tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22840205854766784242024-02-07T05:02:07.378-05:00Bobbie's BlogA collection of stark raving randomnessRoberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-61201310441345214132018-09-20T02:10:00.001-04:002018-09-20T02:10:53.471-04:00I want to say something about the spirituality debate ...<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="5smql-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5smql-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="5smql-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 14px; white-space: normal;">So, this came across my social media news feed tonight:<br /><br /></span></span><blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span data-offset-key="5smql-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 14px; white-space: normal;">I want to say something about the spirituality debate. You don't believe in God? That's okay, it is your right, but why is it so important for many of you to mock those of us that do? If we're wrong, what have we lost when we die? Nothing! How does our faith in Jesus Christ bring you any harm? You think it makes me gullible? Ignorant? I am okay with that, but how does that affect you? If you're wrong your consequence is far worse. I would rather live my l</span><span class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-size: 14px; white-space: normal;">ife believing in God and serving Him, and find out I was right, than not believe in Him and not serve Him, and find out I was wrong. Then it's too late.<br />I believe in Jesus Christ. He said deny me in front of your friends and I will deny you in front of my Father.<br />If you're not ashamed copy & paste it! He is my father I will never deny my father in front of anyone even at the cost of my life.</span></span><span data-offset-key="5smql-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-size: 14px; white-space: normal;">I believe in Jesus Christ. He said deny me in front of your friends and I will deny you in front of my Father.</span></span><span data-offset-key="5smql-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-size: 14px; white-space: normal;">If you're not ashamed copy & paste it! He is my father I will never deny my father in front of anyone even at the cost of my life.</span></span></blockquote>
<span data-offset-key="5smql-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">
</span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5smql-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="5smql-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><b>Here's how I responded:</b>
I'll try to give some quick answers to the questions presented here:</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="p8bb-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="p8bb-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="p8bb-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="fj4b3-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="fj4b3-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="fj4b3-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b>"Why is it so important for many of you to mock those of us that do?"</b></i></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="3pv8c-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3pv8c-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="3pv8c-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="di8rv-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="di8rv-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="di8rv-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">As a non-believer ... I agree - this is 100% wrong ... that goes both ways, and believe me, with a large majority of the USA being believers, it happens a lot ... and actually it's worse than that, non-believers get discriminated against and excluded, ostracized, threatened and even attacked.</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="6rt1f-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6rt1f-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="6rt1f-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="a6qc9-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="a6qc9-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="a6qc9-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b>"If we're wrong, what have we lost when we die?"</b></i></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="331ca-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="331ca-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="331ca-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="4t0be-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4t0be-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="4t0be-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">It's not what you lose when you die ... it's what you lose while you live! Time - going to church, praying etc. Money through tithe. And piece of mind worrying about whether your most recent (or any) "sin" is "forgivable" but your deity ... for non-believers, everything is forgivable ... but what we non-believers can't shake is our responsibilities for our actions - and we wouldn't have it any other way - no scapegoats for us to heap our "sins" on so we choose to live in a way to minimize harming others because that responsibility is ours to live with until the day we die/ </span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="1c43g-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="1c43g-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="1c43g-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="9kqc3-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9kqc3-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="9kqc3-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="4705b-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4705b-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="4705b-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b>"How does our faith in Jesus Christ bring you any harm?" </b></i></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="bnsm2-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="bnsm2-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="bnsm2-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="fkckt-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="fkckt-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="fkckt-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">Directly? - it doesn't. But depending on which sect you follow and how strictly you follow it, many of the believing majority try to legislate (create civil law) that affects the freedoms of non-believers and people who follow other religions ... and no, I'm not talking about being able to "sin" ... laws like trying to put compulsory prayer into schools, trying to rewrite science books to align with biblical stories that don't have evidence to support those stories. ... to name a couple obvious ones.</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="6nekc-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6nekc-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="6nekc-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="2n2r-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2n2r-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="2n2r-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b>"You think it makes me gullible? Ignorant?"</b></i></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="1dr9b-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="1dr9b-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="1dr9b-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="2928q-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2928q-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="2928q-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">No! Like me, I was indoctrinated from birth as were my parents and their parents before them. For over 40 years I believed without question - but as I got older and information/research became easier and more accessible and the science became better - some things didn't add up at a point and I HAD to have answers that made sense. Science provides those answers and many of those answers directly contradict what the religion(s) teach ...</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="b73ri-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="b73ri-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="b73ri-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="cktfg-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cktfg-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="cktfg-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b>"How does that affect you?" </b></i></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="e0r5h-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="e0r5h-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="e0r5h-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="31qlj-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="31qlj-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="31qlj-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">Again, not directly - but again, if your preacher tells you something is a "sin" or someone is a "sinner", it can affect how you think of some otherwise good and decent people - like, say, a non-believer, who may be a good, honorable and trustworthy citizen and/or friend ... an again, it can influence your vote which indirectly affects those who don't believe as you do if your chosen candidate has an agenda with a religious foundation. That said, gullibility and ignorance aren't exclusive to the religious ... there are more than a few non-believers who display these traits</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="49at8-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="49at8-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="49at8-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="a20m5-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="a20m5-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="a20m5-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b>"If you're wrong your consequence is far worse."</b></i></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="ak89l-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ak89l-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="ak89l-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="6qfnn-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6qfnn-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="6qfnn-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">Again, I believed for over 40 years. I didn't seek out an excuse to disbelieve, the evidence just didn't add up to what we see in an objective reality. Many f us non-believers were ragged kicking and screaming away from our beliefs by the overwhelming contradictory objective evidence ... an the utter lack of supporting evidence for just about anything in the bible (excluding some names and locations). And, exactly what are those "consequences"? Which religion and/or sect within that religion correctly outlines those "consequences"? And how can we objectively determine that there is a place (Hell) where these are carried out.