Sharia Sucks Dick: Unidirectional Marriage

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
Really, how much more proof do we need that Ass-lame is completely bugfuck crazy?

Sudanese woman who married a non-Muslim sentenced to death

A Sudanese doctor who married a Christian man and who was convicted earlier this week on charges of apostasy was sentenced to death on Thursday, judicial officials said.

According to the Sudanese officials, 26-year-old Meriam Ibrahim, whose father was Muslim, was convicted on Sunday and given four days to repent and escape death. She was sentenced after that grace period expired, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The sentencing drew condemnation from western embassies in the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, and international rights groups, including Amnesty International.

The court in Khartoum also ordered Ibrahim be given 100 lashes for committing zina – an Arabic word for illegitimate sex – for having sexual relations with a non-Muslim man.

The couple married in 2011 and have a child, born 18 months ago. Sudanese law does not recognise Ibrahim's marriage to a non-Muslim.

Ibrahim can appeal against her death sentence as well as the 100 lashes.

As in many Muslim nations, Muslim women in Sudan are prohibited from marrying non-Muslims, though Muslim men can marry outside their faith. By law, children must follow their father's religion.

Amnesty International said Ibrahim's conviction and death sentence were "truly abhorrent".

"The fact that a woman has been sentenced to death for her religious choice, and to flogging for being married to a man of an allegedly different religion is appalling and abhorrent," the London-based rights group said. "Adultery and apostasy are acts which should not be considered crimes at all."

The group also called for Ibrahim's immediate and unconditional release.

Sudan introduced Islamic sharia laws in the early 1980s, a move that contributed to the resumption of an insurgency in the mostly animist and Christian south of Sudan. An earlier round of civil war lasted 17 years and ended in 1972. The south seceded in 2011 to become the world's newest nation, South Sudan.

Sudan's current ruler, Omar al-Bashir, is an Islamist who seized power in a 1989 coup.

Really? Seriously? Let’s see if I get this straight: that illiterate pedophile Mohammed (PB& J be upon his name) pretty much borrowed 75% of Judaism’s mythology, but retrofitted it to suit the cultural mindset (the obscure reference I’m using here is that in Judaism, Jewishness is measured by the birth mother, not the DNA contributor, back then, it could be someone else) so that it was even more nasty and patriarchal.

What is happening here, and what most of the world is blinded to (gee, thanks for fucking nothing, you asshat accomodationists), is that women are pretty much still chattel in the eyes of most of the religious countries, especially in ass-backwards Africa and the Middle East.

It should not stand.

The rape culture of Islam shackles women like slaves –damages them, mutilates them, makes them the property of their husbands or fathers. It is a sick, malevolent mindset that the other two Abrahamic religions outgrew: the big question is, will our species survive this third spasmic evolution?

Maybe time will tell, on the proviso that there is any time left.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Happy Zombie Bunny Day!

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

Special Agent Seeley Booth: “Voodoo! Who's gonna believe that stuff?”
Dr. Temperance Brennan: “It's a religion, no crazier than... well, what are you? “
Booth: “Catholic. “
Brennan: “They believe in the same saints you do... in prayer... what they call spells, you call miracles... they have priests... “
Booth: “We don't make zombies. “
Brennan: “Jesus rose from the dead in three days... “
Booth: “Jesus is not a zombie! “ – Bones, The Man in the Morgue

How the time flieth. It’s yet another Happy Zombie Day!

And yes, I am unconvinced by all the drive-posters over the years (and even some of the regular commenters for this site) that the mythical man-child Jaybus was anything else besides a zombie.

It seems I’m not alone. Why, there’s even a movie out about it. And the ever-hysterical Uncyclopedia has an entry for it. Why, there’s even a church for it!

Talk about getting a lotta mileage out of a meme. Wow. Wish I could take credit for it.

And amongst the wailing butt-hurt minions of said zombie, this explanation of how Jaysus wasn’t a zombie is among the more amusing.

It is unfortunate, that there is no objectivity gene: it would have spared our species a great deal of nonsense.

For the nerds and nerdettes out there, does anyone recall this bit of Space Opera?

 

If you were/are a Farscape fan, this bit of weirdness is vastly amusing.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Fractured Fairy Tales – Keeping An Even Keel

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

“And why does this same God tell me how to raise my children when he had to drown his?”
― Robert G. Ingersoll, Some Mistakes of Moses

Let me go on the record (for the nth time), that it’s ridiculous that all these idiots are getting puffed up over specific renditions of a fucking fairy tale:

Darren Aronofsky's Noah faces ban in Muslim countries

Darren Aronofksy's Noah could be banned across large swaths of the Middle East and parts of north Africa for contravening Islamic rules on the depiction of prophets, according to the Hollywood Reporter.

The fantasy epic, which stars Russell Crowe as the biblical patriarch, has already been refused a licence by censors in Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. Egypt could well follow suit, with Jordan and Kuwait also expected to outlaw the film on religious grounds.

"Al-Azhar renews its rejection to [sic] the screening of any production that characterises Allah's prophets and messengers and the companions of the Prophet [Muhammad]," said one of Egypt's leading Sunni Muslim institutes in a statement. "Therefore, al-Azhar announces the prohibition of the upcoming film about Allah's messenger Noah – peace be upon him." The institute, which is influential but does not have the final say on censorship, added that the movie "contradicts the stature of prophets and messengers ... and antagonises the faithful".

Noah is currently due to open in Egypt on 26 March, two days ahead of its US debut. The film has already caused controversy amid reports that US fundamentalist Christian groups were dismayed at Aronofksy's decision to produce a loose adaptation of the Bible story rather than a literal retelling. Studio Paramount, which is desperate to court religious filmgoers, last week issued a statement making clear that the movie is not intended as a direct translation.

Aronofsky famously gave up final cut on Noah in return for a $160m budget. But he nevertheless appears to have convinced executives to show his version of the film in cinemas, rather than the reported half a dozen alternative cuts put together by the studio in an attempt to keep churchgoers happy.

"The controversy is all about the unknown and about the fear of people trying to exploit a Bible story," Aronofsky told Variety this week. "It will all disappear as soon as people start seeing the film."

The director of Black Swan and The Wrestler hinted he was likely to return to smaller, more intimate movies after the travails he has faced bringing Noah to cinemas.

"I love big movies and small movies and television," said the film-maker. "I love storytelling, but I'm not going to make another [nine-figure-budget film] tomorrow. I need a break."

Oh wow. So let’s get this straight: religious idiots are carrying on about details and accuracy in a demonstrably unproven fairy tale? There is absolutely no evidence that the ‘great deluge’ ever occurred (a few stories in different cultures doesn’t count – it only proves that interesting stories travel, and/or that our ancestors didn’t know how to interpret fossils), let alone any proof that all the animals across the world inexorably marched to the Middle East, nor that any of the people involved in this ‘event’ actually existed. In fact, I find the show ‘Gilligan’s Island’ to be far more accurate and realistic than any campfire stories told by some Israelite shepherds centuries ago.

