; you're only required to believe what you actually believe!
What a concept, huh?
It never gives religious people pause that they have been taught stories so outlandish that the mere mention of them puts followers on the defensive!?
Back to the political analogy for a second... Religious people refusing to discuss specific beliefs are akin to candidates in the midst of debates answering questions posed by moderators with completely unrelated information. It's misleading when they do it, yet I'm sure those who follow a specific religion mention all the controversial topics right away while trying to convert the lost. "So you're thinking about becoming a Mormon! I'll explain the, 'love thy neighbor' stuff later, but first I want to tell you about all the creature-inhabiting planets god created besides ours, because we can't be alone in the universe... Am I right!?"
Religious folks are of the opinion that you're required to meet certain belief-criteria or else you'll be denied entrance into the kingdom of heaven. For those who don't believe 100% of the words written in your holy book should be taken literally, what makes you so certain the authors were completely accurate while writing the verses explaining what you're required to believe in order to secure an eternity of perfection?
"Sure, some of those parables weren't based in reality, and I don't believe they actually meant I should execute that homosexual who tried to sell me hand cream in the mall, but they absolutely nailed the part about me needing to believe such-and-such in order to achieve eternal salvation!"
Just think; if they left out important details, or couldn't read their own penmanship after taking notes from god as he informed them exactly what everyone needed to believe, you could be royally screwed.
"What do you mean I can't pass through the pearly gates, I believe everything the Bible taught me," a religious person complains after receiving a notice of rejection on really nice letterhead.
"Yeah, but there was a typo in your Bible which instructed you to believe something you weren't supposed to believe. Therefore, you, and all other humans who purchased a 2008 Zondervan Bible, will not be spending the afterlife in heaven. Who would have thought the omittance of the simple word, 'don't' in Ecclesiastics would have such disastrous consequences" St. Peter replies.
"But that's not my fault!"
"You're right, it was the fault of typesetter J. Randolph Kendrick, who ironically purchased his Bible in 2000 and is therefore currently enjoying a juicy steak that will not add an inch to his svelte waistline... He is in heaven after all."
"Did I pardon that criminal because his wife was one of the biggest donors to my campaign!? That is a ridiculous question and I refuse to dignify it with a response. Next unrelated question!"
It's as if some people believe that preventing the discussion of a certain topic means they're in the right.
Ever try and have a rational discussion regarding the alien/outer space beliefs of Mormons with a Mormon? To some followers of Mormonism, the proposition, "Let's discuss Kolob, which you believe is the star closest to the throne of god," are fightin' words.
Why are people so adamant they hang onto religions when the mere mention of a specific belief held by followers of the religion is cause for massive tension?
That's the beauty of atheism; you're only required to believe what you actually believe!
What a concept, huh?
It never gives religious people pause that they have been taught stories so outlandish that the mere mention of them puts followers on the defensive!?
Back to the political analogy for a second... Religious people refusing to discuss specific beliefs are akin to candidates in the midst of debates answering questions posed by moderators with completely unrelated information. It's misleading when they do it, yet I'm sure those who follow a specific religion mention all the controversial topics right away while trying to convert the lost. "So you're thinking about becoming a Mormon! I'll explain the, 'love thy neighbor' stuff later, but first I want to tell you about all the creature-inhabiting planets god created besides ours, because we can't be alone in the universe... Am I right!?"
Religious folks are of the opinion that you're required to meet certain belief-criteria or else you'll be denied entrance into the kingdom of heaven. For those who don't believe 100% of the words written in your holy book should be taken literally, what makes you so certain the authors were completely accurate while writing the verses explaining what you're required to believe in order to secure an eternity of perfection?
"Sure, some of those parables weren't based in reality, and I don't believe they actually meant I should execute that homosexual who tried to sell me hand cream in the mall, but they absolutely nailed the part about me needing to believe such-and-such in order to achieve eternal salvation!"
