A judge informing Michael Vick that slaughtering dogs is a reprehensible crime didn't cause tears of regret to flow down the quarterback's cheeks. For whatever reason, Mr. Vick considers murdering cuddly pooches completely harmless. Through our judicial system, we can hopefully convince him to stay all future canine executions, but we cannot force the football superstar, or anybody else, to feel bad about an act he deems innocent.
Of course sane people would inherently feel sad about harming innocent creatures. Deep down, however, nothing else causes true regret. In other words, religion is strictly used to reverse instincts.
Just like Mr. Vick can't be made to feel empathy for the dogs, few religious people feel a bit of regret over "sins" that harm no one.
I bet there are thousands of gay Christians who don't beat themselves up for sharing a bed with a member of the same sex. Afterward, Sasha and Samantha look up at the ceiling and say, "That was bad for nobody, and extremely good for two!"
If sprinkling pepper was considered a horrific sin, and you hate pepper, you'd have no trouble condemning those needing a little spice. If blandness is not your thing, you'd secretly top your mashed potatoes with black specs. Afterward, your hot mouth wouldn't be a constant source of guilt for the simple reason that only happiness resulted. Regret doesn't stem from someone repeating in your ear, "You did a bad thing."
Religion is about illusion and denial. "Despite the fact that our guts say otherwise, we'll pretend certain actions are sins. Then we'll go to church and act as if we don't regularly, and without regret, perform these deeds. There, the preacher will speak against these 'crimes' as we nod our heads in agreement." You half-heartedly ask for forgiveness, trying your mightiest to pretend it's genuinely needed.
The person that formed the first organized religion probably sounded a lot like Homer Simpson...
"Most people don't daily do things they afterward regret, so we'll claim acts that hurt no one really hurt everyone. Then they'll feel guilty and give us money because only through us can they make amends for doing something perfectly fine that we've convinced them is reprehensible. Now, we just need a large structure in which to gather them all together to repeatedly remind them exactly how many crimes they've committed... Oh, and a bunch of plates so deep they resemble bowls. Then we're set!"
Trouble is, unlike most of Mr. Simpson's harebrained schemes, the above plot worked extraordinary well.
A Travel Agency it Ain't
A popular website recently featured the most picturesque lakes from around the world. "That'd be a fun place to visit," I thought of a beautiful Canadian pond. Of others, I realized... "Wouldn't be safe there... That area is crawling with violent religious zealots... Because I'd probably forget that looking a man in the eye is an offense punishable by death, I wouldn't make it out of the airport closest to that lake..."
God formed our wonderful world and then added religion to prevent us from safely exploring every area?
"I will create a plethora of magnificent attractions, and then add people, who, based on their belief in me, will stop their counterparts from experiencing said magnificent attractions."
Pretend you have $10,000 to spend on a vacation. You must use the entire sum for travel related expenses. Not a dime can be saved, used to purchase Seventh Heaven: The Complete Tenth Season DVDs, or donated to the Boy Scouts.
Plan a vacation based on our current world.
Then plan a vacation as if religion never existed.
Look at your itineraries and marvel at the difference.
Religion even prevents people from experiencing other religions. I doubt a nice Baptist couple would feel comfortable visiting their local Mosque. Something tells me a Jewish couple would be equally as apprehensive.
How can you be for something that prevents you from experiencing a variation of itself!?
Why is something considered good, by so many people, when its simple existence hinders joy, experience, the acquisition of knowledge, etc.?
Only if everyone wakes up with religion amnesia can we all experience everything this brilliant world has to offer.
I can't think of a better way to assist the struggling airline industry...
"To what do you attribute your record profits," a financial reporter would ask the CEO of American Airlines. "Simple, religious zealots decided that, instead of trying to kill people who believe in a different book, enjoying life would be their top priority."
God formed our wonderful world and then added religion to prevent us from safely exploring every area?