It’s well past time our species outgrew these kindergarten nonsenses. Religion is Man’s effort to force his own shadow upon the universe.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

More On The Madness Of Muslims: More Comic Book Nonsense

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

“Man, you straight outta a comic book” – Jim Kelly, Enter The Dragon

  This is more pathetically hysterical than irritating:

Malaysia censors Ultraman comic for 'irresponsible use of the word Allah'

Malaysia has banned a translation of an Ultraman comic book after it referred to the popular Japanese superhero as "Allah", authorities said.

The home ministry, which is in charge of domestic security and censorship, said the Malay-language edition of Ultraman, The Ultra Power contains elements that can undermine public order and morals.

In a statement, it said Ultraman was idolised by many children and equating him with Allah would "confuse Muslim youth and damage their faith".

It further warned that irresponsible use of the word could provoke Muslims and threaten public safety.

The Malaysian government is embroiled in an intense court battle with the Catholic church over the use of the word "Allah" by non-Muslims, in a case that has raised religious tensions in the majority Muslim country.

Ultraman is a fictional Japanese superhero who fights skyscraper-sized "Kaiju" (monsters), and first appeared on television in the 1960s. The comic gained popularity worldwide, including in Malaysia, where versions dubbed in Malay were screened on TV and comic books translated into the national language.

The home ministry said other Ultraman comic books were unaffected and that only this edition was banned.

The decision has led to widespread ridicule among Malaysian Facebook and Twitter users – including from the youth and sports minister, Khairy Jamaluddin, who asked: "Apa salah Ultraman? (What wrong did Ultraman do?)"

The controversial line can be seen in an image available on social media that describes Ultraman: "He is considered, and respected, as Allah or the Elder to all Ultra heroes."

The ban is enforced under the Printing Presses and Publications Act, a much-criticised law that gives authorities wide-ranging powers over printed material, which was also used to bar the Catholic church from using "Allah" in its publications.

The home ministry in 2007 threatened to revoke the publishing permit of the Herald, the Catholic church's newspaper, for using the word in its Malay edition, leading to a seven-year legal battle that has raised religious tensions.

The church is seeking leave from the nation's highest court to challenge a lower court's ruling last October that sides with the government.

The tussle has led to a wider struggle over whether the word can be used by non-Muslims in their translated scripture or other practices of worship.

Seriously? A comic book? Undermining the moral fabric of society? Where have we heard this hoary old chestnut before?

This is more of a head-shaker than a knee-slapper, though. If your kids are that easily influenced by a comic book, a song, or a movie, then you’re obviously not doing that great a job as a parent. Another by-product of overpopulation coupled with religious nonsense: too many people in the world leads to piss-poor parenting.

The only question left is: will this item become a collectible? Should we go out and buy a bunch of these bad boys, in hopes of making bank a decade later?

Likely not. But one can hope.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Separation Of Church And State–Because Otherwise, Everybody Wants A Piece Of The Pie…

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

The devil made me do it! – Geraldine AKA Flip Wilson

It can be safely said, this sort of donnybrook is vastly amusing:

New York Satanists unveil plans for Oklahoma goat-headed statue

A satanic group has unveiled designs for a 7ft-tall statue of Satan it wants to put at the Oklahoma state Capitol, where a Ten Commandments monument was placed in 2012.

The New York-based Satanic Temple formally submitted its application on Monday to a panel that oversees the Capitol grounds, including an artist's rendering that depicts Satan as Baphomet, a goat-headed figure with horns, wings and a long beard that's often used as a symbol of the occult. In the rendering, Satan is sitting in a pentagram-adorned throne with smiling children next to him.

"The monument has been designed to reflect the views of satanists in Oklahoma City and beyond," temple spokesman Lucien Greaves said in a statement. "The statue will also have a functional purpose as a chair where people of all ages may sit on the lap of Satan for inspiration and contemplation."

The Satanic Temple maintains that the Oklahoma Legislature's decision to authorize a privately funded Ten Commandments monument at the Capitol opened the door for its statue. The Ten Commandments monument was placed on the north steps of the building in 2012, and the Oklahoma chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has sued to have it removed.

Similar requests for monuments have been made by a Hindu leader in Nevada, an animal rights group and the satirical Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Funnier still, is how people are purpling over it:

In response, the Oklahoma Capitol Preservation Commission recently placed a moratorium on considering any new requests.

"Anybody can still make their request, but we'll hold off on considering them until the lawsuit is adjudicated," commission Chairman Trait Thompson said.

The push by the Satanic Temple has rankled elected leaders in this conservative state known as the buckle of the Bible Belt, who say such a proposal would never be approved by the commission.

"I think you've got to remember where you are. This is Oklahoma, the middle of the heartland," said Representative Don Armes. "I think we need to be tolerant of people who think different than us, but this is Oklahoma, and that's not going to fly here."

While Greaves acknowledges the Satanic Temple's effort is in part to highlight what it says is hypocrisy of state leaders in Oklahoma, he says the group is serious about having a monument placed there.

The group already has raised nearly half of the $20,000 it says it needs to build the monument.

"We plan on moving forward one way or another," Greaves said.

Another Oklahoma legislator, Representative Earl Sears, called the group's effort "an insult to the good people of the state."

"I do not see satanism as a religion, and they have no place at the state Capitol," said Sears.

On its website, the Satanic Temple explains that it "seeks to separate Religion from Superstition by acknowledging religious belief as a metaphorical framework with which we construct a narrative context for our goals and works.

"Satan stands as the ultimate icon for the selfless revolt against tyranny, free & rational inquiry and the responsible pursuit of happiness," the website says.

The hypocrisy is so obvious, I’ll not even explore any of that. But it is amusing, that the Christians with their constant whinging about persecution, wouldn’t hesitate to visit their imaginary mistreatment on others.

Till the next post then.

Read More...

Summary only...

More On The Madness Of Muslims: The Non-Sacrifice Honored

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
October 13th and 14th marked an Islamic event - Eid al-Adha. What does this mean, you ask?

It is specifically, the

Eid al-Adha (Arabic: عيد الأضحى‎ ʿīd al-aḍḥā, "festival of the sacrifice"), is also called Feast of the Sacrifice, the Major Festival, the Greater Eid, Kurban Bayram (Turkish: Kurban Bayramı; Albanian and Bosnian: kurban-bajram), or Eid e Qurban (Persian: عید قربان‎), is an important religious holiday celebrated by Muslims worldwide to honour the willingness of the prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) to sacrifice his young first-born son Ismail (Ishmael) as an act of submission to Allah's command and his son's acceptance to being sacrificed, before Allah intervened to provide Abraham with a Lamb to sacrifice instead. In the lunar Islamic calendar, Eid al-Adha falls on the 10th day of Dhu al-Hijjah and lasts for four days.

Or to put it more frighteningly:

According to Islamic tradition, approximately four thousand years ago, the valley of Mecca (in present-day Saudi Arabia) was a dry, rocky and uninhabited place. Allah instructed Abraham (ʾIbrāhīm in Arabic) to bring Hājar (Hāǧar), his Egyptian wife, and Ismā'īl (Ishmael), his only child at the time, to Arabia from the land of Canaan.

As Abraham was preparing for his return journey back to Canaan, Hājar asked him, "Did Allah order you to leave us here? Or are you leaving us here to die." Abraham turned around to face his wife. He was so sad that he could not say anything. He pointed to the sky showing that Allah commanded him to do so. Hājar said, "Then Allah will not waste us; you can go". Though Abraham had left a large quantity of food and water with Hājar and Ishmael, the supplies quickly ran out, and within a few days the two began to feel the pangs of hunger and dehydration.

