According to End Times talk radio host Justice Antonin Scalia was ritually murdered by President Obama to mark a pagan festival. Say what?

Courtesy of Right Wing Watch:  

Yesterday on “Trunews,” End Times radio host Rick Wiles discussed “the possible occult connections” to the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, whom he concluded was murdered by President Obama and was a human sacrifice to mark the pagan festival of Lupercalia. 

Wiles explained that the “Luciferian” “devil-worshipers” who control the government are out for blood, noting that Lupercalia is observed between February 13 and 15. Scalia’s body was discovered on the 13th. “There’s always human sacrifice involved,” he said, claiming that Scalia was “killed” to mark the beginning of pagan fascism ruling over the U.S. 

“The 13th was the 44th day of 2016, Obama is the 44th president of the United States,” Wiles said, “so you have this numerology thing taking place.” 

Wiles said that the assassins who killed the conservative justice “deliberately left the pillow on his face as a message to everybody else: ‘Don’t mess with us, we can murder a justice and get away with it.’ And I assure you, there’s a lot of frightened officials in Washington today, deep down they know, the regime murdered a justice…. This is the way a dictatorial, fascist, police state regime takes control of a nation.” 

Okay usually I would mock this as batshit crazy talk, but I seriously do not think that a bat could shit this much crazy.

I would like to seriously ask how somebody like this is not only NOT in a rubber room someplace, but is allowed on the radio to spread this kind of lunacy?

Yupik shaman exorcising evil spirits from sick boy circa 1900-30.

Link

You might think that looks fucking terrifying, because, you know, that's fucking terrifying, but these people were still happier, more productive, and better adjusted than they have been since the white devils brought small pox, STD's, and Christianity into their lives.

Iceland to build new temple in order to worship Norse gods for the first time in 1,000 years.

Courtesy of of The Globe and Mail:  

Icelanders will soon be able to publicly worship at a shrine to Thor, Odin and Frigg with construction starting this month on the island’s first major temple to the Norse gods since the Viking age. 

Worship of the gods in Scandinavia gave way to Christianity around 1,000 years ago but a modern version of Norse paganism has been gaining popularity in Iceland. 

“I don’t believe anyone believes in a one-eyed man who is riding about on a horse with eight feet,” said Hilmar Orn Hilmarsson, high priest of Asatruarfelagid, an association that promotes faith in the Norse gods. 

“We see the stories as poetic metaphors and a manifestation of the forces of nature and human psychology.” 

Membership in Asatruarfelagid has tripled in Iceland in the last decade to 2,400 members last year, out of a total population of 330,000, data from Statistics Iceland showed.

So a temple that worships gods that the faithful know full well were created by man, simply so they can enjoy their cultural heritage and the fables of their forefathers.

Best reason to build a temple ever!

And SO much easier to accept than the Judeo Christian god with all of his rules and threats of eternal damnation.

If Thor gets mad at you he simply strikes you with lightning and that's it. Seems much more reasonable.

Good news Christians, Kirk Cameron is riding to the rescue of Christmas. Is it that time again?

Courtesy of The Blaze:  

Actor Kirk Cameron is taking political correctness to task this fall with a new movie that aims to deflate arguments regularly made against Christmas, while simultaneously pushing back against atheist activists’ annual attacks on the holiday. 

In “Saving Christmas,” Cameron plans to tackle some of the most controversial and disputed issues surrounding the celebration of Jesus Christ’s birthday — claims that he says have had a profound impact on the way believers and nonbelievers alike view the Christian celebration. 

Cameron said some of the claims that will be addressed in the film include: the notion that Christmas is really a church co-opting of winter solstice celebrations, that Jesus was not born on December 25, that Christmas trees are pagan and that consumerism is overshadowing the true reason for the season.

Well bad news there Mike Seaver, because in fact Christmas WAS indeed a pagan holiday and virtually everything about it is borrowed from other traditions predating Christianity.  (As you can learn for yourself by clicking here.)  

The “Growing Pains” actor, who has gone on to direct and produce numerous faith-themed films, said that atheist activists’ attempts to diminish the true nature of the holiday by taking aim at nativities and other symbols of faith amounts to political correctness run amok. 