"I will create a plethora of magnificent attractions, and then add people, who, based on their belief in me, will stop their counterparts from experiencing said magnificent attractions."
Pretend you have $10,000 to spend on a vacation. You must use the entire sum for travel related expenses. Not a dime can be saved, used to purchase Seventh Heaven: The Complete Tenth Season DVDs, or donated to the Boy Scouts.
Plan a vacation based on our current world.
Then plan a vacation as if religion never existed.
Look at your itineraries and marvel at the difference.
Religion even prevents people from experiencing other religions. I doubt a nice Baptist couple would feel comfortable visiting their local Mosque. Something tells me a Jewish couple would be equally as apprehensive.
How can you be for something that prevents you from experiencing a variation of itself!?
Why is something considered good, by so many people, when its simple existence hinders joy, experience, the acquisition of knowledge, etc.?
Only if everyone wakes up with religion amnesia can we all experience everything this brilliant world has to offer.
I can't think of a better way to assist the struggling airline industry...
"To what do you attribute your record profits," a financial reporter would ask the CEO of American Airlines. "Simple, religious zealots decided that, instead of trying to kill people who believe in a different book, enjoying life would be their top priority."
Collateral Damage
Children of the Westboro Baptist church will lead abnormal lives. Homosexuals are still beaten to death strictly for their choice of romantic partner.
To moderate religious folks, these victims are simply collateral damage.
To spread nonviolent discrimination, you've gotta break some eggs.
I understand you genuinely believe that the collection of stories you frequently read are largely factual, but because they can't be proven, why not play it safe and purge the portions that result in the destruction of actual lives?
We're not talking about praying at a high school football game or publicly displaying a sign that reads, "Thou Shall Not Steal." We're talking about genuine lives.
Christians often debate whether non-violent Muslims contribute to terrorism by remaining silent. These same Christians never examine the roll their behavior plays in the persecution of homosexuals.
They're horrified when they see footage of folks jumping for joy in the streets of Pakistan after a terrorist attack kills scores of civilians. Then they curse American Muslims for failing to condemn both the attack and the exuberant celebration. But do they speak up after a hate crime is committed against the homosexual on their block? Or do they stay silent, only approaching the topic around people with whom they're comfortable joking, "Even though the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, I still wouldn't welcome a butcher of gays into my home... Not 'till he wiped the diseased blood off his shoes!"
Violence against homosexuals happens in every corner of the world, yet we rarely hear American Christians speak out against this particular form of global terrorism. American Christians also said nothing when the Pope argued that homosexuals are as great a threat to the planet as global warming.
Many Christians believe Muslims in Michigan wouldn't themselves slaughter infidels, yet consider blown up hotels in other parts of the world necessary to spread their faith. However I don't recall these same Christians marching down Main Street protesting the treatment of gays in notoriously homophobic Jamaica.
Everywhere homosexuals travel, they must be on guard due to a global anti-gay culture your religion promotes, whether by literature or silence.
Bullied male children who "act feminine" sometimes do the unthinkable because they can't bear another day of the same.
The stories are endless...
A school bus driver was arrested for calling a 10-year-old boy "gay" and then encouraging older students to chase the boy down after he got off the bus. The older kids followed the advice of their elder. Not satisfied with tiny fists, the bus driver joined in.
Brothers strolling down the street were beaten, one later died, because overeager homophobic murderers mistook them for a gay couple.
What's the difference between you and the Muslim who unemotionally sets down the newspaper after reading horrific details of a terrorist attack and then asks, "What's for dinner?"
Absolutely nothing; you both view the recently deceased as collateral damage.
If a fellow follower asks you, "Wasn't the most recent terrorist attack tragic?" do you respond, "It depends, what was the sexual orientation of the victims?"