Just think; if they left out important details, or couldn't read their own penmanship after taking notes from god as he informed them exactly what everyone needed to believe, you could be royally screwed.
"What do you mean I can't pass through the pearly gates, I believe everything the Bible taught me," a religious person complains after receiving a notice of rejection on really nice letterhead.
"Yeah, but there was a typo in your Bible which instructed you to believe something you weren't supposed to believe. Therefore, you, and all other humans who purchased a 2008 Zondervan Bible, will not be spending the afterlife in heaven. Who would have thought the omittance of the simple word, 'don't' in Ecclesiastics would have such disastrous consequences" St. Peter replies.
"But that's not my fault!"
"You're right, it was the fault of typesetter J. Randolph Kendrick, who ironically purchased his Bible in 2000 and is therefore currently enjoying a juicy steak that will not add an inch to his svelte waistline... He is in heaven after all."
Coming Out of the non-Gay Closet
I've never understood why it's impolite to talk about religion. Of course it's folks who strictly follow a specific religion that make the topic taboo.
If you tell me that atheism is a bunch of hooey, I get excited because it means a lively debate is forthcoming.
If I tell a religious person that they're full of hooey, they start foaming at the mouth and then string together a bunch of euphemisms for parts of the female anatomy before perfectly segueing into descriptions of unladylike sexual acts they'd like to see me perform on myself.
True, throwing a temper tantrum at the declaration their religious beliefs are not universally held is much better than brutally murdering those with whom they disagree, but still does not excuse exhibiting child-like behavior due to the opinion of a fellow human being.
There should be no topic rational adults must refrain from discussing for fear fists will fly.
And it's not just fear of a violent response that prevents many atheists from bringing up the origin of man...
Organized religion has done such a stellar job of making it seem as if non-believers will suffer an eternity of horror that the prospect of revealing oneself to people about whom they care deeply is extremely nerve-wracking.
It's about a thousand times worse than saying you're too busy to come home for Thanksgiving dinner.
The following sentence is likely what Christian family members hear while a loved one is announcing they've taken to atheism, "You know what, I don't believe in a word of the Bible; so, instead of us being together for an eternity of perfection, I'm just going to hang out in hell where I will exist in agony. Since your time in heaven will be perfect, I suppose they'll somehow wipe me out of your memory so you won't be forced to imagine the desperation emanating from my tortured screams."
Obviously one of the reasons organized religion is so popular is because they enjoy pretending that they're absolutely certain the reward for believing is perfection while the punishment for not believing is absolutely horrendous.
Not only does extreme punishment for non-followers influence individuals to believe, it also discourages debate. If I genuinely believed members of my family would suffer in the afterlife simply because they made a rational conclusion after the gathering of facts, I would do everything in my power to convince them of their error. I would be so adamant they change their opinion they'd probably take a, "It's best not to bring it up," attitude toward the topic of religion while speaking with me.
I suspect it's not only fear that a horrific fate will come to those who do not accept a traditional religion... Perhaps holy people have a problem with the discussion of religion because their argument is based solely on ancient people telling other ancient people stories about how god spoke to them. For us non-believers, the follower of a traditional religion is equivalent to someone who wholeheartedly accepts the word of a nut who approached them on the sidewalk and said, "If you don't believe my pants are the creator of the universe, you will rot for all of eternity!" I suspect religious folks don't much like to hear that kind of talk; especially considering the fact that a good comeback doesn't exist.
Or perhaps religious folks are afraid of actually changing their opinion after hearing ironclad facts backed up by science.
Because religion is spread by fear, I suppose it's only natural that those who follow a specific denomination are afraid to speak about their beliefs and mask said fear with anger when the subject is broached.
It's a shame organized religion uses scare tactics so harsh that families cannot openly debate the existence of god when one member is not of the same belief as the rest, but then again, if there were no consequence for failing to attend church, them pews would be some kind of empty.