</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="5gmvb-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="5gmvb-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="5gmvb-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="8tdth-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8tdth-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="8tdth-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">If I am forced to endure consequences because I used the tools/brain the hypothesized God gave me to use all my senses and follow objective testable evidence and I HONESTLY, in my head and heart could not "find" God. Then if God thinks I'm :worthy" of punishment, then so be it - and I'll happily take it - because I know ... and more importantly, this God should know ... that I did everything in my power to find him and it was HE who chose no to show himself. And if that's how he operates, he's simply not worthy of my allegiance. God "knows" what it would take to make me "believe" and to date, he has purposely chosen not to show me. He showed Paul, Moses, Abraham and many many others ... at any time he could choose to show me ... I'm happy to amend my beliefs if I'm given sufficient evidence.</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="bqjho-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="bqjho-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="bqjho-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="de7pi" data-offset-key="ekio9-0-0" style="background-color: #f2f3f5; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ekio9-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="ekio9-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">Thanks
I'm curious to hear better, more refined answers, explanations and critiques - what I got right/wrong etc. </span></div>
</div>
Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-60829666284596580902016-10-13T08:56:00.000-04:002016-10-13T08:57:09.092-04:00How Amendments Work<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; margin-bottom: 6px;">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">So I keep hearing/seeing this cRaZy idea that the President or the Supreme Court will erase or repeal the 2nd Amendment (or insert your pet amendment here) so just to dispel this incorrect notion. here's what it takes to pass or repeal a Constitutional Amendment":</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; margin-bottom: 6px;">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Constitutional Amendments can't be "erased" ... they MUST be repealed and that can only happen by Constitutional Amendment ... Amendments can only be started in US Congress or in state legislatures (The States) both requiring a 2/3 majority JUST to get the ball rolling ... then once that hurdle is cleared there's the Ratifying process which again goes to US Congress (House AND Senate) AND To State Legislatures requiring 3/4 vote to ratify by each.</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; display: inline; margin-top: 6px;">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Nowhere in the process does the president or any court have any part in the process</span></div>
<div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: #f6f7f9; color: #1d2129;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: #f6f7f9; color: #1d2129;">Look folks ... memes can be funny and cute ... and some even informational ... but you're viewing it on the Interwebz - the most revolutionary vehicle to access accurate information in the history of the universe (</span><span style="background-color: #f6f7f9; color: #1d2129;">far surpassing the Dewey Decimal System) ... it takes all of about 90 seconds to search a claim in any meme ... 80% of the time you can get a satisfactory answer - confirming or denying the meme - from the search results summaries alone ... I'm not asking people to retake a civics class ... before sharing untrue memes ... just do a quick search to validate it :) </span></span><span style="background-color: #f6f7f9; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">You'll thank me and all your friends will be impressed</span><span style="background-color: #f6f7f9; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> </span></div>
</div>
Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-87995092233789828322016-10-10T12:00:00.005-04:002016-10-10T12:00:35.207-04:00The (potential) Dictator has no clothes ... and he doesn't care<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="dn8p-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="dn8p-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="dn8p-0-0">There is no line or rule of decency, protocol, compassion, morals or even law that Trump is not willing to cross and obliterate while doing so. Wholesale change can be made without humiliating everything we hold dear in this country ... I can think of a few such humans in history who ignored the rule of law and the constraints of the country charter/constitution. If Trump had one singe viable and fleshed out policy worth talking about that made sense to Americans, we shouldn't be able to shut him up about it ... but he doesn't talk about ANY policy in ANY detail - only in slogan ... that's NOT a policy ... take the "Wall" for example ... ask the French how that whole "wall" thing worked out ... (Hint: google "Maginot Line")</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="cc83q-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cc83q-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="cc83q-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="ebjnk-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ebjnk-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="ebjnk-0-0">Instead, from Trump we get the most humiliating, embarrassing sleaze campaign in the history of campaigns - so much so that Hollywood would reject this campaign if it was written as a script</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="4fg6v-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4fg6v-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="4fg6v-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="22a2t-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="22a2t-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="22a2t-0-0">All the scum of the Trump campaign will stick to each and every American for years to come if he were to win ... as it is we're now all tainted by it</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="36skn-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="36skn-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="36skn-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="74n80-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="74n80-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="74n80-0-0">And to the Conservative Republicans - start counting the costs - the price tag - of every slogan Trump champions ... you will find that the cost will be higher than anything Bill/Hillary/Obama/Sanders/Carter COMBINED have ever even WISHED for, let alone actually brought before congress for consideration ... He would be the most reckless highest spending liberal spender in history ... who pays for that after he cuts taxes in ways even Reagan and GW Bush would be afraid to even suggest?</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="2omei-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2omei-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="2omei-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="75hu9-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="75hu9-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="75hu9-0-0">All this happens before we even mention how he'll direct government enforcement apparatus's to persecute his political enemies and critics ... the man views the Presidency on par of being a feudal king.</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="9852s-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9852s-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="9852s-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="5gmut" data-offset-key="b5nbl-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="b5nbl-0-0" style="direction: ltr; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="b5nbl-0-0">If there was ever a god, we need his help more than ever to protect our great country from this scourge</span></div>
</div>
Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-79997491523084098442016-07-19T13:10:00.001-04:002016-07-19T13:10:07.504-04:00The "System is Rigged" (Eyeroll)... I keep hearing/seeing/reading this ... over and over. Of course it's never presented along with evidence to PROVE the "system is rigged".<br /><br />I think it intellectually lazy to "blame" the failure of their weak ideas to gain popularity/backing/support on a "rigged system" ... no, it's the fact that:<br /><br />A. Their idea sucks<br />B. Their argument/presentation is weak, and sucks<br />
C. They're unaware/ignorant to the fact that their idea has been done before - and failed<br />
D. They can't be objectively self critical, much less accept external criticism<br />
E. They're delusional to the point of rejecting the evidence that counters/contradicts their idea<br />
<br />
<br />
In short - the "system is rigged" response is a delusional fantasy that thinly veils a temper tantrum that actually means "If I don't get my way, I'm taking my toys and going home"<br />
<br />
... and then they invoke the ultimate unfalsifiable idea by claiming god/bible "supports" their position/idea.<br />
<br />
<br />
