Now, before I get started, keep in mind how this transpired. I was looking at the referrals to my blog, saw one from hers, read her blog, came back HERE and wrote about my observation, then she came here and left a comment. I did not write anything at all in her blog comments until after she made a point to comment on mine.
That's one of my central themes. Religious people tend to initiate. I like to call it "reach out and condemn someone", and as this is my blog, I write the way I want, and if you don't like it you can simply fuck off. It's really that simple.
That's the short version. Now for the long version (as there always is on my blog).
The Joyful Wife's comment was directed at my observation that many religious people, and quite a lot of Catholics, are masochists.. specifically in response to this bit she wrote;
This is why Catholics have long understood suffering of ANY kind, when united to the sufferings of Christ, to be a gift.She does the usual "it's just like training for sports!" refrain. I'm surprised she didn't include "no pain, no gain".
But, of course, her original comment referred specifically to ANY KIND of suffering. That's very unambiguous. She would contend that suffering in health is good for you. She would contend that physical or mental abuse is good for you. She would contend that suffering a car accident is good for you.
Really, her analogy to sport is such a red herring. In sports, you choose to undergo the rigors of training. You know what to expect, what your experience will be like, and you know what result you desire and measure your progress. You push yourself to your own level, and own threshold of pain as you see fit. To equate that to suffering of ANY KIND is beyond ridiculous.
I've read enough of the loons to know they could twist my observation of physical training into a "spiritual" equivalent. They "grow stronger spiritually" through mental or physical suffering. Certainly a person does learn from past mistakes, and through the difficult moments that can happen in life. That's obvious. The difference is, religious types revel in it and justify continual adverse circumstances to some deity’s desire to "teach them a lesson" of some sort.
Staying in a bad marriage is NOT the same as training for a marathon. It's simply stupid.
Now, "anonymous" leaves a long message detailing what a big important person he is, and is upset with me for writing about MY observations, and being mean to a woman. Again, it's here. I'm not going to quote the whole thing here, but just the parts I'd like to dissect, so go read the original. It's quite lovely in a wing-nutty I'm-not-crazy-I-swear sort of way.
So, lets get started then, shall we?
I'm an engineer also, Tom...a registered P.E. I'm proficient in several languages, own several companies, and advise several of our (your) leaders. I'm married to a gorgeous, athletic woman who studied at Oxford and was a member of the select Oxford University Chorus. I'm thirty-three, and by many standards, most would say doing pretty well. You may be pleased to know that I have the respect and trust of many liberal elites in this region (university president, several tenured professors, newspaper editor, AARP leaders, NAACP leaders, NEA leaders, etc). That being said, you may like to be seen drinking wine at parties with me.And?
If I were debating someone on the topic of say, economics, I might be interested in their education and qualifications, but even a completely unqualified person could make the most rational of observations and points. The converse is also true. We've seen countless examples of supposed experts being completely wrong on a topic in their field. Does some list of "look at the great things about me I pulled out of my ass" give you more credibility on any topic, much less the amorphous topic we're talking about? Please..
Again, my point is that there are a lot of people who are absolutely convinced of something that most of the world disagrees with, yet they feel entitled to point the finger of condemnation at the rest of us based on their delusions.
Then you find out I'm a devoted Catholic and that me and my wife have sired six children.So what? You're implying that it's possible for people to be professionally accomplished and crazy at the same time? Yep, I'll agree with that.
As a matter of fact, I'm the youngest of 6 from a Catholic family. Difference is, my family left it up to each of us to determine what we think rather than having a proper indoctrination. After carefully considering it, I've decided that the Catholic church, and indeed ANY organized religion is simply a cult.
I met with and conferred with the Vice President and Speaker of the House before the '04 elections.More e-peen stroking. Really man.. who the fuck cares? Just count your blessings that the Veep didn't shoot you in the face when you met him.. while being completely and totally sober I'm sure.. and you got away lucky that Hastert didn't simply eat you, as appears he does to people from time to time.