If you tell me that atheism is a bunch of hooey, I get excited because it means a lively debate is forthcoming.
If I tell a religious person that they're full of hooey, they start foaming at the mouth and then string together a bunch of euphemisms for parts of the female anatomy before perfectly segueing into descriptions of unladylike sexual acts they'd like to see me perform on myself.
True, throwing a temper tantrum at the declaration their religious beliefs are not universally held is much better than brutally murdering those with whom they disagree, but still does not excuse exhibiting child-like behavior due to the opinion of a fellow human being.
There should be no topic rational adults must refrain from discussing for fear fists will fly.
And it's not just fear of a violent response that prevents many atheists from bringing up the origin of man...
Organized religion has done such a stellar job of making it seem as if non-believers will suffer an eternity of horror that the prospect of revealing oneself to people about whom they care deeply is extremely nerve-wracking.
It's about a thousand times worse than saying you're too busy to come home for Thanksgiving dinner.
The following sentence is likely what Christian family members hear while a loved one is announcing they've taken to atheism, "You know what, I don't believe in a word of the Bible; so, instead of us being together for an eternity of perfection, I'm just going to hang out in hell where I will exist in agony. Since your time in heaven will be perfect, I suppose they'll somehow wipe me out of your memory so you won't be forced to imagine the desperation emanating from my tortured screams."
Obviously one of the reasons organized religion is so popular is because they enjoy pretending that they're absolutely certain the reward for believing is perfection while the punishment for not believing is absolutely horrendous.
Not only does extreme punishment for non-followers influence individuals to believe, it also discourages debate. If I genuinely believed members of my family would suffer in the afterlife simply because they made a rational conclusion after the gathering of facts, I would do everything in my power to convince them of their error. I would be so adamant they change their opinion they'd probably take a, "It's best not to bring it up," attitude toward the topic of religion while speaking with me.
I suspect it's not only fear that a horrific fate will come to those who do not accept a traditional religion... Perhaps holy people have a problem with the discussion of religion because their argument is based solely on ancient people telling other ancient people stories about how god spoke to them. For us non-believers, the follower of a traditional religion is equivalent to someone who wholeheartedly accepts the word of a nut who approached them on the sidewalk and said, "If you don't believe my pants are the creator of the universe, you will rot for all of eternity!" I suspect religious folks don't much like to hear that kind of talk; especially considering the fact that a good comeback doesn't exist.
Or perhaps religious folks are afraid of actually changing their opinion after hearing ironclad facts backed up by science.
Because religion is spread by fear, I suppose it's only natural that those who follow a specific denomination are afraid to speak about their beliefs and mask said fear with anger when the subject is broached.
It's a shame organized religion uses scare tactics so harsh that families cannot openly debate the existence of god when one member is not of the same belief as the rest, but then again, if there were no consequence for failing to attend church, them pews would be some kind of empty.
God Told Me to Tell You to Stop Using Drugs
There are more than a few so-called arguments against the legalization of drugs that tug at the heartstrings.
"I work with special needs children whose mothers abused drugs. If you could spend a day in my shoes, you would applaud the illegality of drugs."
While I have great admiration for anyone who dedicates their life to helping those unable to live independently, the above argument doesn't hold water.
Do you think good parents would all of sudden say, if drugs were legalized, "Put me down for five pounds of your finest cocaine!"
If murder were made legal, would normally good-natured individuals suddenly transform into killing machines?
And obviously the person working with special needs children of mothers who've abused drugs understands that there's a great demand for their services despite the fact that drugs are currently illegal?
The key is harsh punishment. We simply make drugs legal while severely punishing those who use them in ways that harm children. If a woman bears a child with disabilities directly resulting from her abuse of drugs, we throw her in jail for the remainder of her life. If a man played a part in said abuse, he goes in too. Maximum penalties for dealers caught selling to minors. Through negligence, if children gain access to drugs owned by their parents, we throw the parents in jail for eons. If someone is caught driving under the influence of drugs, we forever revoke their license on the off-chance they're still able to drive after being released from a maximum security pound-me-in-the-ass prison. Those who steal money, or physical possessions, with a plan to exchange said valuables for drugs, should also be punished harshly.