I'm not saying all Christians and Muslims are insensitive louts. I am claiming, however, that only people without religion are guaranteed to loudly condemn every brutal act against the innocent. You all should do the same, regardless of what's written on the thin-pages of the book you've spent years coloring yellow. Occasionally you may want to read the words that don't make your insides feel warm and cozy, because those un-highlighted sections will keep brutality a part of our world forever.
To moderate religious folks, these victims are simply collateral damage.
To spread nonviolent discrimination, you've gotta break some eggs.
I understand you genuinely believe that the collection of stories you frequently read are largely factual, but because they can't be proven, why not play it safe and purge the portions that result in the destruction of actual lives?
We're not talking about praying at a high school football game or publicly displaying a sign that reads, "Thou Shall Not Steal." We're talking about genuine lives.
Christians often debate whether non-violent Muslims contribute to terrorism by remaining silent. These same Christians never examine the roll their behavior plays in the persecution of homosexuals.
They're horrified when they see footage of folks jumping for joy in the streets of Pakistan after a terrorist attack kills scores of civilians. Then they curse American Muslims for failing to condemn both the attack and the exuberant celebration. But do they speak up after a hate crime is committed against the homosexual on their block? Or do they stay silent, only approaching the topic around people with whom they're comfortable joking, "Even though the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, I still wouldn't welcome a butcher of gays into my home... Not 'till he wiped the diseased blood off his shoes!"
Violence against homosexuals happens in every corner of the world, yet we rarely hear American Christians speak out against this particular form of global terrorism. American Christians also said nothing when the Pope argued that homosexuals are as great a threat to the planet as global warming.
Many Christians believe Muslims in Michigan wouldn't themselves slaughter infidels, yet consider blown up hotels in other parts of the world necessary to spread their faith. However I don't recall these same Christians marching down Main Street protesting the treatment of gays in notoriously homophobic Jamaica.
Everywhere homosexuals travel, they must be on guard due to a global anti-gay culture your religion promotes, whether by literature or silence.
Bullied male children who "act feminine" sometimes do the unthinkable because they can't bear another day of the same.
The stories are endless...
A school bus driver was arrested for calling a 10-year-old boy "gay" and then encouraging older students to chase the boy down after he got off the bus. The older kids followed the advice of their elder. Not satisfied with tiny fists, the bus driver joined in.
Brothers strolling down the street were beaten, one later died, because overeager homophobic murderers mistook them for a gay couple.
What's the difference between you and the Muslim who unemotionally sets down the newspaper after reading horrific details of a terrorist attack and then asks, "What's for dinner?"
Absolutely nothing; you both view the recently deceased as collateral damage.
If a fellow follower asks you, "Wasn't the most recent terrorist attack tragic?" do you respond, "It depends, what was the sexual orientation of the victims?"
I'm not saying all Christians and Muslims are insensitive louts. I am claiming, however, that only people without religion are guaranteed to loudly condemn every brutal act against the innocent. You all should do the same, regardless of what's written on the thin-pages of the book you've spent years coloring yellow. Occasionally you may want to read the words that don't make your insides feel warm and cozy, because those un-highlighted sections will keep brutality a part of our world forever.
A Blank Canvas
I was fascinated to read New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's daughter Georgina has shunned political life. It seems she prefers the company of horses to public policy pundits. Her sister works for their father in City Hall; Georgina is an equestrian who writes books.
Allegedly, Papa Bloomberg is not happy that his daughter Georgina isn't the typical offspring of a billionaire politician. But were Georgina's sister not produced by the current mayor of New York, would a single Junior Bloomberg work at City Hall?
So many lives would be more fulfilled were we not imprisoned by what's expected of us.
Look at the box in which religion puts millions of people... How many shun pleasurable behavior they would otherwise consider sinless?
Had they experienced no household bias, how many children would grow up to follow the same holy book as their parents? Few would believe a factual holy book even existed. Of those who did, an astronomically small number would eventually decide they accepted the same book in which members of their family have believed for generations. In hopes good earthly deeds lead to heavenly rewards, some would believe in a loving creator, but, if not steered down a direct path, it's safe to assume most children would shun all specific religions, thus opening them up to limitless opportunities.