Ugh! How can anyone have a rational discussion with that? Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-11483889349582711482016-06-12T12:37:00.000-04:002016-06-12T12:37:16.319-04:00OrlandoSo out comes the avalanche of "prayers" for the dead and wounded at the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida.<br /><br />I suppose it's lost on all those devout and prayerful folk that they are "praying" to the same god that was used for justification for this shooting to begin with. Any way you slice, dice or spin this "event" ... religion and it's positions against homosexuality will be at the root of the reasoning behind the motive for this "event". ALL the Abrahamic religions/Gods require tacit acceptation and approval of homophobia and summary execution of those who engage in homosexual acts.<br /><br />When we're in non-shooting mode, Christians will consistently trot out Leviticus 20:13<br /><br />KJV: <span style="background-color: #fafafa; color: #333333; font-family: Roboto, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19.5px; line-height: 28px;">If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death ; their blood shall be upon them.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #fafafa; color: #333333; font-family: Roboto, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 19.5px; line-height: 28px;"><br /></span>
Whether they agree with this verse or not - they hold the bible as god's perfect word and command giving cover and approval to those that not only agree with this verse, but to those who would act upon it.<br /><br />Allah, the Islamic god, and God/Yahweh, the Judeo-Christian God are one and the same god ... we all have heard the horror stories how ISIS throws homosexuals head first off tall buildings or immolates them in small steel cages with gasoline.<br /><br />And still, all the folks who claim to be horrified by this shooting are praying to THIS god ... I can only imagine god's response:<br /><br />"They had it coming"<br /><br />Disgusting! Please reject this myth once and for all so we can all love and embrace ALL of humanity.<br />
<br />
Oh, and lest I forget - the gunman was born in New Freaking York! Raised in the US of A ... so he's OUR asshole ... own it.Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-81384815893176039442016-05-16T12:04:00.000-04:002016-05-16T12:04:04.578-04:00Gods and UnicornsSo I'm reading a fellow atheist blogger's recent post: <a href="http://brucegerencser.net/2016/05/questions-from-an-evangelical-pastor/" target="_blank">Bruce Gerencser's: "Questions from an Evangelical Pastor"</a> ... and deep in this post, he points out that there is a marked difference between the Christian God (any of the 33,000 denominations) and the potential for a deist god - one that most Xian apologists reduce their arguments to defend DESPITE having no awareness that they've effectively jettisoned virtually EVERY word of their beloved bible to make their case. You can't have it both ways ... but something occurred to me and it's a spin on a familiar argument/comparison.<br /><br />The evidence that points to a Christian God is identical to the evidence that fairy tales point to Unicorns. Both of these are unquestionably written about in books throughout history. So there's that. But many Christian apologists will point wildly around them and say:<br />
<br />
"All of this - everything, beauty, complexity the very fabric of our existence point to the Christian God"<br /><br />and it struck me ...<br />
<br />
that's like saying - "Every existing horse, pony, mule, burro, donkey, zebra and all of their extinct ancestors/fossils point to Unicorns being REAL"<br /><br />And yet, just like with the Xian God - no evidence that can be ONLY be explained by a hypothesis that requires a god has EVER been found to support the hypothesis ... just like in the whole lineage of the Equidae family, no evidence for a Unicorn-like animal ... or for that matter a "Pegasus"-like animal ever been found (I figured I'd add a Pegasus since Muhammed supposedly flew to heaven on a winged horse).<br /><br />Winged and Horned Horses are both in books in great detail all throughout history ... yet they are widely accepted as a fiction and the product of the mind of humans ... as it is with gods. There simply is no evidence - real, concrete, physical evidence - direct or indirect that can ONLY be answered by God/Unicorn/Pegasus.<br /><br />Perhaps Bruce Gerencser is closer to the truth that he thinks - perhaps "<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Droid Sans', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 24px;">Maybe, just maybe, earth is some sort of lab experiment for an unknown advanced alien race.</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Droid Sans', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 24px;"> "</span><br />
<br />
And although there is some preliminary evidence to suggest that life exists elsewhere in the cosmos - there has yet to be any clear evidence to suggest that this extraterrestrial life is (by our definition) intelligent, much less space faring capable of terraforming simply for the purpose of conducting and experiment. ... but then these Aliens have been described in great detail in books too ... perhaps we can start a new religion based on them? ... oh ... wait ... isn't that Scientology/Xenu?<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Droid Sans', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 24px;"><br /></span>Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-25579911186782389982015-12-25T11:43:00.002-05:002015-12-25T11:43:56.907-05:00On Religion/Spirituality ...a thought ... or twoSo on Christmas eve 2015, I had a bit of a discussion/debate with a good friend of ours who is a believer ... she genuinely desires and needs a form of Christianity/Spirituality in her life to give it foundation. Fair enough.<br />
<br />
In this country (USA) we're afforded that freedom as a basis of our constitution - Freedom of (from) religion. It was clear from our discussion that she cherry picks the hell out of the scriptures - and that's fine too - "par for the course" I think I'd say.Thankfully she does this cherry picking because we certainly could not be friends, much less, acquaintances, were she to be a strict adherent to scripture.<br />
<br />
This person, is intelligent, kind and an all around good, caring human being. She has a history/background in some pretty extreme sects of Xianity (JW, for one) which I gleaned from our conversation so I guess it should be no surprise that such a compassionate human would:<br />
<br />
A. Cherry pick the scripture<br />
B. Rationally segregate scientific reality from Spiritual beliefs<br />
<br />
I think it safe to say that this person fully understands and rationally accepts all proven scientific facts and evidence but she simply infers a Supreme Deity at the point where the evidence hasn't gone yet (a pseudo God of the Gaps) and it's THIS that she calls Christianity ... but more importantly for her, she uses the Bible/Xianity (cherry picked to pieces) to give her life "meaning" and direction.<br />
<br />
Fair enough again - we all have that right here in the USA.<br />
<br />
Mulling our conversation this Christmas morning, I had a thought and wished I had expressed it last night:<br />
<br />
"If your personalized version of religion/spirituality gives you inspiration to be compassionate, motivation to be a better more giving. loving, sharing, caring human being - that's AWESOME. And that's a version of "religion" I can at least respect in that it is truly an internal engine and personal inspiration and guide ... but the nanosecond that you use that same scripture as foundation for judgment of others and to proclaim a divinely bestowed sense of destiny/entitlement over this world and ALL beings in it - then I wholeheartedly REJECT your "religion" and will be forced to debate you at every turn"<br /><br />As it was ... we parted ways after a fun filled night of holiday cheer with a better understanding of each of our positions on the question of religion - there were no ill words or fisticuffs ... and the world spins on into that silent night as if there is no god directing it - just as you'd expect based on the available evidence.<br /><br />Merry Christmas to allRoberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-45498212980503412112015-11-12T13:11:00.001-05:002015-11-12T13:11:18.948-05:00Capital Punishment - the Death sentence and how to fix/apply itMuch debate has been made regarding the death sentence - whether to have it, how to apply it, why isn't there more/less of it. Some positions and arguments are better than others. I think one of the biggest issues - beyond whether it's right or wrong to us in the judicial system - is how do you implement/apply it and avoid punishing innocent people? And, quite frankly, if you can't be 100% right, 100% of the time ... it really should not be used at ALL because it's reallyreallyreally hard (read: impossible) to justify exactly what percentage of mistakes are "acceptable" to justify the correct applications of the death penalty.<br />
<br />
Now some people will say there is a certain level of "mistakes" that are theoretically acceptable - and I truly believe that it's not out of their lust for death/killing which, it has the outward appearance of - but more out of their frustration with and need for "meaningful" justice. In increasingly violent times, people are frustrated and sick and tired of long drawn out judicial processes that take decades - at law-abiding taxpayer expense - for many violent criminals that project, not only an inability for rehabilitation but also project a desire and lust for mayhem and death. Who wants to feed and care for such criminals (I was going to say "animals - but that would be an insult to animals) for decades when all they want to do is harm law-abiding citizens AND are rock stars and professors in the prisons they're housed. I mean, these criminals literally "teach" potentially rehabilitatable prisoners how to be WORSE.<br />
<br />
BUT ... there is a solution. But it requires us to approach this issue from a completely objective and dispassionate position. And that REALLY hard for a lot of people to do because of all the influences they've had throughout their lives. It will require them to shelve their faith and current morals (to an extent) and approach this without emotion.<br /><br />The solution is two parts:<br />
<br />
1. Change the standard for implementation of the death penalty to this: For the death penalty to apply, there MUST be positive evidence of guilt BEYOND ALL DOUBT. Currently we use the criteria of "beyond reasonable doubt",but I propose to change it to "there is NO doubt possible" as to the guilt of the accused ... now that could mean a detailed and accurate confession and/or DNA evidence along with video and other evidence that leaves no possibility for the crime to have been committed by any one OTHER than the accused.<br />
<br />
If you have this, you can streamline the process and stop wasting money and time to reach a resolution to justice.<br />
<br />