The reason the war on drugs has been so horrendously unsuccessful is because we do everything half-assed. Most junkies, drug dealers and impaired drivers get multiple opportunities to commit crimes. Their final offense usually has catastrophic consequences.
With harsh punishments, we could seriously reduce instances of expectant mothers abusing harsh drugs, dealers selling to children, and impaired drivers flying down the freeway.
If we were to legalize drugs, while throwing the book at those whose drug related actions led to the harming of innocence; the innocent would be protected, and those with a desire to destroy their own bodies would be free to do so.
As usual, it all comes down to religion. "God doesn't want us harming our bodies by using illegal drugs. Though not everybody shares my religious beliefs, I will nonetheless force them to abide by the same rules set forth by the unproven deity I choose to follow."
It's the same with prostitution. The only reason you can't legally pay fifty bucks for a quicky is because it goes against the teachings of a certain religion.
"But prostitution leads to disease and the abuse of women."
Only those willing to take the risk while not using every precaution made available by the fine folks at Trojan are likely to catch a disease. And, just as with my drug legalization proposal, if those convicted of abusing women or children faced serious consequences, offenders would not have multiple opportunities to commit crimes and the overall number of abuse cases would decline.
Despite disastrous consequences resulting from the illegality of certain behaviors, which are illegal solely based on their religious beliefs, opponents of drug and prostitution legalization refuse to even consider reversing their position.
They refuse to budge simply because being "anti-drug" makes them feel good. "Sure more people die thanks to my rigid stupidity, but I'm doing god's work!" they say while dreaming about the day they'll proudly saunter through the pearly gates still bloated from a life full of good intentions.
"I work with special needs children whose mothers abused drugs. If you could spend a day in my shoes, you would applaud the illegality of drugs."
While I have great admiration for anyone who dedicates their life to helping those unable to live independently, the above argument doesn't hold water.
Do you think good parents would all of sudden say, if drugs were legalized, "Put me down for five pounds of your finest cocaine!"
If murder were made legal, would normally good-natured individuals suddenly transform into killing machines?
And obviously the person working with special needs children of mothers who've abused drugs understands that there's a great demand for their services despite the fact that drugs are currently illegal?
The key is harsh punishment. We simply make drugs legal while severely punishing those who use them in ways that harm children. If a woman bears a child with disabilities directly resulting from her abuse of drugs, we throw her in jail for the remainder of her life. If a man played a part in said abuse, he goes in too. Maximum penalties for dealers caught selling to minors. Through negligence, if children gain access to drugs owned by their parents, we throw the parents in jail for eons. If someone is caught driving under the influence of drugs, we forever revoke their license on the off-chance they're still able to drive after being released from a maximum security pound-me-in-the-ass prison. Those who steal money, or physical possessions, with a plan to exchange said valuables for drugs, should also be punished harshly.
The reason the war on drugs has been so horrendously unsuccessful is because we do everything half-assed. Most junkies, drug dealers and impaired drivers get multiple opportunities to commit crimes. Their final offense usually has catastrophic consequences.
With harsh punishments, we could seriously reduce instances of expectant mothers abusing harsh drugs, dealers selling to children, and impaired drivers flying down the freeway.
If we were to legalize drugs, while throwing the book at those whose drug related actions led to the harming of innocence; the innocent would be protected, and those with a desire to destroy their own bodies would be free to do so.
As usual, it all comes down to religion. "God doesn't want us harming our bodies by using illegal drugs. Though not everybody shares my religious beliefs, I will nonetheless force them to abide by the same rules set forth by the unproven deity I choose to follow."