I voted for Bush.Then you're also complicit in the dismal state of affairs in this country. Like that pic of him over there on the right? It's not a photoshop or anything. It's a still image from a television broadcast. It occurred shortly before he was to debate Ann Richards for the governor election.
I've never stuck my middle finger out at the camera like that, just a few short minutes before a political debate. But you would felate Bush as some sort of "moral" person. That finger is for you, for being the fool you are.
Still happy with that choice? Seems the majority of Americans are having buyers remorse about that one. Personally, I'd never vote for somebody who cannot pronounce "nuclear", much less insist that "God" personally told him to invade Iraq, and the myriad of simply bad policy decisions.
I believe our nation was founded on the principles of Judeo-Christian philosophies and philosophers.You can believe it all you want, but you'd be wrong. I've written about it, and here's a link to one of my posts. Quoting from some of it;
If you look at the Federalist Papers, you'd know that the founders saw ancient Sparta and renaissance Venice as the best models for government. Those two systems were chock full of checks and balances preventing any single entity or president from making reckless policy. The founders didn't like Athens as a model either--they saw a series of demagogues rousing the mob to war with disastrous military and financial consequences.So, we know the bible has next to ZERO influence on our form of government, and in fact religion is the antitheses of popular culture and democratic principals.
The bible only enters US law to the extent that it influenced English common law, and even there it's part of a hodgepodge including Roman, Viking and Norman law. In other words, it's of very limited importance.
The truth is, there is no basis for a constitutional government in the bible, or any religious document for that matter. Religious institutions throughout history generally aren't very friendly to a democracy. They are more like monarchies. Do a word search on the Constitution and see how often the word "God" appears. If this nation were founded, in any sense, on God or Jesus, the names would appear there. You will find zero, count with me again please folks, zero instances of the word "God" in the United States Constitution.
But - is America a "Christian" nation? That's laughably absurd. The word "God" does NOT appear in the constitution. The word "Jesus" is nowhere to be found. In fact, there are only two references to religion in the entire Constitution, and they were written to protect us from the crazy religious people. One reference is in the first amendment, the "establishment clause". I think "faith based initiatives" violates the establishment clause. The second reference to religion in the constitution is in Article VI, which prohibits "religious tests" for candidates running for public office. So - in our system of government, there are only 2, count them with me boys and girls, 2 references to religion, and both were designed to protect us from religion.
If you need an official government document that tells you straight out that America is not a Christian nation, simply look at the Treaty of Tripoli.
"As the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,--as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Messelmen, --and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mohammedan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinion shall ever interrupt the harmony existing between the two countries"--Treaty of Tripoli in 1797, Article XI, written by Joel Barlow (USA diplomat) and Hassan Bashaw (of Algers), late during George Washington's second term and later ratified by President John Adams. Original and copies preserved in the national Archives in Washington, DC. under Treaty series no.358. Official Senate treaty found in the American State Papers, Foreign Relations, II p. 18-19. "Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States of America" vol.2, edited by Hunter Miller, US. Government printing office, 1931, p.349-385.All of this, of course, does not stop the crazy people from lying about our fundamental system of government. I suspect they actually believe America is a "Christian" nation in the sense that our laws should be guided by "Christian principals". Might be nice if it were true, because I doubt Jesus would really like us bombing the FUCK out of women and children in Iraq, or torturing prisoners in Gitmo. But, alas, it is not.
I believe the enforcement of U.N. Resolution 1441 and the toppling of Saddam Hussein was right and necessary.That's because you're a chicken hawk. 1441 offered "severe consequences", which was an intentionally ambiguous word smithing. It did not say "war" or "regime change". In fact, every justification for the war turned out to be untrue.
Now, I'm sure Mr. Anonymous there supports toppling dictatorships and removing "bad guys" from power. While he's having cocktails with the Veep, other men his age are getting placed in a body bag in Iraq, and shipped home to horrified families.
The United States has NEVER initiated a war, and certainly not to simply change a government. We do NOT do that. If you think we should send our military to "free an oppressed people", you better fucking sign up for that shit yourself.