Hājar ran up and down between two hills called Al-Safa and Al-Marwah seven times, in her desperate quest for water. Exhausted, she finally collapsed beside her baby Ishmael and prayed to Allah for deliverance. Miraculously, a spring of water gushed forth from the earth at the feet of baby Ishmael. Other accounts have the angel Gabriel (Jibrail) striking the earth and causing the spring to flow in abundance. With this secure water supply, known as the Zamzam Well, they were not only able to provide for their own needs, but were also able to trade water with passing nomads for food and supplies.

Years later, Abraham was instructed by Allah to return from Canaan to build a place of worship adjacent to Hājar's well (the Zamzam Well). Abraham and Ishmael constructed a stone and mortar structure —known as the Kaaba— which was to be the gathering place for all who wished to strengthen their faith in Allah. As the years passed, Ishmael was blessed with Prophethood (Nubuwwah) and gave the nomads of the desert his message of submission to Allah. After many centuries, Mecca became a thriving desert city and a major center for trade, thanks to its reliable water source, the well of Zamzam.

One of the main trials of Abraham's life was to face the command of Allah to devote his dearest possession, his only son. Upon hearing this command, he prepared to submit to Allah's will. During this preparation, Satan (Shaitan) tempted Abraham and his family by trying to dissuade them from carrying out Allah's commandment, and Ibrahim drove Satan away by throwing pebbles at him. In commemoration of their rejection of Satan, stones are thrown at symbolic pillars signifying Satan during the Hajj rites.

When Ismā'īl was about 13 (Abraham being 99), Allah decided to test their faith in public. Abraham had a recurring dream, in which Allah was commanding him to offer up for sacrifice – an unimaginable act – his son, whom Allah had granted him after many years of deep prayer. Abraham knew that the dreams of the prophets were divinely inspired, and one of the ways in which Allah communicated with his prophets. When the intent of the dreams became clear to him, Abraham decided to fulfill Allah's command and offer Ishmael for sacrifice.

Although Abraham was ready to sacrifice his dearest for Allah's sake, he could not just bring his son to the place of sacrifice without his consent. Ishmael had to be consulted as to whether he was willing to give up his life in fulfillment of Allah's command. This consultation would be a major test of Ishmael's maturity in faith; love and commitment for Allah; willingness to obey his father; and readiness to sacrifice his own life for the sake of Allah.

Abraham presented the matter to his son and asked for his opinion about the dreams of slaughtering him. Ishmael did not show any hesitation or reservation even for a moment. He said, "Father, do what you have been commanded. You will find me, Insha'Allah (Allah willing), to be very patient." His mature response, his deep insight into the nature of his father’s dreams, his commitment to Allah, and ultimately his willingness to sacrifice his own life for the sake of Allah were all unprecedented.

When Abraham attempted to cut Ishmael's throat, he was astonished to see that Ishmael was unharmed and instead, he found a dead ram which was slaughtered. Abraham had passed the test by his willingness to carry out Allah's command.

This is mentioned in the Quran as follows:

"O my Lord! Grant me a righteous (son)!" So We gave him the good news of a boy, possessing forbearance. And when (his son) was old enough to walk and work with him, (Abraham) said: O my dear son, I see in vision that I offer you in sacrifice: Now see what is your view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do what you are commanded; if Allah wills, you will find me one practising patience and steadfastness!" So when they both submitted and he threw him down upon his forehead, We called out to him saying: O Ibraheem! You have indeed fulfilled the vision; surely thus do We reward those who do good. Most surely this was a manifest trial. And We ransomed him with a momentous sacrifice. And We perpetuated (praise) to him among the later generations. "Peace and salutation to Abraham!" Thus indeed do We reward those who do right. Surely he was one of Our believing servants.

As a reward for this sacrifice, Allah then granted Abraham the good news of the birth of his second son, Is-haaq (Isaac):

And We gave him the good news of Is-haaq, a prophet from among the righteous.

Abraham had shown that his love for Allah superseded all others: that he would lay down his own life or the lives of those dearest to him in submission to Allah's command. Muslims commemorate this ultimate act of sacrifice every year during Eid al-Adha.

To put it all in a nutshell: what a load of horse manure.

For one thing, it is highly unlikely that old pimp Abram ever actually existed at all (horrors!). Secondly, the origin story featured Isaac not Ishmael. Thirdly, the whole narrative is derivative syncretism – it borrows willy-nilly from the original, and injects piles of horseshit into it. The original also stipulated that Isaac would be a king, and the seed of kings would spring from him, so the likelihood that good old Abe was a raging psychotic just hearing bloodthirsty voices (let me qualify that, at all times), and even if prophecies were ever real, it’s a solid-state contradiction in terms. If indeed Ishmael ever existed, he was an idiot for being willing to proffer his throat to dear old demented dad.

I was raised (as most of you were, I suspect) to be in awe of this story (in whatever incarnation), to see this as some sort of inspirational milestone in the bible (or whatever), but the truth of the matter, it’s horrific and scary instead. A deity asking for child sacrifice? Never mind the imaginary sky daddy in question reneged (something today’s Republicans would term ‘flip-flopping’) – the mere suggestion should send civilized shudders down anyone’s spine.

Allah, Jehovah, Jesus – it’s all a load of bullocks, as our cousins across the pond would say.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Allegories Gone Wild: Obama Is The Antichrist? Pull The Other One Please…

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
Sometimes my eyes hurt from popping out in disbelief, especially when the wankers start spewing this ass-nonsense:

Lively: Obama Is The Antichrist, Working With Satanic Gays To Bring About The Apocalypse

Scott Lively, the pastor behind anti-gay laws from Uganda to Russia, appeared on TruNews yesterday to reveal to host Rick Wiles the identity of the Antichrist: President Obama. While he refused to mention Obama by name, he said that the Antichrist is the person “heading the largest superpower of the world today.” Lively explained that the Antichrist (read: Obama) will cancel all of the world’s debts in 2015, end the Mideast conflict with a peace treaty between the Israelis and Palestinians and introduce a one-world economic system and secular humanist religion.

Lively: Regional war breaks out and at the same time, because of that, the global economy collapses, crashes. That begins the serious pain for the entire world that the globalists actually want to prepare them for the global, one-world system. They already have the economic system to bring in; just nobody is ready to accept it. So at the right time, after there’s been enough pain, what happens is the Antichrist—I won’t name any names here but he is heading the largest superpower of the world today—steps in at the right time and does three things. He declares a global jubilee in which all the debts of the world are eliminated, this is after there’s been massive numbers of people who have died—
Wiles: Scott, I told people, I told our audience years ago, I’m going to say 2008, I said on this program this global financial crisis will be so bad that at some point in the future a world leader will say the only solution is biblical, we will have to cancel all the debts and we are going to have a global jubilee.
Lively: Amen. And we just happen to have one coming up, September 23, 2015.
Wiles: And the politician who does it is going to be hailed as the greatest man on the planet.
Lively: The hero of the world, right? This is the guy that also is going to be able to do what no one else in the history of the Middle East conflict could do. He’s going to have brought a peace treaty between the Palestinians and the Israelis; the Palestinians get their two-state solution and the Israelis get the permission to build on the Temple Mount. And who is the hero? It’s the guy that I’m not going to mention his name.
Wiles: And a lot of Christians when they see the Temple going up are going to hyperventilate, thinking this is a great thing and they have no idea that Antichrist is coming.
Lively: Only because it’s a symbol of what’s coming. Here’s the one other part that’s been missing, you’ve alluded to it and we’re very close on this that at the same time he introduces the new global system but here’s the other missing component. What’s the religion of the Antichrist? The religion of the Antichrist is secular humanism.