It's the same with prostitution. The only reason you can't legally pay fifty bucks for a quicky is because it goes against the teachings of a certain religion.
"But prostitution leads to disease and the abuse of women."
Only those willing to take the risk while not using every precaution made available by the fine folks at Trojan are likely to catch a disease. And, just as with my drug legalization proposal, if those convicted of abusing women or children faced serious consequences, offenders would not have multiple opportunities to commit crimes and the overall number of abuse cases would decline.
Despite disastrous consequences resulting from the illegality of certain behaviors, which are illegal solely based on their religious beliefs, opponents of drug and prostitution legalization refuse to even consider reversing their position.
They refuse to budge simply because being "anti-drug" makes them feel good. "Sure more people die thanks to my rigid stupidity, but I'm doing god's work!" they say while dreaming about the day they'll proudly saunter through the pearly gates still bloated from a life full of good intentions.
Preaching for Power
Not a whole lot of people truly live for others.
But the majority of preachers; their only reason for existing is to serve their congregation, right?
Or are preachers like politicians, who, regardless of whether there is an "R", "D", "I", "G" or "L" beside their name, only crave money and power. They want you to give them money in exchange for advice on how you should live.
Here's a bit of advice I'll offer absolutely free of charge: work hard and be decent in your relations with others. Beneath my poignant, yet simple, guide to living a life of fulfillment and happiness, please notice the complete absence of PayPal links, which, if clicked, would take you to a page providing detailed instructions on how to deposit funds directly into my account. And please don't email me asking for my routing number, because I will not divulge such information! And that's not just because I have trouble differentiating it from my account number on the bottom of my checks, a problem from which I doubt a single preacher suffers.
Preachers differ from politicians in that they can't pass laws forcing you to fork over a large portion of your paycheck. However they can control you with threats.
And it doesn't matter what church you enter, the man or woman at the pulpit is usually similar to their peers in more ways than not. Do you really think President Obama's controversial preacher, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, had different goals for the Trinity United Christian Church than the "aww shucks" Methodist preacher has for the unassuming church former President George W. Bush visits while vacationing at his small town ranch? Do you think they have different goals for their own careers?
They both want power. They both want their name on buildings. They both want to increase attendance so the collection plate will be overflowing by the time it reaches their office. That's why they want your butt in that pew.
Like any working relationship, I'm sure preachers care about a few of their parishioners while remaining apathetic toward others. I'm sure preachers enjoy the company of some of their parishioners while finding it difficult to be in the same room as others.
Church is big business, and despite their tax status, if you think your preacher has any goal that trumps improving the bottom line, you're sadly mistaken.
Sure, things have improved in that religious organizations of yore tried to establish dominance by committing mass murder, while most modern day American institutions of religion attempt to financially better neighboring churches by printing more colorful fliers or implementing a stricter age limit on female members of the choir; but the ultimate goal is the same.
Though they seek far less than those who walk the halls of Congress, you're still being led by people who have chosen to follow fame, money and power. How many people who crave fame, money and power are truly wholesome, upstanding individuals?
By the admission of your own religion, human beings are imperfect; yet you choose to elevate scores simply because they've attended seminary.
Because there are exceptions to every rule, I'm sure there are a few preachers who abide by the teachings of the Bible, and, no matter how many hundreds of thousands of dollars they raise, get by on just enough money to pay for food, a decent education for their children, and to put aside a tiny bit for retirement. "To the layman, it may seem as if I deserve a raise, but because an increase in funds is not necessary for my survival, I will not take money away from those who desperately need it for theirs," are words that must have been uttered by a few preachers, don't you think?
Neither do I.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are decent preachers all over this fine country of ours; I just hate to see people follow a fellow human being just because others have elevated him or her to the position of pastor.
Hopefully, due to the Catholic Church scandal, religious leaders are at least somewhat scrutinized. Not necessarily because everyone is afraid they're committing unspeakable acts, just to make sure they're trustworthy. Because, if, when conversing with your preacher, you get the feeling an 800-number should periodically be displayed below his or her chin, you may not be dealing with someone who is making your needs the number one priority.