I am not willing to die for an Iraqi's freedom, and apparently neither is Anonymous. The difference is, I refuse to support sending somebody else to die in my stead, but the anonymous Catholic sure as hell does.
I believe abortion is an injustice to women and their unborn children.You're not a woman, so shut the fuck up about that. Really, what is it about the crazy religious people that feel they have a right to control somebody else’s' body?
And just for reference, a zygote is not a "child". It's a clump of cells.
I believe that recognizing and publicly endorsing homosexual marriage will weaken society.Yay.. there we go.. more pointing the finger of condemnation. Guess what Mr. Catholic - I'm gay.. so I think you're a sick fuck for "believing" that, okay?
What is it with the religious people using a couple of obscure references in the OT to deny millions of Americans the same rights as other people? Jesus said NOTHING about it - but even if he said all homosexuals should be put to death, it wouldn't matter in the slightest. As I've shown, America is a SECULAR nation. It guarantees EVERYONE the same rights. The fact that the Catholics are opposed to that is THEIR problem, not ours.
I really sound angry about that, don't I? To understand the anger, you have to be a member of the targeted group. Religious freaks would say I'm targeting them - but that's simply not true. I just want religious people to stop pointing the finger at me and trying to pass legislation denying me basic rights. They're the ones on the attack. They're the ones that are stigmatizing. They're the ones that are trying to dehumanize millions of human beings. They're the evil ones, and I'm not the sort of person that asks nicely to be treated as an equal human being. I demand it, and I will have it in my lifetime.
So, Mr. Anonymous - why not same-sex marriage? Make your case. How will my being able to get married "weaken" society, unless you think that by recognizing gays as human beings will weaken our country? Maybe you just think that every other straight guy out there is suddenly going to want to blow another guy the minute we're treated the same as everyone else?
You simply have no argument on this point, so I'd like to see you make one.. Six kids huh? Chances are, one of them is going to turn out gay. Whether they end up well adjusted, or suicidal by the time they're 18 is up to you.
I'm sure you're convinced you could never sire a gay child, because you're the "moral" one, and gay's are made and not born right? I have two words for you. Mary Cheney.
I believe Jesus Christ rose from the dead, and I can unleash a syllogistic rationale more persuasive than you can that He didn't.Why would I need to prove a negative? Duh.
Again, my point is that I don't give a flying fuck what you believe. I don't care if you think Jesus did back flips while juggling 10 holy grails. It's not up to me to "disprove" that. It has absolutely nothing to do with American public policy, and trying to base a civilization on your delusion is a bad idea.
I swear, these hard core religious freaks act as if they are totally brainwashed.
Your scoffing, uppity, anti-Christian ilk is mundanely predictable, and this blog of yours enforces such.Ah.. now it's getting fun. The "moral" person starts name calling. That's fair, right? After all, I keep calling them crazy and delusional. Difference is, I like the traditional United States, and I want to protect it from the crazies.
Still, lets see how good he is at insulting.
The title of your blog, Tom's Irrelevant Musings, should be minus that final word to be congruent with my opinion of you and this low traffic hate-trap of a blog.I included the word "irrelevant" in the title as a sort of stab at self deprecating humor, but also as a clue that any and all discussion on news and politics is irrelevant. Where do you think my care-meter sits on your opinion of me and my blog? The only reason I even respond is because every time one of your type writes, it reinforce my point.
What you call a "hate-trap", I call self defense. I call it standing up for liberty and justice for all. I call it standing up for the middle class, and the poor and the secular heritage of this nation. I call it standing up for EQUAL PROTECTION, you fucking moron.
And what is it with the fundis and this fascination with style? The Joyful Wife told me I need to change my writing styles to be "taken seriously". You tell me my blog has low traffic. Who the fuck cares? I really could not fucking care less what you think about my writing style, my "hate-trap" or how many people read my blog or what they think of it. It's an internet fucking blog you stupid fuck. Jesus Christ what the fuck is wrong with you people? Do I look like I'm writing to get hundreds of hits a day? Do you think I care? Do you see anywhere that I've said anything about traffic, other than joking about it once?