[As Lively explained, the imminent apocalypse is the result of homosexuality, which he said is “at the heart of the Antichrist kingdom” (along with Islam). He repeated his claim that homosexuality caused Noah’s Flood and the destruction of Sodom, arguing that gay rights is the issue that “portends the End Times” and is backed by the Devil.]

What is the issue that God is using to divide the sheep and the goats right now? It’s not whether Jesus Christ is Lord. It’s where do you stand on homosexuality? You know why? He gave us the warnings about that. From Genesis to Revelation, he has given us the advance notice that this issue portends the End Times and that when you see these things happen you’ll know that is the context that you are in. That’s the issue that is dividing the church right down the middle, of all the issue that God could’ve chosen. And the people who are going to the world’s side and the Devil’s side on that question are completely blind to its importance as a biblical topic; they think it is unimportant, that God doesn’t care about that when He gave us the only sin associated with the destruction of cities with fire and brimstone, the only sin associated with a reprobate mind in Romans 1, the thing that the rabbis said was the last straw before God brought the Flood, the issue that seems to be the heart of the Antichrist kingdom in Revelation 11 when it says that the two witnesses are struck down in the city that is mystically called Sodom and Egypt: homosexuality and Islam.

[Lively argued that only Vladimir Putin is the world’s last hope, and called for other nations to follow in his footsteps in implementing stringently anti-gay laws.]

We don’t want to gloss over the problems that we have with Mr. Putin but by the same token he’s the only world leader capable of standing up to the West and he is championing the traditional marriage and Christian values regarding the central moral issue of our time that no one else has the capability to do what he’s doing. Really there’s a chance here for him to inspire all the morally conservative countries of the law to adopt a similar law that he just adopted, his country just adopted and really have a chance maybe to roll some of this terrible agenda back.

Really, Lively and Wills are just going to have to stop sucking on that glass pipe – religion seems to have the same effect on rational thought as crack cocaine.

Obviously Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dum are futurists – that is to say, they believe that all the alleged ‘prophecies’ will occur in the not-too-distant future at an unspecified time. As opposed to preterists and historicists.

This nonsense has been going on for far too long. So many people have pointed the finger at prominent figures –from popes to presidents.  Religious people are such children – they live in a comic book world of extremes, and they love to point and call names at someone they disagree with.

Jesus never existed, there is no devil, no antichrist, all of that folderol is the invention of a bunch of Iron Age shepherds who pretty much do what today’s Republicans do – pull their info straight out of that orifice-that-shall-not-be-named.

No wonder religion appeals to those assholes…it’s the oldest con-game in the book, and all it requires is the steady stare of the psycho and the spittle of the passionate ranter to convince all those sheeple.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Christians? Being Discriminatory? Say It Ain’t So!

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
I always attribute the ability of people to say one thing and do another to the contrariness of the species and our innately remarkable ability to lie to ourselves. Religion may not be responsible for this perverse trait, but I doubt anyone could argue that religion tends to mollycoddle the feebler minds.

Case in point:

Faith schools cannot continue their immoral policy of discrimination

The London Oratory has been ordered to change its admissions policy. Segregating children based on faith is unacceptable

The London Oratory school in Fulham, west London, which was criticised for breaching the schools admissions code. 'Spending time in church to gain a place has become the religious equivalent of paying cash for honours.' Photograph: Fiona Hanson/PA

"How are the mighty fallen!" is a biblical verse that will not only be well-known by the Roman Catholic state school, the London Oratory, but now applies directly to them. The school – famously chosen by both Tony Blair and Nick Clegg for their sons – has just been criticised by the Office of the Schools Adjudicator for breaching the schools admissions code and ordered to change its policy.

The school's criteria for entry included parents participating in church life for at least three years beforehand through activities such as singing in the choir, serving at the altar or arranging flowers. There is nothing wrong with these practices – and many would consider them very worthy – but they should be pertinent only to the individual concerned, not determine whether the children of such parents qualify for a place in a state school.

This case was specific to the London Oratory, but the issue is much wider, for such breaches are endemic to the way faith schools operate. Unlike any other state-funded institution in society, they are allowed to base admission on belief. Spending time in church to gain a place has become the religious equivalent of paying cash for honours.

It would be unthinkable – not to mention illegal – for entry to hospitals or libraries to depend on a person's faith. Why should schools be privileged? It is a legal anomaly that is immoral and should be rectified. The fact that such discrimination is permissible because of specific exemptions in the Equality Act speaks volumes and effectively says: we know this departs from our normal standards.

Equally remarkable is that it is such a religious own goal, for it reverses the original mission of churches to embrace the whole of society, not withdraw into itself and cater for a particular constituency. Alongside these theoretical objections are the negative practical consequences, which apply also to schools of other faiths: they segregate their children, isolating them from those of a different background. That is not healthy for the children concerned, nor for society as a whole.

The better faith schools will teach about other belief systems, but that is no substitute for the children interacting on a daily basis. It is tragic that the last 20 years have seen an explosion in schools from the minority faiths – especially Jewish and Muslim, but now also Hindu and Sikh. Children that used to grow up alongside each other, are now becoming strangers. The more multifaith and multiethnic Britain becomes, the more schools should be where children mix and meet and learn about each other in the interests of social cohesion.

From an educational point of view, it is a perverse lesson that we are teaching children – saying everyone is equal, yet then separating them by faith groups and thereby creating an "us and them" culture. Yes, it was churches that pioneered schools in Britain centuries ago – and all credit to them for doing so – but that is no argument for maintaining a socially divisive educational policy today. The Fair Admissions Campaign has recently been formed to tackle the issue, uniting both religious and secular groups who object to its continuing presence.

Faith should have a role in schools – with multifaith studies taught both as an academic subject and to advance understanding of one's different-faith neighbour – but it should not be allowed to discriminate between children.

In contrast to the Oratory, some Church of England schools in the Diocese of London have decided that while they will maintain a particular ethos, they will be open to all in their local area. I bet God prefers them.

In the 21st century, why is this still an issue?

Because humanity is basically a collective infancy, and the crowds prefer an imaginary friend who echoes their hysteria and vacuous homilies, rather than the real world.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

If Buddha Meets Muhammad On The Road, Who Kills Whom?

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
Powder kegs in orange robes:

Burma: Buddhist mobs burn down Muslim homes and shops

Fresh sectarian violence broke out in north-western Burma late on Saturday when Buddhist mobs burned down dozens of homes and shops following rumours that a young woman had been sexually assaulted by a Muslim man. There were no reports of injuries.