So please proceed with caution when getting close to church royalty, because they have similar characteristics to cult leaders who deviously convince thousands of people that it's in their best interest to participate in insanely self-destructive activities. And because their subtlety may cause a delay in the arrival of an illuminated light bulb over your head, you may want to be extra careful.
But the majority of preachers; their only reason for existing is to serve their congregation, right?
Or are preachers like politicians, who, regardless of whether there is an "R", "D", "I", "G" or "L" beside their name, only crave money and power. They want you to give them money in exchange for advice on how you should live.
Here's a bit of advice I'll offer absolutely free of charge: work hard and be decent in your relations with others. Beneath my poignant, yet simple, guide to living a life of fulfillment and happiness, please notice the complete absence of PayPal links, which, if clicked, would take you to a page providing detailed instructions on how to deposit funds directly into my account. And please don't email me asking for my routing number, because I will not divulge such information! And that's not just because I have trouble differentiating it from my account number on the bottom of my checks, a problem from which I doubt a single preacher suffers.
Preachers differ from politicians in that they can't pass laws forcing you to fork over a large portion of your paycheck. However they can control you with threats.
And it doesn't matter what church you enter, the man or woman at the pulpit is usually similar to their peers in more ways than not. Do you really think President Obama's controversial preacher, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, had different goals for the Trinity United Christian Church than the "aww shucks" Methodist preacher has for the unassuming church former President George W. Bush visits while vacationing at his small town ranch? Do you think they have different goals for their own careers?
They both want power. They both want their name on buildings. They both want to increase attendance so the collection plate will be overflowing by the time it reaches their office. That's why they want your butt in that pew.
Like any working relationship, I'm sure preachers care about a few of their parishioners while remaining apathetic toward others. I'm sure preachers enjoy the company of some of their parishioners while finding it difficult to be in the same room as others.
Church is big business, and despite their tax status, if you think your preacher has any goal that trumps improving the bottom line, you're sadly mistaken.
Sure, things have improved in that religious organizations of yore tried to establish dominance by committing mass murder, while most modern day American institutions of religion attempt to financially better neighboring churches by printing more colorful fliers or implementing a stricter age limit on female members of the choir; but the ultimate goal is the same.
Though they seek far less than those who walk the halls of Congress, you're still being led by people who have chosen to follow fame, money and power. How many people who crave fame, money and power are truly wholesome, upstanding individuals?
By the admission of your own religion, human beings are imperfect; yet you choose to elevate scores simply because they've attended seminary.
Because there are exceptions to every rule, I'm sure there are a few preachers who abide by the teachings of the Bible, and, no matter how many hundreds of thousands of dollars they raise, get by on just enough money to pay for food, a decent education for their children, and to put aside a tiny bit for retirement. "To the layman, it may seem as if I deserve a raise, but because an increase in funds is not necessary for my survival, I will not take money away from those who desperately need it for theirs," are words that must have been uttered by a few preachers, don't you think?
Neither do I.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are decent preachers all over this fine country of ours; I just hate to see people follow a fellow human being just because others have elevated him or her to the position of pastor.
Hopefully, due to the Catholic Church scandal, religious leaders are at least somewhat scrutinized. Not necessarily because everyone is afraid they're committing unspeakable acts, just to make sure they're trustworthy. Because, if, when conversing with your preacher, you get the feeling an 800-number should periodically be displayed below his or her chin, you may not be dealing with someone who is making your needs the number one priority.
So please proceed with caution when getting close to church royalty, because they have similar characteristics to cult leaders who deviously convince thousands of people that it's in their best interest to participate in insanely self-destructive activities. And because their subtlety may cause a delay in the arrival of an illuminated light bulb over your head, you may want to be extra careful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)