“[It is] offensive to 90 percent of people in our country who want to see nativity scenes and who know the birth of the Christ child is the fundamental root of Christianity, which is the ideology that built this country,” Cameron said.

Once again Atheists do not care about crosses and nativity scenes placed on private property, we only want them kept away from government facilities and public areas.

And that 90% number is bullshit by the way.

Personally I LOVE Christmas and have no problem with a Santa Claus, commercialism, and even a baby Jesus or two. However for me it has always been the religious people demanding that everybody remember the "reason for the season" and cramming Christianity down our throats who have poisoned the well.

And I personally find the idea that the idiotic, Bible thumping Kirk Cameron is going to actually convince anybody that Christmas is solely a creation of Christianity laughable on its face.

Remember he is the guy who along with Ray Comfort literally tried to prove the existence of God using a banana. 

(H/T to Politicususa.)

Two men attempt to light "Keep Saturn in Saturnalia" sign on fire. Well so much for religious diversity in this country.

Courtesy of South Jersey Times:

Someone tried to torch the “Saturnalia” billboard on the edge of town Tuesday night. 

An off-duty police officer from another municipality was in Carolina Blue with a number of friends when they looked across the intersection of Lambs Road and Holly Avenue at about 11:45 p.m. and spotted two men underneath the billboard, which proclaims “Keep Saturn in Saturnalia.” 

The billboard was erected by the Freedom from Religion Foundation, the organization’s way of countering the “Keep Christ in Christmas” banner that hangs across Broadway, Pitman’s main thoroughfare. The Christmas banner is erected by the Knights of Columbus. 

The FFRF has been objecting to the Christmas banner since at least 2011, insisting it is illegally hung, without receipt of proper permits. 

Despite the fact that the billboard features a depiction of the ringed planet Saturn, Saturnalia was an ancient Roman holiday named after Saturn, a Roman deity. The holiday took place near the Winter Solstice — which occurs on Dec. 21 this year — and featured public feasting and gift-giving.

That was not the first attempt to destroy or deface the sign either by the way: Also on Sunday, a man accompanied by a woman and child put an extension ladder against the billboard and prepared to climb up and paste a poster with a picture of a manger on it over top of the Saturnalia sign. Police intervened and the protesters left.

Sure the religious people are always talking about freedom of speech and diversity, but put up one billboard celebrating the TRUE reason for the season and what them lose their shit.

I gotta tell you this stuff is cracking me up this year.

Thankfully we have Christian movie critics to warn us about the Satanic influences contained within the children's film.....The Princess and the Frog.

Did you just run over to your calendar to make sure that this is indeed 2009? Well I can hardly blame you considering the amazing superstitious nonsense vomited forth by these "critics".

At first I thought it must be a joke, but no, they are completely serious.

As evidenced by this review from Hollywood Jesus. (No, I am not making that name up!)

I also want to mention that the spirituality in this film is pretty dark, even for a Disney film. The villain sings a song about his friends "from the other side" making it very plain this isn't just magic that's being used but the powers of hell and its minions. This is serious stuff, and the light-handed manner that it was often handled with made me a bit uncomfortable. One should never lightly toy with the spiritual world, especially the world of demons and their dark powers. Having a show-stopping Broadway-like song about dalliances with dark forces in an animated movie may make it seem like doing such things is really no big deal; not something I want my kids to pick-up on.

Truth is playing around with such spiritual forces is extremely dangerous, be it voodoo, black magic, Ouija boards or whatever, a truth that is highlighted at the end of the film as the villain discovers the evil forces he thought he was in league with and was in control of were really the ones in control of him. Let's just say playing with "friends from the other side" didn't end well. I'm glad that the consequences were shown, but I still feel all of that was a bit too dark and extreme for this kind of kid's film.

This warning comes to us from a site called Christian Spotlight on Entertainment.

I do not personally recommend “The Princess and the Frog.” Practicing any sort of occultic magic is directly against God and is labeled as an abomination throughout Scripture. This movie displays that voodoo magicians hold all the power of both good and evil. A PG rating would have been more appropriate; I strongly advise that younger, undiscerning children not be allowed to see it. For older children, however, “The Princess and the Frog” might serve as an platform for parents to discuss with their children the real existence of occult practices and how to identify them.