Myanmar's radical monk Wirathu, whose anti-Muslim rhetoric has placed him at the centre of rising religious violence, said on his Facebook page that hundreds of people took part in the riot on the outskirts of Kantbalu.

A crowd surrounded the police station demanding that the suspect be handed over, said a police officer from the area, who asked not to be named because he did not have authority to speak to the media.

When police refused, they started setting buildings on fire, he said.

About 35 houses and 12 shops, most belonging to Muslims, were destroyed before calm was restored, he said.

Predominantly Buddhist Burma has been grappling with sectarian violence since the country's military rulers handed over power to a nominally civilian government in 2011.

More than 250 people have been killed, most of them Muslims, and 140,000 others forced to flee their homes.

The unrest began last year in the western state of Rakhine, where Buddhists accuse Rohingya Muslims of illegally entering the country and encroaching on their land. The violence, on a smaller scale but still deadly, spread earlier this year to other parts of the country.

Obviously these folks never heard of the inherent ‘tolerance’ of Buddhism. Mobs demanding suspects without evidence is far from anything resembling rational and tolerant.

Much as I despise Islam, nobody deserves to suffer at the hands of another. That my friends, is ideological terrorism – the earmark of the religious psychopath.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Giving One’s Life For The Fight…

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
I have belittled the religious foolishness of that benighted country called India – a nation that allows women to marry snakes, forces men to marry dogs, and has companies that elect imaginary friends to their board.

Alas, we have lost one of our own – an intrepid individual who made it his mission in life to expose all the religious garbage for what it is – garbage.

Battling Superstition, Indian Paid With His Life

PUNE, India — For nearly three decades, an earnest man named Narendra Dabholkar traveled from village to village in India, waging a personal war against the spirit world.

Police officers removed a banner bearing the image of Narendra Dabholkar near the spot where he was shot in Pune, India.

If a holy man had electrified the public with his miracles, Dr. Dabholkar, a former physician, would duplicate the miracles and explain, step by step, how they were performed. If a sorcerer had amassed a fortune treating infertility, he would arrange a sting operation to unmask the man as a fraud. His goal was to drive a scientist’s skepticism into the heart of India, a country still teeming with gurus, babas, astrologers, godmen and other mystical entrepreneurs.

That mission ended Tuesday, when two men ran up behind Dr. Dabholkar, 67, as he crossed a bridge, shot him at point-blank range, then jumped onto a motorbike and disappeared into the traffic coursing through this city.

Dr. Dabholkar’s killing is the latest episode in a millenniums-old wrestling match between traditionalists and reformers in India. When detectives began putting together a list of Dr. Dabholkar’s enemies, they found that it was long. He had received threats from Hindu far-right groups, been beaten by followers of angry gurus and challenged by councils upholding archaic caste laws. His home state, Maharashtra, was considering legislation he had promoted for 14 years, banning a list of practices like animal sacrifice, the magical treatment of snake bites and the sale of magic stones.

This is a sad and sobering reminder to us all – that sociopaths masquerade their narcissism in incense, prose and imagined piety, until it is all exposed as folderol. And then their masques are shorn away to reveal the blazing psychopath inside.

Narendra Dabholkar – you shall be missed.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

More On The Madness Of Muslims: Bangladesh Bozos Making Trouble….

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
Here’s a common refrain, whether it’s in the blogosphere or realtime: “Hey, it’s only a few crazy troublemakers making the rest of us look bad.”

Look again, people: it’s more than a few crazies – it is in fact, hordes and stampedes of crazy assholes, making the moderate minority look like nutcakes.

Case in point:

Bangladesh's radical Muslims uniting behind Hefazat-e-Islam

Passersby cast wary looks at a bunch of men lurking outside the entrance to the Hathazari madrasa. They stand out, having neither beards nor traditional dress. Indeed, one of them has had the bright idea of wearing a flowered shirt. For the past few weeks the madrasa in Chittagong, central Bangladesh, has been under police surveillance. It houses 12,000 Qur'anic students, guided by Shah Ahmad Shafi, who heads Hefazat-e-Islam, the country's largest radical Islamic movement.

At his instigation over 500,000 demonstrators clogged the streets of Dhaka on 5 May, demanding the application of 13 measures, including a ban on mixing of men and women in public places, the removal of sculptures and demands for the former wording of the constitution to be reinstated, affirming "absolute trust and faith in Almighty Allah". About 50 people were killed in clashes with police and several leaders were arrested. Since then Hefazat has avoided the media, for fear of reprisals. The government is extremely wary of a movement that has steadily gathered strength since its launch three years ago.

So when confronted with a statement like ‘demands for the former wording of the constitution to be reinstated, affirming "absolute trust and faith in Almighty Allah"’, the first move any interested party should make is to look it up, and guess what?

After Bangladesh gained independence from Pakistan, Secularism was included in the original Constitution of Bangladesh in 1972 as one of the Four State Principles, the others being Democracy, Nationalism and Socialism. In 2010, the High Court upheld the secular principles of the 1972 constitution. Bangladesh follows secular government system in democratic state. However, Bangladesh also follows combined system of state laws and individual religious laws applicable to people of respective religious group.

In fact, reading the item in question, it’s pretty unambiguous:

We, the people of Bangladesh, having proclaimed our Independence on the 26th day of March, 1971 and through a historic struggle for national liberation, established the independent, sovereign People's Republic of Bangladesh;

Pledging that the high ideals of nationalism, democracy, socialism and secularity, which inspired our heroic people to dedicate themselves to, and our brave martyrs to sacrifice their lives in the struggle for national liberation, shall be fundamental principles of the Constitution;

As far as I can see, there’s absolutely no mention of this ‘Allah’ character in that constitution at all. In fact, that little tidbit was slipped in around 1977, and Ass-lame became the state religion in 1988. And ‘Secularity’ was replaced by this Allah fellow (peanut butter and jelly be upon his name).

And it becomes a huge mess from then on.

Politics is a disgusting mess no matter where one goes, but throwing religion into the mix is the equivalent of trying to put out a fire with gasoline.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Republicans Gone Retarded–A Pulse As An Excuse For Misogyny

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

Heartbeat, heartbeat, listen to my heartbeat – Red 7

Texas. Yet another state the US could do without.

Texas Legislators File Radical ‘Fetal Heartbeat’ Bill To Ban Abortion After Just Six Weeks

On Thursday, three Texas Republicans filed a measure that would criminalize abortion services after a fetal heartbeat can be detected — which typically occurs around six weeks of pregnancy, before many women even know they’re pregnant.

The Texas legislature is currently in the midst of a special session that was convened specifically to give lawmakers more time to consider abortion restrictions. The session will end on July 31. Until then, GOP lawmakers have been busy proposing a slew of anti-abortion bills in the hopes of being able to rush them through.

One of those bills, a measure to ban abortion after 20 weeks and shut down the majority of the states’ abortion clinics, has captured national attention over the past several weeks as thousands of Texans have rallied at the capitol in protest. The legislature gave final approval to that bill on Saturday, and Gov. Rick Perry (R) just signed it into law on Thursday morning. But that’s not enough to satisfy Reps. Phil King (R), Dan Flynn (R), and Geanie Morrison (R) — who filed HB 59 on the same day that Perry signed the controversial abortion restrictions.