2. There MUST be a completely humane method that is universally acceptable to everyone. Far too often, what stands in the way of the death penalty is this idea that it must cause some "suffering" to make up for the pain and suffering to the victims - honestly, this is a revolting thought to me. If there must be a penalty of death then it should be as efficient as possible ... the "death" penalty is not the "pain, suffering and death" penalty ... we need to stop treating it as if it is.<br />
<br />
There is a perfectly acceptable and painlessly quick/efficient way to kill criminals - hypoxia - the same thing that kills people in a depressurized plane at 25,000 feet of elevation - lack of oxygen. NOTE: this is NOT suffocation! Hypoxia - the lack of oxygen but NOT the overabundance of carbon dioxide, which is the gas that gives people the "panic/dread" feeling - lack of oxygen causes a brief euphoria and disorientation before the subject blacks out then ultimately dies. - no muss not fuss and no elaborate or ghastly equipment and procedures - just a room with low/reducible oxygen levels and a a way to disburse/dilute carbon dioxide and you're done.<br />
<br />
As an aside - you could implement a program that would allow long serving of life time sentenced criminals to choose this method after x time served to further reduce the prison population of habitual, long term criminals.<br /><br />Feel free to discuss the potential "downsides" please. I think this is a very pragmatic and efficient solution to a difficult problem that offers a type of middle ground between the pro and anti death penalty factions.Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-82760086236831871432015-09-17T01:54:00.002-04:002015-09-17T01:54:46.034-04:0014th Amendment and Birthright Citizenship<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">From the text of the 14th amendment:</span><br />
<br />
"<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;">Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;">This is the first sentence and I've always been under the impression that those born within the borders of the United States or in the jurisdiction of one of it's possession/protectorates always automatically granted US citizenship automatically. And as far as I can tell, that IS how it's done</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;">... except ...</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;">this little tidbit leaped to my attention in the recent Republican primary debat when it was recited ...</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;">" ... </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><i>and <b>subject</b> to the<b> jurisdiction</b> thereof</i> ... "</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;">Now... I have to rethink what I've always thought to be true. Does this <i>really</i> mean <i>ANYONE</i> born in the US ... or can an argument be made that an illegal immigrant ... being here illegally and not through an official process ... having never accepted or agreed to accept to be SUBJECT to the JURISDICTION ... cannot enjoy the birthright clause of the 14th amendment?</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;">I honestly don't know the answer and I haven't researched it yet ... but it would SEEM that a damn good case can be made that anyone who has not subjected themselves OFFICIALLY to the jurisdiction of the US cannot invoke a right offered that REQUIRES them to do so either through the citizenship of the parents or the child born or through a legal immigration/visa/tourist/travel process that AT MINIMUM they MUST at least make some affirmation to respect the laws of this country.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;">If a woman arrives here illegally, how can she accept and acknowledge being SUBJECT to the JURISDICTION of our country? Now, this throws out the argument made by JEB Bush and others that Asians "abuse the birthright clause because even though they come here as "tourists" for the sole intent on having their child in the US, they DO need to acknowledge and accept the jurisdiction of the country they visit - the US. So their kids WOULD enjoy that right since the mother became SUBJECT to the jurisdiction as a condition of the tourist visa ... as I recall from my travels (limited as it was) to other countries - one must affirm that they will respect and abide by the laws governing the host country in order to gain access. Thus becoming "subject to the jurisdiction" of the host country.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;">But illegal immigrant never do this ... so ... because it's late ... and I'm feeling lazy, does anyone have some insight as to any legal case that applies to the "subject to jurisdiction" clause ... because, despite my normal uber liberal leanings ... I gotta say ... perhaps the conservatives have a leg to stand on with this argument. That said, I gotta assume that somewhere along the line this was argued in the courts and defined to mean ANYONE born within the borders - by geographic location - implicitly accepts that they are "subject to the jurisdiction" by mere presence.<br /><br />Educate me please :)</span><br />
<span style="background-color: #172317; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: #172317; color: #343434; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17px;"><br /></span>Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-9946300004310511702015-06-23T15:52:00.003-04:002015-06-23T15:52:46.345-04:002 things ... Thanking God/Sending Prayers ... and Evolution of Religion(s)Yesterday, I read on the <a href="http://advocatusatheist.blogspot.com/2015/06/why-are-certain-people-more-religious.html" target="_blank">Advocatus Atheist Blog</a>, some information regarding a hypothesis of how religions came to be through a type of evolution ... now in fairness, I only scanned the blog post linked here, but I hit on the evolution/development concept and it got my mind to wondering off on a tangent. Now, while most people just kind of roll with the idea that religion/god has just "always been there" - since they just take their medicine on demand (like I did once upon a time) and accept what they've been told and taught. I started trying to think how the first supernatural rites and rituals first came into being.<br />
<br />
What occurred to me ... and I wouldn't mind input on the idea ... is that something unexplained or undesirable happened and early humans wanted a different outcome. ... like say ... rain or lack of rain ... So they tried "stuff" ... like sacrificing something - dancing, chanting etc. to "help" arrive at the desired outcome. When, whatever kookie idea/ritual coincided with the desired result became the new ritual for every time a similar event occurred.<br />
<br />
Fast forward to modern times ... and what NOT religious event/activity do millions of people concoct all manner of rites, rituals, totems and dejinxers to try to sway an outcome in their favor ... ?<br />
<br />
Sports!<br />
<br />
How many people do you know that do all manner of zany rituals to ensure their favorite team wins the game? Rally Caps, Flags, towels waved to the right or left x number of times, turn lights on/off, wear a certain shirt/jersey, prepare a certain meal/snack, drink only a certain beverage.<br /><br />I have to wonder, given enough time, if all these rituals could become religions in their own rite. Take Hockey, for instance, when a team reaches the play-offs, most players and many fans, coaches and employees of the team organization, stop shaving to grow a "Playoff Beard". I'm not sure how/why this superstition came to be - but now it's common place AND think for a moment the similarities it has with the story of Sampson (a story I am only vaguely familiar with as of this writing) ... as I recall, Sampson's hair was somehow his link to god and provided him his strength ... when his hair was cut, he no longer had the power that men feared ... hockey players see the shaving of beards as a jinx that will make them lose.<br /><br />The point that I'm trying to make is that when we want something to work a certain way and we have no earthly idea how to achieve it - we'll try anything to gain the desired result. And when we actually DO gain that result, whatever ritual or action we did gets adopted for the next similar situation. Now imagine all the horrible things that happened to pre-scientific humanity and all the kookie things they would have tried to gain the desired results ... from rain dances and prayers/chants to animal and human sacrifices in the most horrifically terrifying manners. The things that worked became common practice and because they "worked", no one revisited these issues to understand how/why they "worked" ... they just kept doing them.<br /><br />The consequences of NOT doing these bizarre and/or horrific rituals could be earthquakes, lightning strikes or all manner of things - so it became paramount to enforce these ritual strictly and make them "happen" even if people didn't want to participate ... hence ... religion - an enforcement mechanism. Now these things are so integrated with societies that trying to undo them is nearly impossible. I just wonder if - as we see with all the different superstitious rites and rituals surrounding sports and stuff, if a couple hundred years from now those rituals/rites could evolve into something like a religion in it's own right especially with the conflicts and controversies regarding the old and established religions.<br /><br />Anyway - the discussion/thought experiment is to think of how a simple random wishful gesture that conveniently coincides with a positive result could evolve into an established religion/custom.<br />
<br />
<br />
The other thing - is this whole "Thanking God/Sending Prayers" business. I think it is really a reflexive reaction coming from most people anymore simply because they need to say SOMETHING when Joe is stricken with an illness or Sue was in a car accident (NOTE: these are arbitrary fictitious events). I think many people, who probably haven't seen the inside of a church in decades or cracked open a bible in a longer time (if at all), have been conditioned through early indoctrination and social standards/media to respond with these cliche saying. They don't actually "pray" or bow and give thanks to god ... they just absentmindedly say these things - they are cavernously hollow platitudes.<br />
<br />
Since becoming aware of what religion and god is and is not (in other words, since becoming atheist) I have become keenly aware of when people say these things ... when I use to say these things. But why is this a problem, you ask? Well, because so many people have spent their lives devoted to honing skill because they want to really and practically save lives and help people - and all their time and effort spent learning, practicing and perfecting these skills to be able to expertly administer the correct remedy to save life and limb and summarily dismissed with "Oh thank god you are well/safe/better"<br />