The reviewer from Christianity Today finds fault with the movie because it suggests that problems can be solved through self-reliance.

As if this weren't bad enough, on the flip side we get mystical Mama Odie, stereotype piled on stereotype straight out of every cliché of the wise old black woman. Mama Odie knows voodoo, too, but her magic is more of the prosaic, homegrown kind. In a production number that evokes gospel music but with Jesus neatly stripped away, Mama Odie offers up a defiantly American church of the self. Just "dig a little deeper" inside yourself and you'll find what you need to achieve all of your dreams. Sure, there's magic, but it only shows up once you've done everything in your power to get what you desire. Her message is the epitome of works-righteousness, where the only counter to the forces of evil is the good inside the human heart. (And this is somehow bad?)

Sure, this is the message of just about every family film that has come down the pike since the dawn of cinema. But to see it presented in a context that evokes the style of Christianity, Mama Odie's song serves as a stark reminder as to how the American values of self-reliance diverge from the Christian message of humble submission to external grace. Just because something looks and sounds beautiful doesn't make it gospel. (So American values diverge from Christian values? Has anybody told Sarah Palin?)

Look I have not seen this movie so I cannot argue the merits of the film one way or another. However it seems to me that these critics found much to like about the film apart from the fact that it was an affront to their religious sensibilities.

They liked the music, the animation, and most of the storyline. They just got their panties in a twist when Voodoo reared its dark, sinister head. And apparently voodoo is not presented in the best light imaginable, the villain uses it for evil purposes, and yet it's very presence is of concern to these modern day Cotton Mather's.

This is one of my major bitches when it comes to the Fundamentalist Christian perspective. This idea that information which represents a view differing from, or in direct contrast to, Christianity is somehow inherently evil. This is simply not the kind of thinking that should be going on in the 21st century. It just isn't!

This movie presented the first African American female lead in a Disney film. It should be celebrated for finally breaking through the animated glass ceiling and presenting a young lady that little girls of ALL races can admire and sing along with. But instead the film gets attacked for NOT having enough Christianity in it. WTF?

Did these same critics get bent out of shape when Merlin was teaching little Arthur about magic in "The Sword in the Stone"? Or when the good fairy gave the gift of life to a puppet in "Pinocchio"? Or when Wilby Daniels used a magic ring to turn into a four legged beast in "The Shaggy Dog"? Of course not. And those films were made back in a time when we were less educated than we are today.

So what is the problem? The skin color of the main character? Well I certainly hope not. The getting to first base with an amphibian? Admittedly a little gross but he is not REALLY a frog so that should not be a problem. So if not racism or fear of bestiality then what is it?

Well than it can only be fear of the unknown, and the superstitious nonsense that permeates the thinking of these so-called "critics".

First off there is NOTHING satanic about Voodoo. It is no more bizarre or evil than Shintoism, or Hinduism, or Jainism, or Judaism, or any other religion that is not Christianity. It is simply the prism through which the people of Haiti tried to understand their world. Which by the way is the origin of ALL religions.

Now this may anger some of my Christian visitors, but I am sorry it needs to be explained.

When Christianity was still just a small Jewish cult it was in a real battle for converts. One of the tools that was used was to label the other religious practices as "evil". If somebody was seemingly cured after making an offering to a rival god the Christians labeled that the work of Satan, and cast aspersion on the entire religion.

This was in fact what happened to the so-called witches.

These were usually mid-wives, herbalists, and pre-Christian healers who were utilizing methods that had been handed down from generation to generation to heal the sick and deliver children in to this world. But early Christians felt in competition with these primitive healers and labeled them heretics which provided the biblical license necessary to justify hunting them down and exterminating them.

And before you get all defensive about my picking on Christianity I should probably tell you that these tactics were not invented by the Christians, they are a tried and true methods used by dozens, if not hundred, of religions that came before and continue to exist today. The Christians were just much more successful.

So anyhow I would encourage you to base your decision on whether or not to take your child to "The Princess and the Frog" on what you know about your child's sensitivities, the quality of both the animation and musical score, and NOT on whether it will introduce an interest in exploring "black magic" to your impressionable youngster.