So-called “heartbeat” bills are so radical that they divide the anti-choice community. In addition to criminalizing the vast majority of abortions, they also mandate invasive ultrasound procedures for women seeking abortions. In order to detect a fetal heartbeat so early in a pregnancy, doctors typically have to use a transvaginal probe.

Earlier this year, North Dakota became the first state to pass a six-week heartbeat ban. It currently represents the most stringent abortion ban the country has seen since Roe v. Wade first legalized the procedure, and it’s being challenged in court for overstepping Roe.

None of this will go into affect unless Roe vs. Wade is overturned:

Later on Thursday night, the text for the bill was released. The heartbeat ban is a “trigger” provision, which means it wouldn’t take effect unless Roe v. Wade is overturned. If that court decision is struck down while HB 59 is law, a six-week abortion ban would immediately go into effect without requiring Texas to pass another law. Similar “trigger” provisions have been added to state constitutions in other conservative states in hopes of quickly banning abortion in the event that Roe is invalidated.

I’m actually shocked that any of these boneheads could set up a domino effect – but along with conscious denial of the facts, deception is a valued weapon in the repertoire of the rethuglicans.

And because Americans (as a rule) only live in America (mentally), they somehow think that there’s just plenty of room for more people, so hey! Let’s get fertile! As if overpopulation is the stuff of dystopian science fiction.

Which it will not be – if we keep walking down the road of irresponsible prolificacy.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

More Batshit Crazy Burmese Buddhists: Mobbing The Muslims

Cross posted at the Atheist Oasis

"Life is dear to all. Comparing others with oneself, one should neither kill nor cause to kill." -  Dhammapada

Lately, more Buddhists have been in the news – and the press is none too good.

Burma jails 25 Buddhists for mob killings of 36 Muslims in Meikhtila

A Burmese court has sentenced 25 Buddhists to up to 15 years in prison for murder and other crimes during a night of rioting, burning and killing in central Burma, after weeks in which it seemed only Muslims were being punished for sectarian violence aimed largely at them.

But the sentences handed down on Wednesday and Thursday did not erase a sense of unequal justice: a day earlier, a Muslim received a life sentence for murdering one of 43 people killed in March in the central Burmese town of Meikhtila.

A wave of violence in the past year in the largely Buddhist country has left more than 250 people dead and 140,000 others fleeing their homes, most of them Muslim. The attacks, and the government's inability to stop them, have marred the south-east Asian country's image abroad as it moves toward democracy and greater freedom after nearly five decades of military rule.

Many of the sentences were handed down on Wednesday, and the toughest stemmed from the deadliest incident of the Meikhtila riots: a brutal mob attack on an Islamic school, its students and teachers that killed 36 people.

Buddhist mobs torched Mingalar Zayone Islamic boarding school, Muslim firms and all but one of the city's 13 mosques after a row between a Muslim and a Buddhist at a gold shop and the burning to death of a Buddhist monk by four Muslim men.

Although among the least associated religious traditions with violence, there is a robust history of Buddhist-related self-flagellation, suicides, torture, and wars.

Buddhism often promotes unproven nonsense concepts such as reincarnation and karma –again proving my repeated insistence that the idea of an afterlife - and as a transient factor the comic book idea that all deeds are written down in some invisible ledger to be paid off at some indeterminate point in the future – only pours gasoline on the fire.

The afterlife poisons all that it touches – regardless of which culture it hails from.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

J’accuse! What Religion Is Truly Responsible For…

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; Bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein. Genesis 9:7

"We have met the enemy and he is us." – Pogo

Puff pieces. None of them ever cut to the bone. Every one of them dilly-dallies around the issues. Most articles adopt a shrug-hey-let-‘em-have-it-if-it makes-them-feel-good attitude.

The truth of the matter is this: religion isn’t responsible for anything. That’s the fallacy of reification. The fact is, that people are responsible. For everything. Good and bad. Natural selection doesn’t select on intelligence. It selects based on adaptability, and being easily influenced is a facet of adaptability.

But this religion nonsense still has got to go.

It propagates a series of vast lies: that some otherworldly other is watching out for you personally, that there’s some invisible ledger being kept and all debts and injuries will finally be balanced; in short, someone else will come along and sort your mess for you.

It’s an insane and irresponsible mindset. It gives the lazy thinker all the excuses they might need: I’ll not use birth control, because the result is gawd’s will. My gawd wants me to have multiple children (see the quote from above). Gawd is against birth control because some pointy-hatted asshole in Italy says so.

At this juncture, anthropocentric global warming is fact – the only people who battle that are the mooks fiercely clenching their SUV’s to their chests in denial. We are exhausting this planet’s resources. This is no longer speculation or science fiction. As a species, we are going to wreck this little blue pearl within a century or so.

We are coming to an agonizing realization: people are going to have to start taking reproductive responsibility. We have upwards of an estimated 100 million abandoned children living in the streets – and the upper percentiles are usually in the heavily religious countries. Starving children? Human trafficking? Yeah, there’ll be no divine intervention there. It’s down to us.

Pretty soon, it will get to the point where governments will be required to legislate and enforce a limit to family size. For the sake of our species. Regardless of fuzzy-wuzzy feelings or religious belief. Sad but true.

So go forth, and fuck responsibly.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Defending The Delusion: Or How Journalists Pander To The Sheeple…

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing. — Macbeth (Act 5, Scene 5)

Puff pieces. Nauseating things. They’re usually filler, pandering to the great unwashed, designed to tug a tear from the brainless. And this article is illustrative of that:

In defence of prayer

Whenever the US Congress and Senate are officially in session, the daily activities commence with someone saying a prayer. The same ritual occurs in many state and local governments throughout America: a prayer, the pledge of allegiance to the flag and then the business of the day.

To get a feel for what these prayers are like, consider this one that opened the US House of Representatives session on Friday:

"God our Father, we give You thanks for giving us another day. Bless the Members of the people's House as they gather at the end of another week in the Capitol. Endow each with the graces needed to attend to the issues of the day with wisdom, that the results of their efforts might benefit the citizens of our Nation and the world.

"On this Flag Day, may we be reminded of the greatness of the democratic experiment that is the Republic of the United States and diligent in our responsibilities as citizens to guarantee the freedoms enumerated in the Constitution for all who claim this country as their home.

"We also ask Your blessing leading into this weekend upon fathers throughout our country. May they be their best selves, and may their children appreciate fully the blessing their fathers have been to them. May all that is done this day be for Your greater honor and glory. Amen."

This was said by the House's resident chaplain, a Roman Catholic priest. He gives many of the prayers, although "guest chaplains" from other faith backgrounds are also invited throughout the year.

This is a clear violation of SOCAS. But this author goes on a tangent:

In an increasingly diverse nation, people are rightly asking if these prayers still have a place. The simplistic answer is to demand complete separation of church and state and advocate for the end of these prayers. But they are a tradition that has been in place since the initial meeting of the Continental Congress in 1774 (and even earlier in some state sessions).

No, it’s not ‘simplistic’ to demand that separation. An argument from tradition would also state that the Founding Fathers had slaves – so we should re-institute that atrocity.