And just because - there is a site meter here, and about 40 unique people read a day, which translates into about a few hundred unique per week. Is that low? Is it high? I don't know, don't care, and it dosen't fucking matter regardless. So fuck off with your silly insults on MY fucking blog you asshole.
You have been engaged respectfully and intelligently by Joyful Wife, and yet you have the audacity to cyber-slap her, a woman and mother, because she believes differently than you. Where I'm from, only pencil armed sissies attack women, so I have a fair enough idea about your physical appearance too.She came here, and posted on MY blog - so I don't give a fuck who she is, or who's mother she is, or what her background is. I don't give a fuck if she's a woman or man. I treat them the same on the net.
I cyber-slapped her because she's pointed the finger of condemnation at me. She can fuck off for that. Christ, I have to say that hundreds of times. I don't care what she "believes". She wants to make her crazy made up bullshit public policy, just like you do.
As for my appearance, I'll post a pic if you like. Be warned, it will probably give you a hardon.. How about a shirtless pic, if you're so concerned about my arms? Or maybe, I'll post pictures from my black belt testing? I have some nice ones from that. Say the word - I'll post 'em.. oh.. and I can post a scan of my 1st dan registration, if you're so fucking concerned about being physical. I mean, if you want to be so concerned about my appearance, that leads me to believe you want a piece of me. Is that right? Is that some sort of threat you delivered? Other wise, I have no idea why that shit even matters.
Tom, the next time your barren blog is graced with a lady, might I suggest you treat her as one. Such an attitude may help you enter an abiding relationship something longer than eight years. And BTW Einstein, invoked is spelled with an "i", not an "e".Notice all the finger pointing he does. My relationship was "only" 8 years. I misspelled a name.. waa waa waa..
I've decided to post a nice little reflection on the Christianity which is parcel to our nation. It's one of 'dem 'dar quotes from a certain fellow. I hope the nine or ten readers of your blog will take the time to read it (below). Those who appreciate the discipline of historical reading may recognize some of the names.Hey dumbfuck.. you know that 7 of the 9 men considered to be the "founding fathers" of this nation were not Christians, right? You know they were what we would consider "deists". You posted the "first prayer in Congress" but neglected to mention the date. In fact, it was September 7, 1774. That predates the Constitution of course. You happened to cheery pick-out that quote from Adams. How about I show you the one where Adams calls your religion "blood soaked"? How about some from Franklin, or Jefferson?
Benjamin Franklin:
"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches."--Benjamin Franklin, _Poor_Richard_, 1758
"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."--Benjamin Franklin, _Poor_Richard_, 1758
"I wish it (Christianity) were more productive of good works ... I mean real good works ... not holy day keeping, sermon-hearing ... or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and compliments despised by wise men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity." -- Benjamin Franklin , _Works_ Vol.VII, p.75
"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one." -- Benjamin Franklin, _2000_Years_of_Disbelief_ by James A. Haught
"Religion I found to be without any tendency to inspire, promote, or confirm morality, serves principally to divide us and make us unfriendly to one another."--Benjamin Franklin
Thomas Jefferson:
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."--Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association on Jan. 1, 1802, The_Writings of Thomas Jefferson Memorial Edition, edited by Lipscomb and Bergh, 1903-04, 16:281
"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are serviley crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God, because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blind faith." -- Thomas Jefferson
"...no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship ministry or shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise.. affect their civil capacities."--Thomas Jefferson, _Statute_for_Religious_Freedom_, 1779, _The_Papers_of_Thomas_Jefferson_, edited by Julron P. Boyd, 1950, 2:546
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."--Thomas Jefferson, _Notes_on_Virginia_, _Jefferson_the_President:_First_Term_1801-1805_, Dumas Malon, Boston: Little Brown and Company, 1970, p. 191
John Adams:
"But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed.--John Adams in a letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816, _2000_Years_of_Disbelief_, John A. Haught
No comments:
Post a Comment