By the way, I had a very good friend who was a Wiccan once. One of the kindest ladies I ever met. Did not ONCE turn me into a frog.

Santa Claus, not Jesus, is the great symbol of unity and peace for Christmas.

It's recently been reported that an atheists' group has planned an advertising campaign for this Christmas, featuring a photograph of smiling people wearing Santa Claus hats. The caption: "No God? . . . No problem! Be good for goodness sake." Whatever you might think of this message, the ad does contain a grain of historical truth: the modern image of Santa Claus was invented in the 19th century by New Yorkers, as a secular myth meant to unite the city's diverse and growing population.

No common observance of Christmas existed in New York at that time, other than a holiday from work. Many Protestant churches frowned on elaborate Christmas celebrations, which they associated with Anglo-Catholicism and the aristocracy. The city's free laborers, who often suffered from unemployment in the dark days of winter when shipping and industry slowed down, were only too willing to gather in the streets at Christmas, turning the holiday into an excuse for drunken caroling. As for the laborers in the city's large enslaved population, they used this rare time off for celebrations that often included customs with roots in Africa.

There's little wonder that some leading citizens would have welcomed a symbol that encouraged peaceful, domestic celebrations, of the sort that most New Yorkers might share. They found that symbol in Santa Claus, starting around 1810.

The thing I used to love about Christmas is that people seemed to go out of their way to be more pleasant to each other, more gracious, and less selfish. And immediately after that observation I would always think "Why can't we ALWAYS treat each other with this much respect?"

Now I used to think that way back before the battle lines were drawn and the "War on Christmas" began back in the 1990's. (Or perhaps even earlier.) Now days I have to listen to new reports of vandals stealing the baby Jesus from Nativity scenes, and Christians yelling "The Reason for the Season!", and the endless discussion over who is trampling on whose religious freedoms.

And suddenly the season of love and acceptance, turned into the season of selfishness and recriminations. The Christians demand that Jesus feature prominently in Christmas displays in store windows, and television commercials, and holiday decorations on public property. And non-Christians demand that they be able to celebrate an American holiday without having a religious belief that they do not share thrown in their face every time they turn on the radio, watch television, or drive to the mall.

The truth is that NOTHING about Christmas has its origin in Christianity. From the pagan origins of the Christmas tree, the borrowed Saturnalia custom of gift giving, to even the assimilation of the Winter Solstice celebration, Christmas is a potpourri of borrowed customs and traditions. And is THAT really so bad?

I have to applaud the 19th century New Yorkers for attempting to create a holiday that brought all kinds of citizens together. What a wonderful idea!

And it worked great too! Right up until people started getting greedy and saw an opportunity to stir up some self serving controversy. Not much Christmas spirit in that is there?

Perhaps this year, instead of slapping each other's hands away from the holiday and trying to take it for our own, we should adopt the philosophy that St. Nicholas espoused so eloquently and offer to share this season of giving with our neighbors, despite our religious, ethnic, or political differences.

So the next time you turn on Fox News and see Bill O'Reilly yelling about the "attacks on Christmas" in a desperate attempt to gin up controversy and boost his ratings, just turn it off and hold your children, and thank Santa Claus for representing a season that ALL Americans can enjoy regardless of which religion they embrace, or to which God they direct their prayers.

Christians might be surprised to learn that Christmas is a relatively recent celebration.

In researching his book, "Christmas: A Candid History," Forbes discovered that major American denominations--Presbyterians, Baptists, Quakers, Methodists and Congregationalists--either ignored the holiday or actively discouraged it until the late 19th century.

That rejection was rooted in the lack of biblical sanction for Dec. 25 as the date of Jesus' birth, as well as suspicion toward traditions that developed after the earliest days of Christianity. In colonial New England, this disapproval extended to actually making the holiday illegal, with celebration punishable by a fine.

"Some somehow observe the day," wrote Boston Puritan Samuel Sewall on Christmas Day 1685, "but are vexed, I believe, that the body of people profane it, and blessed be God no authority yet compels them to keep it."

With so much focus on the so-called "War on Christmas" each holiday season it is kind of funny that for much of history the churches themselves were against it.

Especially considering that the day we now celebrate as Christmas really started out to be a pagan celebration.