It's the reason the US supreme court decided in 1983 (Marsh v Chambers) that these prayers are legal – but on one very big condition: the prayer opportunity cannot be "exploited to proselytize or advance any one, or to disparage any other, faith or belief".

What exactly constitutes proselytizing is hard to pin down and means something very different to each person.

What a load of shit. The word proselytize means, "1: to induce someone to convert to one's faith. 2: to recruit someone to join one's party, institution, or cause, and transitive verb: to recruit or convert especially to a new faith, institution, or cause”. The meaning is unambiguous, and not contingent on interpretation.

The supreme court is again hearing a case about crossing that line, this time from in a town in western New York where the claim is that the prayers have been far too Christian over the years and efforts have not been made to invite non-Christians to participate.

  And the best way to deal, is to eliminate the superstitious fluff.

The issue goes to the heart of the first amendment of the constitution that grants religious freedom:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Wrong again. The issue is about expressing religion itself – and that the government should stay out of that arena.

Keep in mind that these prayers are said among grown-ups (well, as much as you can call lawmakers that some days). Those who want to take a moment to pause and reflect can, those who don't can reasonably be expected to tune it out.

This is the dishonest backhand: don’t like it? Shut up about it.

Any appearance of religion in government does not mean there's a theocracy. Yes, some legislation (anti-abortion bills, in particular) in America is motivated by religious causes, but by and large, there is respect for the diverse society that we live in today. It's built into the very nature of such large deliberative bodies that are responsive at the ballot box to a multicultural voter base. If someone really crosses the line, they will be called out and voted out.

Oh please. It must be soothing to be so naïve. Lawmakers cross the line so often, it’s been smudged out of existence. George W. claimed ‘gawd told him to invade Iraq’ (which was ploy to get him re-elected). There’s too many of these sort of examples to list in a single post.

It's true that the US has a growing atheist (or simply agnostic) population, though it is still less than 20% of the population. The overwhelming majority of Americans practice and identify with some religious tradition. It forms a part of many people's personal morality and their sense of being. That doesn't mean every decision comes from the Bible or the Qur'an or the Torah or the Vedas. But it does mean that people see their belief system as a spiritual guidance.

An argument from numbers? Pathetic.

That's why the prayers should stay in place, albeit in a more explicitly diverse way. These daily prayers can showcase how pluralistic America is, and they can still offer some inspiration for those for whom faith is an integral part of life.

No they shouldn’t – because they’re symptomatic of a more primitive, more superstitious tradition that we should’ve outgrown centuries ago.

There is nothing to hide with the prayers. They become part of the official record. At the federal and state levels, they are easily searchable online. What stands out to me after browsing through them for this year alone, including at the federal level, is a need for more diversity. Many governments are good at inviting clergy from different Christian traditions, but not at inviting other religions to take part. For example, in my home state of Pennsylvania, the state house hasn't had anyone other than a Christian give the prayer, according to the records released thus far for 2013.

Oh no, we can’t do something as simple as discontinue this…no, no, no, too many people’s petite toes might be stepped upon. Instead, let’s complexify everything even further by allowing every crazy delusionist a shot at being heard.

When I called the offices that coordinate the prayers in Pennsylvania, it was clear that they weren't trying to exclude anyone, they simply select people to give the prayers based on the nominations they receive from fellow lawmakers (and sometimes the politicians themselves will offer the daily prayer). There probably needs to be a greater effort to recruit people from other faiths. And yes, that should include having some atheists, as well.

Pander, pander, pander. It’s nauseating, it is. It’d be simpler (but not simplistic) to simply do without the nonsense altogether.

Controversies are inevitable. Recently in Arizona, an atheist politician used his prayer slot to offer some thoughts that one of his fellow lawmakers took issue with. Having so many faith traditions exist side by side has brought plenty of friction over the years in American society. It's never going to be perfect, and there are likely to be more court cases about public prayers, regardless of the outcome of the current one.

And yet still the obvious solution is avoided assiduously.

That is part of the grand experiment of America. But so is the ability to practice religion. Simply striking it entirely from our legislatures doesn't honor the many faith traditions who have come to this nation seeking religious freedom.

Wrong – striking it from the legislatures saves a whole lot of tax money, and that means a fatter wallet for us the citizenry. Wouldn’t you agree?

Because it really boils down to ‘my dad can kick your daddy’s ass’, only in this case, the fathers are not only not present, but never existed in the first place.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

More On The Madness Of Muslims: Street Patrols In London

Cross posted @ The Atheist Oasis
Actually, this is exactly on point:

Extremist ‘Muslim Patrol’ attempting to enforce Sharia law in East London is condemned by England’s imams

The Muslim Patrol has verbally harassed gays, calling them“dirty” and demanding that they leave the neighborhood quickly.

A small group of Muslim extremists are patrolling the streets of East London, publicly targeting gays, drinkers and women who aren’t dressed modestly, in an attempt to enforce Sharia law.

The self-styled “Muslim Patrol” group has posted videos of at least three verbal attacks on YouTube. Out of the handful who participate in the attacks, at least five have been arrested on suspicion of harassment, according to CNN. The group’s alleged purpose is to defend Islamic morals, but numerous local and national Muslim leaders have denounced their dubious methods.

The vigilantes start their patrolling late at night and make sure that their faces don’t appear on camera. The attacks were based in the Tower Hamlets area in London, some happening right outside the East London Mosque.

In a video, the Muslim Patrol tells a woman wearing a short skirt that she “cannot dress like that in a Muslim area.” In another incident, they harass a young man, saying that he looks like a homosexual.

“What’s wrong with your face, mate? Why you dressed like that for? You need to get out of here. You’re dirty, mate,” an anonymous attacker said on a video obtained by CNN.

The patrol also accosted a man who holds a beer can while walking through the streets. An anonymous voice stops him and says, “This is a Muslim area, okay? Alcohol bad.”

Members of the group claim that these vices are contributing to the moral degradation of their neighborhoods.

“Alcohol is causing so much problems in the area, in fact it’s blighting the area. It causes crime, it causes people misbehaving and drunken disorderly behavior,” said Abdul Muhid, whom CNN identified as being a part of the Muslim Patrol.

But leaders at the East London Mosque have said that their imams have condemned the verbal attacks.

In a statement, the mosque’s leaders said that “These actions are utterly unacceptable and clearly designed to stoke tensions and sow discord ... The actions of this tiny minority have no  place in our faith nor on our streets.”

That’s complete crap. This sort of behavior is not only considered acceptable, is applauded regularly in the Middle East. In fact, it could be considered the epitome of Sharia law. Groups of self-appointed ‘defenders of the faith’ running around making sure local folks are behaving themselves properly is the very foundation of the Big 3 of monotheism. Because of course religion(s) teach us we can’t trust ourselves with anything, so we need Big Daddy In The Sky to mildly scold us (all the while we’re supposed to adore this invisible babysitter), so naturally, we need gangs of crazy people running around making sure we behave.

Does that make sense to any of you? Because it sounds as crazy as a shithouse rat to me.

I’ve said it before, but I’ll repeat myself: religion is for narcissists with low self-esteem.