And they would most likely be better people. Instead of recalling sermons about the evils of homosexuality and therefore adding to the torment, brave untainted high-schoolers would come to the defense of bully victims.
Faithful people claim religion injects its subjects with goodness, when it instead acts as a barricade to inherent feelings of goodness. No religion in a young person's life means, "The high-voiced boy in my school is a good person; I know this because I judge him by his actions, not his mannerisms," would replace, "Only a small percentage of boys in my school talk like girls, and church teaches me that boys should talk like boys."
I understand that children often ridicule unique members of their class, and completely eliminating bullying is nearly impossible, but weekly visits to grandiose dwellings supposedly inspired by perfection, which actively back the assertion that the picked-on are vile sinners, certainly increases the amount of cruelty perpetrated in schoolyards across America.
If no parent influenced their child to believe a certain way, the world would undoubtedly see vast improvement.
Laws are aimed at making sure parents feed and water their children. Why not control what parents feed their child's brain by forbidding the teaching of propaganda? Again, think about how much society would benefit from legislation that required adults to only teach what they can prove. You can't prove god hates fags, you can't prove god encourages moderate levels of child abuse, and you certainly can't prove god smiles after the killing of an infidel under the age of 18.
Like Mayor Bloomberg should not be disappointed with his equestrian/author daughter; don't treat your child poorly for making decisions that fill his or her life with happiness. In fact, you should be proud they bravely carved their own niche - particularly when said niche doesn't call for baseless discrimination.
Allegedly, Papa Bloomberg is not happy that his daughter Georgina isn't the typical offspring of a billionaire politician. But were Georgina's sister not produced by the current mayor of New York, would a single Junior Bloomberg work at City Hall?
So many lives would be more fulfilled were we not imprisoned by what's expected of us.
Look at the box in which religion puts millions of people... How many shun pleasurable behavior they would otherwise consider sinless?
Had they experienced no household bias, how many children would grow up to follow the same holy book as their parents? Few would believe a factual holy book even existed. Of those who did, an astronomically small number would eventually decide they accepted the same book in which members of their family have believed for generations. In hopes good earthly deeds lead to heavenly rewards, some would believe in a loving creator, but, if not steered down a direct path, it's safe to assume most children would shun all specific religions, thus opening them up to limitless opportunities.
And they would most likely be better people. Instead of recalling sermons about the evils of homosexuality and therefore adding to the torment, brave untainted high-schoolers would come to the defense of bully victims.
Faithful people claim religion injects its subjects with goodness, when it instead acts as a barricade to inherent feelings of goodness. No religion in a young person's life means, "The high-voiced boy in my school is a good person; I know this because I judge him by his actions, not his mannerisms," would replace, "Only a small percentage of boys in my school talk like girls, and church teaches me that boys should talk like boys."
I understand that children often ridicule unique members of their class, and completely eliminating bullying is nearly impossible, but weekly visits to grandiose dwellings supposedly inspired by perfection, which actively back the assertion that the picked-on are vile sinners, certainly increases the amount of cruelty perpetrated in schoolyards across America.
If no parent influenced their child to believe a certain way, the world would undoubtedly see vast improvement.
Laws are aimed at making sure parents feed and water their children. Why not control what parents feed their child's brain by forbidding the teaching of propaganda? Again, think about how much society would benefit from legislation that required adults to only teach what they can prove. You can't prove god hates fags, you can't prove god encourages moderate levels of child abuse, and you certainly can't prove god smiles after the killing of an infidel under the age of 18.
Like Mayor Bloomberg should not be disappointed with his equestrian/author daughter; don't treat your child poorly for making decisions that fill his or her life with happiness. In fact, you should be proud they bravely carved their own niche - particularly when said niche doesn't call for baseless discrimination.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)