<br />
It's actually disgusting at how may real people with real skills and intentions are completely dismissed with these statements.<br /><br />Additionally, a recent situation leaves me in a weird position. A "candle light prayer vigil" has been arranged and scheduled for a friend who is in a hospital. Now granted, in all practicality, I cannot attend - time/distance etc. but if I could ... could I attend? Well sure ... but to do what? Pretend? Lie? Fake? I know my attendance would show support for my hospitalized friend - an outpouring of love and support is always encouraging ... but praying? It's useless, in my experience, and there are scientific studies that show it to be an empty gesture at best. So my attendance would only be to demonstrate to other friends and family that I was committed to my hospitalized friend's speedy recovery ... and to bolster the bottom line for some candle makers.<br /><br />So, these seemingly "simple" statements of "Thank god" and "prayers sent" along with seemingly hopeful gestures like prayer circles and candle light prayer vigils ... these things ostracize and dismiss the positive acts and thoughts of MANY people. UGH!<br />
<br />
Ok ... end of rant ... if you have thoughts, experiences and/or solutions - please comment - lets discuss :)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-10875901282245116392015-04-14T14:01:00.000-04:002015-04-14T14:01:41.373-04:00Defenders of the FaithOne thing that has always stood out to me as long as I can remember is:<br />
<br />
Why do fallible humans ALWAYS have to enforce God's laws and will?<br />
<br />
The Bible says, God will do this; the Quran says, Allah will do that; The Torah says God will do the Other; ... if you think or act out certain behaviors ... they are ALL specific that GOD will do these thing and that God will hold judgement and mete out "punishment(s)".<br /><br />Yet ... we never seem to see an instance of God doing the meting or judging - it's ALWAYS the humans!<br /><br />If someone takes the lord's name in vane or says something derogatory against the church or religion, faithful HUMANS feel compelled to lash out and "defend" their god/religion. Going back to when I was a young child, this ALWAYS struck me as strange - Why would humans need to risk life, limb and liberty to fight or defend the biggest baddest most capable-est deity/entity in the universe?!? I could never wrap my mind around how the logic plays. God could strike down anyone who angered him (or so the bible tells) yet I am supposed to punch little Johnny in the mouth for saying Jesus was a putz?!? Even as a believing child, when faced with such conundrums, I'd merely say something to the effect of "God will get you for that" but even as a very young believer I never felt compelled to take an action other than to pass on the rule of god and "maybe" stop interacting with someone of differing beliefs.<br /><br />Of course today I realize, there is no god(s) and know that insulting any deity will not be met with a supernatural sanction (or lightning bolt) ... nor will there be any final judgement AFTER death - unless it's at the eulogy of the deceased offender.<br /><br />Why does this come to mind now? Because recently I've become aware of the most vile threats that the religious folks (usually the most ardent - not so much the casual) throw at ANYone who even utters the most mundane contradiction to their religion. The slightest things cause the fervently religious to have a scorched earth policy on anything that "might" even be remotely viewed as contrary to their god/religion. Example: ISIS blowing up archaeological sites ... because, you know, old bricks and pottery shards could ... excuse me ... what can they do to your god again? Exactly how weak and fragile is your god that looking at old bricks will cause your god irreparable harm?<br /><br />I was always taught that god, creator of the heavens and Earth, father of all humanity, was beyond reproach and untouchable when it came to the puny, feeble antics of non-believing humans. And I am equally sure that god didn't "tell" you to act on his behalf because he really has no time or energy to worry about who called his son a putz and/or anything else of this earth - I mean, for fuck's sake - he has a LAKE OF FIRE to roast people for eternity in when he judges them, right?!? Not good enough for his human minions though, evidently. Nope, THEY (the humans) feel a NEED to act on god's behalf and exact worldly retribution ... and the reason is clear ... even THEY don't trust god to do it ... because they REALLY know he is not there ... now or ever :PRoberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com26tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-85162804160775680812015-01-17T11:48:00.001-05:002015-01-17T12:06:56.354-05:00Lessons in "Marriage"<div class="vk_ans" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: xx-large !important; font-weight: lighter !important; margin-bottom: 0px;">
<span data-dobid="hdw">mar·riage</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: small;">
<div class="lr_dct_ent_ph" style="font-size: large;">
<span class="lr_dct_ph">ˈmerij/</span></div>
<div>
<div class="lr_dct_sf_h" style="padding-top: 10px;">
<i>noun</i></div>
</div>
</div>
<br />
<ol>
<li><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">the legally or formally recognized union of adult human partners in a relationship</span></li>
<li><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small; font-weight: lighter; line-height: 1.2;">a combination or mixture of two or more elements</span></li>
</ol>
<div>
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span></span></div>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">Ok ... so there's your working definition of what "marriage is - it's a union, mixture or combination of things - pretty easy concept to grasp.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">Now, lets look at the players (as pertains to the United States) in the same sex marriage debate and what their roles and limitations are:</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><b>Government </b>(all) - the US government is governed by the constitution which forbids it from participating in or takings sides/positions regarding religion. Provides services and secular leadership to the citizenry it represents.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><b>Religion </b>(all) - spiritual guidance to their parishioners/flocks and provide services in as it pertains to the word of their specific god. Cannot participate directly in government matters - i.e. cannot make binding laws; cannot campaign for or endorse political candidates for government - at least not directly as the entity known as "the church" (supplement synagogue or mosque or whatever religious jargon - for simplicity the word "church will be used throughout to represent all religious organizations) .<br /><br />So we have two <i>VERY </i>different bodies (church and state) that perform to <i><b>VERY </b></i>different services but use the <i><b>EXACT </b></i>same word to describe that service:<br /><br /><b>Marriage</b><br /><br />And it applies as defined appropriately very well.<br /><br />Now - here's where people make the mistake - they cannot separate the two very different services provided but these very different groups in their minds because both services are usually <i><b>COMBINED </b></i>and executed at the same general time.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><b>But they <i>ARE </i>separate actions!</b></span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><b><br /></b></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">Make no mistake - a "marriage" as a religious act is <i><b>NOT </b></i>legally binding withing the government context. Conversely, a "marriage" in the civil/government context is <i><b>NOT </b></i>sanctioned or binding in the eyes of god or the church.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">Just <i>TRY </i>to go to your local church and have the pastor marry you in the eyes of god and not file the applications/paperwork for the government version of "marriage". See if you can exercise the legal rights that are granted by the government's"marriage" (spoiler: you won't be able to unless you lie through your teeth).<br /><br />Now, you "may" be able to have your civil/government "marriage" recognized by a church that you chose to join after the actual government (or other church/denomination) marriage was executed but I suspect more often than not, a civilly married couple <i>MUST </i>have their union sanctioned by the church they choose to attend even if they have been married for decades - as an example I will quote from <a href="http://www.americancatholic.org/messenger/feb2004/feature2.asp" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">americancatholic.org</a></span></span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Geneva, Swiss, SunSans-Regular, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">Catholics who exchange marriage vows in the presence of only ministers from<b> other religious traditions</b> or <b>authorized civic officials</b> are <b>not considered validly married</b> in the eyes of the Catholic Church.</span></blockquote>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">(emphasis added - so much for "we all worship the same god" - if that were so, a sanction from one church would be recognized by all churches :P )</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">So to summarize what we've learned:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">Marriage has <b>TWO separate </b>forms and functions:<br /><br /><b>Civil </b>Marriage - legal and binding in the eyes of the government and generally accepted norm of society</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><b>Religious </b>Marriage - spiritual</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"> and binding in the eyes god and church </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /><br />Why is this important?<br /><br />Because anyone who wants the<b> legal</b> protections and benefits of the <b>legal</b> institution known as "marriage" <i><b>MUST </b></i>have a <b>civil </b>union (marriage) applied for, accepted, approved and performed and filed with the government. But (and this is an important distinction) a civil government sanctioned and recognized as <b>legal </b>marriage is <i><b>NOT </b></i>- repeat <b><i>NOT REQUIRED</i></b> - or even expected to have <b>any </b>religious sanction or approval!<br /><br />Now - the <b>REAL </b>crux of the issue facing American society today - same sex marriage.