Now personally I love Christmas. I don't even mind all of the religious trappings of the holiday. In my family, no matter how hard the year had been, we always got together for Christmas and there were plenty of presents and food for all.

This year I am going to visit my sister in Maine. My daughter is coming up to meet me there and I expect to have a great time. This will be my first Christmas away from home, and I am a little nervous. But just getting to see my daughter will make it all worthwhile.

The fallacy of the soul.

For many scientists, the evidence that moral reasoning is a result of physical traits that evolve along with everything else is just more evidence against the existence of the soul, or of a God to imbue humans with souls. For many believers, particularly in the United States, the findings show the error, even wickedness, of viewing the world in strictly material terms. And they provide for theologians a growing impetus to reconcile the existence of the soul with the growing evidence that humans are not, physically or even mentally, in a class by themselves.

The idea that human minds are the product of evolution is “unassailable fact,” the journal Nature said this month in an editorial on new findings on the physical basis of moral thought. A headline on the editorial drove the point home: “With all deference to the sensibilities of religious people, the idea that man was created in the image of God can surely be put aside.”

Or as V. S. Ramachandran, a brain scientist at the University of California, San Diego, put it in an interview, there may be soul in the sense of “the universal spirit of the cosmos,” but the soul as it is usually spoken of, “an immaterial spirit that occupies individual brains and that only evolved in humans — all that is complete nonsense.” Belief in that kind of soul “is basically superstition,” he said.

This article is of particular interest to me right now because I have been pondering of late that the idea of a monotheistic God with followers created in his image may be the most poisonous belief system ever created by man.

Now I know that the previous sentence probably made a number of visitors simply click to the next page and refuse to read any further, but if you did stay allow me to elaborate.

You see evolution explains more then just how all living things arrived at the stage we see them in today, it also explains how religions came to be as well. It is a false assumption to believe that Judaism was given to the Jewish people by Yahweh, it actually evolved over time from a more "primitive" belief system.

Ancient people, including those who would one day become Jews, were puzzled by the world around them and in an attempt to understand it better began to give the things that they saw familiar human traits, which is called anthropomorphous, or humanizing non-humans. So trees were imbued with spirits, and animals were determined to be creatures who could speak to each other and occasionally to certain special humans. This then evolved from believing that there were unseen spirits in creatures and inanimate objects to believing that there were various gods in charge of different parts of our world, god of the feast, god of the harvest, goddess of beauty, etc., etc., etc..

Then came Zoroastrianism in the 5th century B.C., which was the first known religion to be monotheistic. It is also the religion which inspired Judaism, followed by Christianity, and then Islam.

And this is when things went south. The idea that there is a God that made this planet for the sole use of his children, the faithful, allowed these people to literally destroy the planet in their greed to use its natural resources for their benefit. Animals hunted to extinction, forests chopped down, oceans polluted, and the very air damaged beyond repair.

You see the people in other religious beliefs are far more connected to the world around them, they do not think of it as a incredibly generous gift from their sky father, they think of themselves as being part of an amazing organism and therefore not at all special or superior to it.

You can see this in how these other religions interact with the planet.

Buddhists are careful in only using what they need and never intentionally harming a creature, while carefully cultivating the land around them, often growing beautiful gardens in an homage to nature. Taoists are also as non-intrusive as they can be, and feel a kinship to everything that surrounds them. Native Americans lived and traveled with the animals that they hunted believing the animals sacrificed themselves to the hunters and were therefore a gift to be honored and whose flesh, skin and bones were never wasted. The same is true of the natives in my Alaskan home.

When the Christians came to the countries inhabited by people who had these simple belief systems they endeavored to obliterate them. Either by enslaving them, or taking their lands, or even hiding their agenda in educational opportunities.(That is how it was done to the native Alaskans. They were given Christian names and punished for speaking their native tongue in school. The result? Many native languages are almost completely extinct.)

But the sad fact is that if we had all remained "pagans", as the Christian or Muslim faith would label these other beliefs, the world would not have suffered the harm that it has suffered in the last 2,000 years. I know that some will think that I have oversimplified the situation, but you will have to agree that my logic is bulletproof.

So to sum up, Christianity is killing our planet. You should all be ashamed of yourselves!