Till the next post then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Abstinence Makes The Church Grow Fondlers: Not Very Funny Anymore…

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
It’s a small wonder that Pope Ratzi resigned: it seems that pedos in robes are coming out of the woodwork these days…

Police investigate allegations of sex abuse at Catholic boarding school

Police are investigating allegations of abuse at a Catholic boarding school in the Scottish Highlands, following complaints of a brutal regime in which boys were physically beaten, psychologically tortured and sexually assaulted. The school closed in 1993.

Officers from Police Scotland will travel to Newcastle tomorrow to interview Andrew Lavery, 41, who for two years in the 1980s attended the fee-paying Fort Augustus Abbey, which was run by Benedictine monks. "It was systematic, brutal, awful torture," says Lavery, who says he was beaten, sexually assaulted and isolated in a locked room for days on end under "special measures". He added: "The psychological torture was the most damaging. In the end I wanted to kill myself."

Lavery claims he was beaten unconscious by a monk and lay master while pupils watched, then left at the playing fields to crawl back to school. He also says he experienced "greying", which involved other pupils pinning the victim's legs apart while his testicles were hit with a hockey stick. A monk watched without intervening. "I have had pain in my left testicle all my life," he said.

There’s more at the link provided, if you have the stomach for it.

This is an ongoing issue. I don’t need to cite cases to prove that anymore. Res ipsa loquitur.

This illness we call religion blinds the eye to reality: it destroys self esteem and turns narcissists into sexual predators. It claims we need to return to a state of purity that never existed, deifying that state and holding it up as some sort of goal. And when that state that the worshipper never achieves goes unfulfilled, it seems to create some sort of frisson that builds unless released.

Religion is a constant state of perversion. It deals in delusion. It panders to the self-loather, and imposes unnatural controls on the psyche. And when the imposed inhibitions become too much to contain, the dam breaks, and the madness of repression spills forth.

This madness needs to end, else it may end us.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

More On The Madness Of Muslim: Sharia Is For Shit

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis
When I read horrendous accounts like this, it’s almost too much to bear:

Alicia Gali: Rape Victim Who Was Jailed For Being Assaulted in UAE Tells Her Story

Those familiar with the Steubenville case or the Rehtaeh Parsons suicide are aware of the backlash against rape victims in contemporary society. Another rape victim, Alicia Gali, has recently come forward to describe her experience in a foreign prison as result of rape.

In 2008, Gali, then a 27-year-old Australian woman, was hired as the manager of the Starwood Le Meridien Al-Aqah Beach Resort, Fujairah, spa and beauty salon in the United Arab Emirates.  One night, after having her drink spiked in the employee bar, she awoke in her room, naked, covered in bruises, with four broken ribs. Reports were made during the night in response to her screams. Guards who entered the room saw her unconscious and three naked, male hotel employees in her room.

When Gali reported the assault, reportedly neither the Australian Embassy nor the hotel offered her assistance, an accusation the hotel denies. After seeking medical attention, she reported the assault to the police, which she did not know entailed admitting to illicit sex, a crime under United Arab Emirates law. According to UAE law, proving rape requires four adult male witnesses to the sex act who will affirm that it occurred. She also confessed to consuming alcohol, which is illegal without a license. Gali signed a confession in Arabic, which she did not understand.

She was sentenced to eleven months in prison for illicit sex and one month for alcohol consumption. Two rapists received twelve-month sentences as well, also for illicit sex; the third received thirteen months. After eight months in prison, which she described as “appalling” and a “nightmare,” she was pardoned. Her rapists were released on the same day.

And there you have it. There is no long complicated explanation to it: Islam is a rape culture. There are no involved sociological explanations, no wishy-washy bullshit watered down moral relativism to invoke.

Islam is a rape culture.

No ideology can lay claim to being ‘civilized’ when such inequities, such injustice, such horrific discrimination is visited upon someone simply because of their gender.

All religion is evil, but Islam is by far the most barbaric.

It’s gotta go.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

David Bowie, The Catholic Church, And The Pearl Clutchers

David Bowie - The Next Day (Explicit) - YouTube

Cross posted @ the Atheist Oasis

After watching a very, very old movie with David Bowie in it (The Hunger – and I suppose that it was a little bit of all right in 1983, but only gets an ‘eh’ and a horizontal palm shaking slightly), I googled Mr. Bowie, and lo and behold, even at the age of 66, he’s still managing to piss somebody off. Namely, the usual suspects:

Critic: New David Bowie video 'offensive' to Christians

Forget “Let's Dance,” David Bowie, 66, is back and raising hell – if you will – with his new religion-themed music video “The Next Day,” the title track in his first studio album in 10 years.

Taking a page out of Madonna and Lady Gaga’s playbooks, Bowie’s latest offering is wrought with racy religious imagery and stars Oscar-winning actress Marion Cotillard and Oscar-nominated actor Gary Oldman. 

Directed by Fiona Sigismondi, the controversial video opens with a priest played by Oldman punching a street-urchin beggar in the face, then entering a club -- while perving at women’s backsides -- filled with less-than-saintly behavior. Cotillard embodies a prostitute-turned-saint while Bowie rocks out on stage as the Christ-like figure in robes, while nearly-naked folks dance provocatively around him. In the background, a Cardinal can be seen dealing in cash and a nun prays, all before the stigmata saturates the scene.

The contentious music clip, deemed “a bloody battle between the sacred and the profane,” was banned from YouTube for “violating terms of service” just a few hours after its release on Wednesday, and returned with an age restriction a little while later.

But some say Bowie’s creative vision mocks Christianity, and wish it was gone altogether.

“The video is offensive and distasteful. It is a misrepresentation of the multitudes of clergy who have given their lives to help hurting people. Undeniably, some clergy have misused their position, but to focus on these few is a character assault of their position and call,” Jay Lowder of Harvest Ministries told FOX411’s Pop Tarts column. “Bowie’s verse claiming ‘they work with Satan while they dress like saints,’ is to attribute God’s work through man as being sinister and evil in its origin. I find it hard to excavate any level of truth or reality from this video except Jesus was continually in the midst of those who were blind and sinful.”

The shorter version? This picture says it best:

Our culture is becoming sandwiched between the Pathetic Church Of Victimology and awash in a sea of undeserved entitlement. Everybody wants special privileges just because they exist. But the religious? They want more than just privileges: as a rule they whine continuously that they as a group should be granted special dispensations. No stepping on toes, no criticism, no critical thought applied to that meme plague they bring and distribute at the drop of a hat (good news my homesick ass).

But this is the human race we’re talking about – somebody somewhere is getting stoked up about something (usually something idiotic).

Personally, I’m done being polite about these subjects. I usually don’t hesitate to laugh in people’s faces when they say something beyond stupid, nor am I shy about explaining how said something is patently and relentlessly stupid.

Anyways, the religious (especially the Christians) love to whinge on about how they’re persecuted in this country. When I hear this, I tell them straight up: are churches being closed? Are their beloved TV networks being shut down? Are there folks being scooped up in the middle of the night because of their faith, or being separated from their children? Not in this country they’re not.

So it’d be nice if they put a cork in it, close their pie-holes, quit yapping, and all in all just STFU – because the complaint department’s closed, and their persecutory complex, like their little imaginary sky daddy, is all in their fucking heads.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...