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">Dun ... Dun ... DAAAAAAAAAH</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">(Cue the outraged homophobes)</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">"Awww HELL no!!! - can't let no QUEERS be all married and shit - it'd be the ruination of the 'mur'can way of life!!! That shit is just unnatural in the eyes of the one true almighty <b>GAWD</b>!!! My BuyBull TELLS me so!!! Ain't a gonna let no ..."</span></blockquote>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">(cut away from outraged homophobes)</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">As distasteful as it is - religions have the <b><i>RIGHT </i></b>to define and execute and sanction <b><i>RELIGIOUS </i></b>marriage anyway their scriptures dictate they must.<br /><br /><b>HOWEVER </b>(and THIS is MOST important):<br /><br />The Government is <b>NOT </b>in the "religion" business, nor can it adopt any one religion or religious rites and or rituals. The government can and should now and always execute unbiased marriages that are</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><b> "</b></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><b>legally or formally recognized unions"</b> to any and all persons who qualify as competent and who apply to execute this legal instrument known and defined as <i><b>CIVIL </b></i>(government) marriage.<br /><br />I know that the two <b>DIFFERENT </b>forms of marriage are very often performed and executed at the same time but it's high time we put on our big boy/girl pants and recognize that one word can mean <b>TWO </b>different things:</span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwziNeT6re-vhOEDEeHN3EGgkn-N5BlsZKsOp8pU0daZu8eSM_R25TNg6CnoY6MpNPhBK2GIxn75Qv5s899WJYS8DxQb-aavsD24DBeBZUdxByBK8mranr3Bs5Y5Lo_0cfvXGvPPSt9JQ/s1600/15692.MultipleMeanings.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwziNeT6re-vhOEDEeHN3EGgkn-N5BlsZKsOp8pU0daZu8eSM_R25TNg6CnoY6MpNPhBK2GIxn75Qv5s899WJYS8DxQb-aavsD24DBeBZUdxByBK8mranr3Bs5Y5Lo_0cfvXGvPPSt9JQ/s1600/15692.MultipleMeanings.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">No one questions that "<b>crane</b>" conjures two <b>VERY </b>different images</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">And so it is with "marriage" - Religious and civil - same "marriage" word - two <b>DIFFERENT </b>meanings. So, to those that identify as "anti-same sex marriage", I accept and grant you your right to believe and act accordingly as it pertains to <i><b>RELIGIOUS </b></i>marriage. You won't get <b><i>ANY </i></b>argument from me, in fact I will ally with you to protect your rights to your religious freedom. <b>BUT </b>- that right <b><i>ENDS </i></b>when it comes to <b><i>CIVIL </i></b>marriage performed and executed for and by the government - which <b>MUST </b>be for <b>ALL </b>the people.</span><br />
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">For the record - I am neither gay nor religious (no viable evidence for supernatural beings - without this evidence, religions fail) but I am fair and empathetic so I believe all people should have the same rights and opportunities and it is no one's business or right to dictate love/commitment between consenting competent adult humans.</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: x-small; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;"><br /></span>
</div>
Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-9418307393936801572014-11-23T03:01:00.002-05:002014-11-23T03:01:39.935-05:00Theological Arms Race?So, I was reading a post over on <a href="http://dougsdribblings.blogspot.com/2014/11/is-god.html" target="_blank">Doug's Dribblings</a> and something popped into my head as I read the following sentence:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #666666; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Trebuchet, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.4799995422363px;">... I also have a dislike for the idea of "chosen" people. Fatalism and predestination in the divine scheme of things just don't appeal to me at all ...</span></blockquote>
It occurred to me that many religious/theologic constructs tend to proclaim in some form or fashion that those who have complete faith and give total buy in to a particular religion will gain favor and blessing from eternal bliss in heaven to 72 virgins (I don't think it's specified as to which gender said virgins possess so ... ) and so on et. al. Anyway, I got to thinking that earlier religions had an ever growing cadre of task specific gods that handled particular issues and as more issues arose, more gods were created to address them ... I can see how such a convoluted and unwieldy org chart of deities could rapidly become confusing not to mention expensive in the form of proper offerings to curry favor with the specific god that handled your specific needs at a give time.<br />
<br />
It seems that after a pretty good run, the polytheistic religions started to lose favor and followers as new religions with more streamlined customer support were implemented. Certain tribes - perhaps simply because they were excluded from participating in specific religions due to race, status, nationality etc. - may have simply developed their own version of the best gods from the polytheistic religions and tailored their new god's requirements to their own customs and means.<br /><br />And of you're going to tailor make a god, you may as well dress it up to the nines and give it powers that surpass that of your oppressors gods, right? In a world during a time when human knowledge of the natural world was rudimentary, gods "just had" to be the source and cause for things like earthquakes, lighting, shooting stars, diseases etc. And why have many gods that handle individual issues when you can make one that handles multiple issues ... and if this god were powerful enough to take on all these takes ... maybe they could use that "power" to intimidate foes in other tribes/lands.<br /><br />Much like how weapons began their development, so too did these theologies/religions morph into more refined, more powerful more all encompassing dogmas. As the generations tick by, each new generation refined, detailed and perfected their religion ... just like how the world went from mortars to conventional bombs and ultimately to the A-bomb and then to ICBMs delivering multiple warheads.<br /><br />Back then, there was no such awesome man made power - but there were existing religions, but they didn't quite fit everyone's needs so some made new gods/religions to fill those needs ... they changed the structure ... instead of one problem, one god ... why not one god, many problems addressed - provided you yous the proper rite, incantation, prayer etc. to invoke your god to help ... a real one size fits all deal that is easier to deal with because it's streamlined and efficient and you can go to one temple to do your theological laundry ... a real on stop shop.<br /><br />It's no small wonder it caught on. And since you didn't have to spread your wealth around to many gods/temples, you'd have more resources available to conquer your enemies and slaughter and subjugate them like they had once done to you. So the religions with the most efficient "requirements" that allowed to to pay your respects, make your offerings and get down to the taks of slaughtering foes with the least daily interruptions were are the religions that ultimately became what we have today in the world.<br />
<br />
The only difference is, now we really don't even need them because we have a real good grasp on how the natural world works ... so either some religions will reinvent themselves (notice how Pope Francis is changing doctrine to fit the demands of modern world) ... and some will just eventually dwindle and wither down to obscure, archaic footnotes to history ... just like muzzle loading muskets.<br />
<br />
So yeah, I think religions started as a way to explain the (then) unexplained (which we, of course, now know) and morphed into a "My god(s) is/are bigger and more powerful than your god(s) ... just like an arms race ... and who wants to cross the biggest most powerfulestest deity?<br /><br />Bring on the "arms" reduction treaties ... and soon, please<br />Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-57515830411064777392014-11-15T11:47:00.001-05:002014-11-15T11:47:55.326-05:00War on Christianity?!? Really?Okay ... granted ... a lot of atheists, agnostics, secularists and constitutionalists want to remove "under god" from the Pledge and take "In God we trust" off the money in favor of "E Pluribus Unum" ... But lets be honest - that's NOT a "war" or even an "attack" ... not even an "affront to sensibilities" (unless those sensibilities are exceptionally sensitive) ... it's really just constitutional common sense that removes the appearance of the government showing any preference of one religion over another or discriminating against no religion at all as the constitution demands.<br /><br />A "war" is when the government (or mob) forces you to move your church(s) outside the city limits ... but despite the perceived "war", every Sunday, 80,000 people can gleefully sing "God Bless America" in ball parks without fear of reprisal or sanction - and this would STILL be fine and free to do without "under god" in the Pledge. Additionally, every church would STILL be right where it always was and open for "business" just like before ...Now what kind of "war" fails to address the obvious targets - churches and huge gatherings of people loudly singing about God and Country?<br /><br />None<br /><br />Nada<br /><br />Zip<br />
<br />
Zero<br /><br />Zilch<br />
<br />
No "war" known to human kind would go out of it's way to AVOID the obvious targets. I mean, really ... what the F*ck? Either this "war" is being executed by the most inept and incompetent folks ever to perpetrate a "war" on anything ever ... or ... it's not a "war" ... and never was. (Hint: It's not a "war" on anything)<br /><br />You see, when this "war" is over - people will still be able to:<br /><br />
<ol>
<li>Have a church</li>
<li>Go to Church (not that the majority of those railing about this horrific "war" actually GO to church but I "get that they like to know they "can" go if they ever were to choose to do so)</li>
<li>Pray</li>
<li>Carry the Bible in public</li>
<li>SELL the Bible openly in (gasp) public bookstores</li>
<li>Read the Bible</li>
<li>... you get the idea - there isn't much that would "change" after this "war" has been "fought"</li>
</ol>
<div>
In short, the only changes - as per the constitution - are that the government (who bears the burden of restriction from religion - not the people or religious organizations) won't and shouldn't be able to invoke the word or ideas of any one "god" or religion.<br /><br />See, then the government uses a term like "god", it excludes other forms of deities that - in this FREE nation - we can choose to worship ... and THAT excludes AMERICANS from feeling fairly treated and represented - YES there are a large number of AMERICANS - born and raised here that don't worship YOUR god du jour ... and THAT is "suppose" to be okay - see, we're supposed to have freedom to do that.<br /><br />So, for the same exact reason that you, my good christian, find the prospects of saying:<br /><br />One Nation, Under Buddha</div>
<div>
One Nation, Under Vishnu</div>
<div>
One Nation, Under Ra<br />One Nation, Under Thor</div>
<div>
One Nation, Under Allah</div>
<div>
One Nation, Under Zeus<br />One Nation, Under Baal<br />One Nation, Under El</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
etc. et. al.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Or even perhaps:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
One Nation, Under Yahweh</div>
<div>
One Nation, Under Jesus</div>
<div>
One Nation, Under Jehovah</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If you find these very narrow and specific statements preposterous, limiting, narrow, exclusive, divisive etc. congratulations - you now understand why "One Nation, Under god" just does NOT work for a government agency to set in stone WHICH god.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
More importantly, am I, and others of similar mind, any less American for not believing in any of these gods at all ... the only difference between you and I is - I (we) don't believe in your god either ... it's just one small step from where you are to where we are.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
History has documented 2870 gods/deities that fit the following definition:<br /><br />"<span style="background-color: white; color: #373a3e; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22.3999996185303px;">According to </span><i style="background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #373a3e; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 22.3999996185303px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The English Dictionary,</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #373a3e; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22.3999996185303px;"> god is defined as, "a supernatural being, who is worshiped as the controller of some part of the universe, some aspect of life, or is the personification of some force." Included in this definition are all deities, goddesses and supernatural beings. "<br /></span></div>
<div>
The vast majority of US citizens dismiss 2869 of those gods out of hand without losing a minute's sleep worrying if they "might" be wrong ... it would seem the odds may not be in your favor on this point. But you only dismiss all the others because you where taught to do so from birth. It was not some great "revelation" that you had - the idea was seeded in you by humans and by society at large as you grew up.<br /><br />None the less - no one is asking you to disbelieve and no one is at "war" with you. We only want American government to live up to it's Constitutional mandate - "<span style="background-color: white; color: #252525; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22.3999996185303px;">Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ..."</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
By choosing which god to name in the Pledge and place on the money, the government is establishing a preferred god and religion over all others - this is illegal and should be removed.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Besides - if your faith in your god is really so strong - do you really need your dollar bills to remind you?!? ... I question your commitment to your god if you do.</div>
<div>
</div>
<br />
<br />Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-12202428613502491402014-11-06T12:29:00.001-05:002014-11-06T12:29:39.359-05:00Purging Old/Outdated/Unsupported BeliefsI follow another blogger - Gary - (http://www.lutherwasnotbornagain.com/) and as I understand he was pretty close to a fundamental believer - or orthodox, if there is any real difference - which I imagine to followers/believers of a faith know as "orthodox" would probably take it as an insult that I equate the two beliefs as virtually synonymous. I'm sure there are differences - but to me, an outsider from all aspects even when i held beliefs in a deity, I don't see too much "wiggle room" between the fundamental and orthodox dogmas. I just don't - when I held belief, I found them equally harsh, strict and overbearing ... inflexibly rigid and unyielding to any other viewpoints or concepts/interpretations. So as a non-believer - well ... they are still as I stated.<br /><br />So I found it quirky that an orthodox believer would call another former orthodox believer a "fundamentalist" as an ad hominim attack. There's quite the smack down going on over at Gary's blog. And Gary is holding strong to his new found non-belief.<br /><br />See, Gary states on his blog that his blog is a form of therapy and though he is trying to spread his new found truth, he is also going through the process of purging all the insidious religious mumbo jumbo that was instilled into his mind and life while double checking which parts are based on fact and which are based on fantasy/religion. I know this very feeling - the need to re-verify the very things we used as a foundation for our entire lives. We need to relearn and re-justify EVERYTHING. So it somewhat angers me when his readers (many of them still orthodox/fundamental believers) attack his very person - what's worse is they use his very former orthodox/fundamentalism against him.<br /><br />So it was okay for him to be a orthodox/fundamentalist as long as he believed, but now that he has lost his faith and no longer believes, his orthodox/fundamentalism is now a detriment!?!?<br /><br />Well isn't THAT a dandy?!?<br /><br />Or would that be the pot calling the kettle "Black"?<br /><br />Point is - this religion stuff is rooted deep and it hides deep deep inside us. It's been molded into our very core foundation since birth for most of us - overtly and covertly. Sometimes with the express purpose to get and keep us on the god team and other times in very subtle, imperceptible ways - such as with our money and our (US) pledge of allegiance.<br /><br />I generally "came out" as an atheist a couple years ago - it was a very slow very gradual process of the balance of evidence being recognized to show that the world and uni/multiverse are a natural process that has no hint of divine assistance to being what it is. But what really strikes me is all the little tidbits that are instilled in most people - even those who never proclaimed faith in any religion/deity - with a constant, consistent and relentless barrage.<br /><br />These little bits must constantly be identified, assessed, verified and justified and if found to be based on theology rejected ... or new secular supporting evidence must be found to ground these items on logic, fact and rationale. But it's not as easy as all that - because each bit has other bits built on top of them ... and like a game of Jenga - the whole shebang could come crashing down when you pull out the now unsupported and unsubstantiated bit.<br /><br />I often find myself in the middle of a conversation and just as I say something I realize that "oops" there's a bit that is founded and based on religion - it has a tendency to derail my point right there on the spot. This is hard stuff! It's no wonder many people - wittingly or not - just give complete buy in to their theology to avoid the headache and hassle. But in reality - it's completely dishonest to one's self to simply say "god did it".<br /><br />As I watch and read Gary's progression - I can see often where he really wishes the veil had never been removed to reveal the truth about religion - and it's clear why so many don't want to face the hassle. I don't recall the specific moment when Gary was on Bruce Gerencser's (a former baptist preacher turned atheist) blog and had that "AHA" moment (or if it was even through dialogue on that blog) ... you see, I first saw Gary there debating FOR theology ... and then the light bulb went on and the right question finally forced him to question the house of cards of his theology that his life was built on. From there it's been a difficult road of revealing and relearning everything - it's that kick in the groin a kid gets when he learns his parents are really Santa Claus - that heavy can't breathe feeling.<br /><br />It's hard work to get at the truth and rooting out the falsehoods - it's important to let people do so in a way that helps them come to an understanding with the (provisional) truth of the uni/multiverse. Although I was never indoctrinated to the level of Gary or the multitude of others, this is a hard, long laborious and time consuming venture - but the journey is worth it. An although not all questions are answered, it's kind of cool to be able to say "I don't know" with confidence that one day a real and plausible NATURAL answer will be found without the need to resort to the dark mystique of supernatural magic and the whims of "unknowable" deities.<br /><br />Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-41260426051868474712014-08-29T23:29:00.000-04:002014-08-29T23:29:00.976-04:00Progress of a sort ... <span style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;">So I was debating if I should post my latest FB "status" as a blog post since it veers sharply from the limited content topics I led off my blog with ... but ... screw it ... it's my blog right? And to me, this was a Big F&cking Deal™ ... and since dogs and rescue are a big part of who I am ... I share ... because I can. <br /><br />With that, let me spin a yarn ...</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;">This is Zee ... </span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVdi2_tvi8ZNEt0jMQVomqmF0jFKQw6P6SFRY18mIA1N_Uz0I64izQ4LsZ19cfghe36ELzoEcRbOj4MLMUXSSnWS6k8mqWUGC_k4YmRg5Kn_MtbbMRpXSw4EWjizRyFo877PWDBRl-cqg/s1600/20130725123947.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVdi2_tvi8ZNEt0jMQVomqmF0jFKQw6P6SFRY18mIA1N_Uz0I64izQ4LsZ19cfghe36ELzoEcRbOj4MLMUXSSnWS6k8mqWUGC_k4YmRg5Kn_MtbbMRpXSw4EWjizRyFo877PWDBRl-cqg/s1600/20130725123947.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;">I got him (along with his pal Riley) waay back in March 2012 as foster dogs for/from </span><a data-hovercard="/ajax/hovercard/page.php?id=177360725779657" href="https://www.facebook.com/underdogrescueofflorida" style="background-color: white; color: #3b5998; cursor: pointer; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">Underdog Rescue of Florida</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;"> - Zee and Riley were confiscated from a hoarder in the Orlando area and were considered unadoptable due to extre</span><span class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; display: inline; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;">me fearfulness and lack of trust in all things human. Basically Zee was as close to feral as I'd ever seen - Riley, for all his distrust was still at least social to some degree. But not Zee, He'd have been just fine running the streets/woods without ever interacting with another human for the rest of his life. But, that was not an option - so my "job" was to attempt to "train" him to be something society would recognize as a domesticated dog.<br /><br />This was a loooong, hard, mind blistering task. You see, Zee is smart. He's an escape artist. I can't tell you how many times I was gripped with fear and worry after he'd figured out yet another great escape ... but he always came back (and so you don't worry where this story is going - he's here and he's safe and fine). But like any wild distrustful animal, although he might coexist in the same space as humans he kept his distance from them (me). While every other dog I had would sit in bed with me ... Zee was more comfortable UNDER my bed - safe, close but separate.<br /><br />I could go on at great length (as if I haven't prattled on enough already, right?) as to all the trials and tribulations Zee and I went through over 2.5 yrs "together" ... and my former roommate,and my girlfriend could collaborate and write a 3 volume book series titled <i>"Mind Boggling Frustration and Annoyance at the paws of one small dog named Zee"</i>. I think Lenny would have bought and cooked me steak dinners for a month if I would have sent this damn dog back to the rescue. But like a dumb ass I persevered since I had made the commitment.<br /><br />Now - ask any dog trainer how they train a dog and they'll tell you - positive reinforcement with food/treats. Everyone will tell you this and what most people would rightly take as an absolute fact. And what dog WON'T accept food?!? Well ...<br /><br /><b>Zee</b><br /><br />For 2.5 years - Zee would not take even the most salivating offerings of food from my hand ... for at least a year or more, he wouldn't even take the food in the SAME ROOM as a human. Slowly I built the trust to the point were I could set food on his paw but I still had to step back before he'd consume it.<br /><br />Well, that changed last night - with the exception of ONE single solitary time in 2.5 years - Zee FINALLY and regularly, took food out of my hand (after first inspecting a piece unattached to a human) ... it was slow roasted chicken. After his inspection and consumption of the first bit laid on his paw, all the rest, he reached out and took directly from my hand AND Linda's hand too!!!<br /><br />Zee is now a domesticated dog <i class="_4-k1 img sp_vDfewtEkPde sx_7ce69e" style="background-image: url(https://fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net/rsrc.php/v2/yP/r/7SrH40Z4RBE.png); background-position: 0px -8474px; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: 28px 8648px; display: inline-block; height: 16px; vertical-align: -3px; width: 16px;"></i> <i class="_4-k1 img sp_vDfewtEkPde sx_8e37cc" style="background-image: url(https://fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net/rsrc.php/v2/yP/r/7SrH40Z4RBE.png); background-position: 0px -8294px; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: 28px 8648px; display: inline-block; height: 16px; vertical-align: -3px; width: 16px;"></i><br /><br />But he still barks his fool head off semi randomly GRRR <i class="_4-k1 img sp_vDfewtEkPde sx_0b06b8" style="background-image: url(https://fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net/rsrc.php/v2/yP/r/7SrH40Z4RBE.png); background-position: 0px -8546px; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: 28px 8648px; display: inline-block; height: 16px; vertical-align: -3px; width: 16px;"></i></span><br />
<span class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; display: inline; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzHAxRijrWYFt3ey621-4Rx6oMqbPnyGbi9SkJSVEsxZJOuOOdscpNqTVMBIkwhbW85ze6oQRijUnJbpw0bWd-mnrTzBSZt6gLvzfZAM1mA59Dvw21axofootVK6V0Ueui9iyB2HCVCyo/s1600/20130702183642.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzHAxRijrWYFt3ey621-4Rx6oMqbPnyGbi9SkJSVEsxZJOuOOdscpNqTVMBIkwhbW85ze6oQRijUnJbpw0bWd-mnrTzBSZt6gLvzfZAM1mA59Dvw21axofootVK6V0Ueui9iyB2HCVCyo/s1600/20130702183642.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Zee & Riley</span></div>
<span class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; display: inline; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span>
<span class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; display: inline; line-height: 20px;"><span style="background-color: #fafbfb; color: #4e5665; line-height: 17.0666675567627px;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">This is Zee and Riley - Riley has always been more accepting of human contact ... but as you can see from his round body - food is his kryptonite</span></span><span style="background-color: #fafbfb; color: #4e5665; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.222222328186px; line-height: 17.0666675567627px;"> </span><span class="emoticon emoticon_tongue" style="background-color: #fafbfb; background-image: url(https://fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net/rsrc.php/v2/yP/r/7SrH40Z4RBE.png); background-position: 0px -8528px; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: 28px 8648px; color: #4e5665; display: inline-block; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.222222328186px; height: 16px; line-height: 17.0666675567627px; vertical-align: top; width: 16px;" title=":P"></span></span><br />
<span class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; color: #37404e; display: inline; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #37404e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, lucida grande, tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;">Epilogue - My GF and I permanently adopted these two</span><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 14.4444446563721px; line-height: 20px;"> a few months ago - although they've made HUGE strides to becoming like "regular dogs" we felt any change regarding the humans in their lives would be a major blow to their confidence and trust and they would regress and potentially run away or worse. Problem solved - they're staying. <3</span></span>Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-79835842957013518462014-08-20T14:41:00.000-04:002014-08-20T14:41:13.246-04:00James Foley, photojournalist - beheaded ...... in the name of god ... in this case allah (at least one version of allah).<br />
<br />
Yet hundreds, thousands and maybe millions prayed to their god to save him - mostly christians praying to the christian god to deliver this dedicated, brave young professional from the hands of his captors.<br />
<br />
But aren't they arguably the same god - including the god of the hebrews?!?<br /><br />One version of god is claimed to have ordered/demanded the head of this man (as interpreted by the men of ISIL) and another version of god did not see any benefit in sparing him.<br /><br />How is it that anyone can see a "just" god acting in any capacity in this or any other situation? And if there is, which one is the "one true god"? Or are there many gods that are competing for top spot? Or is one a false god - satan - acting in a capacity of god to delude and mislead his "followers" down a path of conflict, death and suffering.<br /><br />What do you tell people who believe in a merciful, all loving, just god as to why he didn't lift a finger - hear their prayers. What do you tell people who believe in a version of allah that claim their god would NEVER want such a thing to happen? I can assure you, many of them prayed for this NOT to happen as well - maybe even some of the captors, themselves, prayed to the god/allah to reconsider such a heinous, sinister, senseless murder.<br />
<br />
Where was god?<br /><br />The ONLY answer that makes ANY sense that fits every single aspect and angle of this situation is - there is no god, no allah, no yahweh ... none, nada, nil ... never has been ... including satan. It's all a fiction and MEN are responsible 100% for this murder. Men use the concept of a supernatural being to shirk their responsibility for their inhuman behavior. And those men, women and children that pray and worship the version of god that would NOT be "okay" with this vile murder will unanimously give god an excuse of not lifting a finger to stay the hand of the murderer(s) ... and they will go to church on sunday and pray that god will prevent the other hostages (Steven Sotloff et. al.) from meeting the same fate but other than that, they will merrily accept that their god "works in mysterious ways" that they simply cannot comprehend.<br /><br />I'm sorry, but that's JUST not good enough for a deity - any deity - that is supposed to know see and hear everything and be the creator of the world/universe. It really isn't. Time to wake up and recognize who is at fault in all this - humans - we made the gods, we act on the "command" of these gods ... which is really just our own voice/thoughts under a different "name" ... so it's us - humanity - who has the blood on it's hands.<br /><br />Time to wash it off and be done with it. Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2284020585476678424.post-46357394301427494262014-06-30T13:15:00.001-04:002014-06-30T13:15:26.008-04:00How does one start?<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">For quite some time I've been reading and following blogs of others - there's lots of REALLY good blogs out there with really interesting topics. I've commented on many of them - some superficially and some more extensively. It's fun and informative to have "discussions" which are often difficult if not impossible to have with people in person.<br /><br />In any regard, I'm starting this blog - my blog - with a very generic, non-committal post just to get the ball rolling ... if it rolls at all, but at least it opens a venue for other bloggers to comment.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">Welcome, and Cheers</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">Robt</span>Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07009270838071689231noreply@blogger.com4